חדש באתר: NotebookLM עם כל תכני הרב מיכאל אברהם

Q&A: Substantive Response to Talkbacks. (Tam as a Parable)

Back to list  |  🌐 עברית  |  ℹ About
Originally published:
This is an English translation (via GPT-5.4). Read the original Hebrew version.

Substantive Response to Talkbacks. (Tam as a Parable)

Question

Hi. 
I follow you from time to time, and I’ve noticed that the more tolerant the Rabbi is, the more short-tempered he can also be — hard to anger and hard to appease. 
 
I mainly mean the commenters who raise important points that it seems the Rabbi ignores, because they touch on sensitive spots.
For example, a commenter בשם Tam, I’ve noticed that usually his arguments are substantive (despite the provocative scent that comes off them). And he doesn’t get a substantive response; mainly he gets smacked over the head for the wording or other cosmetic mistakes.
Thanks in advance. 

Answer

I didn’t understand the initial claim. In any case, if I’m generally tolerant and there’s an exception, it’s worth examining the exception. Believe me, I don’t know the above-mentioned person, and I relate to him only as called for by his appearances here. I have hardly seen from him any substantive claim at all.

Discussion on Answer

Michi (2020-05-14)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop

In the Field a Girl, and Forsaken (2020-05-14)

This responsum solved a huge difficulty for me, since the site is addressed to both men and women, and if so it requires investigation why even when the questioner is a woman it says in the masculine, “asked,” such as here “Ayelet asked.” But now it is very well explained, and examine it carefully.

Always Liable (2020-05-14)

In the Field,

“He kisses the lips who gives a right answer.”

Always Liable (2020-05-14)

By the way, the woman’s belly is between her teeth: the tag — “Pure Truth.”

To Always and the Truth (2020-05-16)

In the Field, very nice.
However, in my opinion this isn’t really Tam, because I too have had the privilege of reading his nonsense from time to time, and the writing style seems different.
Maybe it’s a friend or something like that..

To Always Liable, I didn’t get the depth of your proof from the tag.

In the Field a Girl, and Forsaken (2020-05-16)

What he means by the tag is that there’s a tag on the question called “Pure Truth,” and someone asking a question for the first time wouldn’t use something that passive-aggressive.
It’s obvious this is Tam trying to hide. The wording is exactly what Tam himself would want to write — to claim that he argues excellently, deeply, and innovatively, and that people oppose him because he supposedly “provokes” (which in my view also really isn’t bad), and that all the responses don’t answer what he asks but just seize on minor details. These are the recurring motifs in the way Tam relates to himself and his respondents, and it’s unlikely that some random woman would invest that much effort in forming an impression from Tam’s thousands of long messages and conclude that they’re “good,” and form that kind of impression of the responses, and in short make exactly the same colossal perceptual errors as Tam himself. What problem is there with the theory that this isn’t Tam? Do you suspect him of being so careful about keeping a fixed screen name that also matches his gender? It’s completely reasonable and obvious that he really wanted to ask this question, and managed to understand that he’d get a more refined answer (or any answer at all) if he impersonated someone else, all the more so a woman, to distance his testimony. In short, in my opinion, nothing further need be said.

In the Field a Girl, and Forsaken (2020-05-16)

The different writing style seems to me at least to be sweating with effort, but I can’t rule out that I saw the sweat out of the thoughts of my own heart.

Always Liable (2020-05-16)

To Always and the Truth, I hadn’t imagined that my words required Talmudic study, for in my opinion they cry out to the heavens.
After all, according to the false show that Tam tried to stage here, there is some woman/girl who came to ask the Rabbi why such-and-such arguments are not being addressed.
If that were indeed the case, it would be reasonable to assume that the questioner is neutral, has no connection to Tam, she saw his words, which shine like the radiance of the firmament, and she wondered how it happened that Rabbi Michi does not spend his time on wood and stones.
But our friend, in his great wisdom, tagged the question — and with “Pure Truth,” no less. Meaning: don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m objective, that I’m asking innocently; I’m a member of the sect of the Tam-ites (which of course includes only one member), and I protest the ignoring of Tam’s words, which are nothing but pure truth!
Tam is not the parable, as the simpleton wrote in the title of the question; he is the lesson. And not only that — there is no parable at all!

(And all this is beyond the letter of the law, since indeed Tam’s scent wafts from every aspect of the phrasing, and from the argument itself, as In the Field wrote.)
And therefore the words of the one who wrote that the simpleton erred in choosing his nickname are correct; a more accurate name for him would be: “The One Who Does Not Know How to Ask.”

Secrets of Secrets, and let’s see whether the establisher will understand.. (2020-05-17)

Now that this has been clarified with such conclusive proofs, let Tam the establisher come and admit that he was caught in his shame and corruption.
With blessings, Secrets of Secrets.

Ayelet (2020-05-24)

when the cat’s away, the mice might play

It’s unbelievable how hatred blinds and distorts the eyes of zealots

Ayelet (2020-05-24)

Such an obsession, just relax people, and quickly!!

השאר תגובה

Back to top button