Maturity

Once upon a time I annoyed people when I tried to push their buttons… now I ask honest questions, have them ignored, and annoy people all at the same time.

I guess this is growing up.

The author

Nathan runs St Eutychus. He loves Jesus. His wife. His daughter. His son. His other daughter. His dog. Coffee. And the Internet. He is the campus pastor at Creek Road South Bank, a graduate of Queensland Theological College (M. Div) and the Queensland University of Technology (B. Journ). He spent a significant portion of his pre-ministry-as-a-full-time-job life working in Public Relations, and now loves promoting Jesus in Brisbane and online. He can't believe how great it is that people pay him to talk and think about Jesus.

12 thoughts on “Maturity”

  1. I think it’s got to do with how you argue. Your honest questions weren’t ignored. But perhaps others felt that some of their answers/feelings were.

    But I’m okay. Andrew pointed out that by your arguments student ministers probably don’t need cash!

    1. Most of my honest questions were ignored. Perhaps they were considered rhetorical.

      “Andrew pointed out that by your arguments student ministers probably don’t need cash”

      Then you’re misreading my argument – I am not suggesting song writers not be paid, nor am I suggesting that their work is not of value.

      I’m suggesting copyright should be sacrificed for the sake of the kingdom, and that Open Source is the church’s future. Like I said – there are plenty of people making money through open source.

    2. “But perhaps others felt that some of their answers/feelings were.”

      That may be fair – but I’m not aware of ignoring anybody’s answers. I have actually been genuinely intellectually engaged (and excited) by the discussion – and the concept of Open Source Christian music.

      When it comes to feelings – that may be true. Feelings are more subjective than answers. Feelings are also more likely to be based on emotional bias and personal convictions. I’d hate to let someone critique my position just because they “feel” I’m wrong… and that pretty much, I think, sums up your objection to having your lyrics changed… that was a bit of an epiphany right there.

      I think the open source thing requires separating one’s self from one’s work – and being prepared for it to be tinkered with – and the fact that you, in your post, compared your songs with your children – probably suggests you’re not willing to go down that path.

  2. “I’m suggesting copyright should be sacrificed for the sake of the kingdom”

    I think I am using copyright for the sake of the kingdom as I have argued.

  3. Just noticed your tag: you frustrate those who take their arguments seriously by not taking your own arguments seriously. You argue like the devil!

  4. Further evidence of maturity – I wrote a song about Copyright. Robyn said it was too mean. I didn’t post it.

  5. I should have some sort of alert – or font or something – that indicates when I’m taking something seriously.

    I genuinely think “open source” is a nice, Christian way of approaching capitalism. It’s still a capitalist system, people make money for their labour but give freely of the product.

    It’s a nice community centric model without being communist.

  6. My songs are tinkered with (and rejected) all the time. I’m a collaborator – it’s what happens. I’m not okay with losing control and oversight of tinkering. That’s what copyright is about.

    On the feelings thing, I was actually talking about your mode of argument – not that I just feel you are wrong. You are not willing to concede anything nor acknowledge the feelings of others. You think you put up a knock down argument. But look through the comments. Not one person was knocked down. No one was convinced. Perhaps we might have been if you had more compellingly put your case by acknowledging something what songwriters feel…

    But my case is not based on my subjective feelings. I think I’m anti open-source when it comes to music and books and art. I think we appreciate what we have to pay for. Having books available at no cost does not increase reading. It decreases it. There is more crap to sift through to find anything decent and less decent stuff produced because writers can no longer afford to put significant amounts of time into writing. More and cheaper is not better. [At this point you will give me examples of software etc that show this is not the case. I will quote you examples showing there is more info than ever out there but less understanding of real knowledge.]

    1. “You think you put up a knock down argument.”

      Not true at all. I hadn’t ever considered this whole realm of thinking before. I wasn’t “putting up knock down arguments” so much as considering an interesting ministry issue for the first time.

      “But look through the comments. Not one person was knocked down. No one was convinced.”

      I’m not sure who you think I was trying to knock down? I disagreed with Ben. I answered onlinesoph’s question. I explored a topic putting up new thoughts as they arose (I was bored at work). Either we’re reading different threads or you’re ascribing thoughts to me that aren’t consistent with what I was saying or doing.

      “I think I’m anti open-source when it comes to music and books and art.”

      But not when it comes to software? That’s an assumption because you cited Open Office. I don’t think you can pick and choose where you apply the Open Source philosophy.

      “because writers can no longer afford to put significant amounts of time into writing”

      Not true – the whole point of open source is to put your work in front of potential new markets – because it’s a community thing. Yes there’s more crap to sort through – but Einstein’s maxim of “genius coming from the prolific” would seem to hold up when you consider open source developments like Firefox and the plug-ins that have been developed that significantly improve internet browsing (and are then introduced to the core).

      I find it odd that you’re a collaborator in nature but against the idea of a model that is the ultimate collaboration.

      “You are not willing to concede anything”

      Not true at all. I’m not sure there’s been an argument put forward contrary to what I’m suggesting – just contrary to what you think I’m suggesting – and I have been at pains to try to make a distinction between respecting your right to copyright – and suggesting that an alternative model where you forgo that right might be better.

      “Having books available at no cost does not increase reading”

      Libraries decrease reading?

      Sure – more crap will be produced, you’re inviting more people into the club, but more good stuff will be produced too. Part of the pressure when writing songs (and this is from a conversation I had with Dan Saunders today) is that it will be sung and reflected on hopefully hundreds of times – whereas a sermon will only be (theoretically) listened to once. I would think that a more voluminous bank of theologically correct songs would take some of the pressure off – which in my mind is a good thing.

  7. I see your point.

    But I know people (one in particular) who would be considered very mature who have purposely pushed my buttons because, as someone else told me, “he knows you can handle it”.

    I always wondered what would have happened if “he” discovered I couldn’t handle it :P (Not saying I couldn’t. Just “what if”.)

Comments are closed.