From: Hermit (virus@hermit.net)
Date: Mon Oct 06 2003 - 07:36:37 MDT
[Hermit 3] Despite your brave defense of rudeness,
[Mermaid 4]I am not defending rudeness anymore than I would defend freedom of expression.
[Mermaid 4 <moved>] btw...regarding you misquoting me...effective, but transparent tactic to lure me back into this discussion...
[Hermit 5] Oh please, snip yourself and then claim I'm misquoting you?
[Mermaid 2 <restored>] Are you saying now that if people sign up on CoV they cant be RUDE? They'd be disciplined if they *sound* rude to someone else? Rudeness...which btw is awfully subjective....is not "desired and acceptable behaviour"?
[Mermaid 2 <restored>] Rudeness, imo, can be anything from personal expressions to irresponsible parenting ... insecurity or inferiority complex...or just a creative mind or even intelligence...it can be out of ignorance as much as it can be out of spite. The reaction to rude behaviour is what monitors rudeness. Not a document that instructs people how to behave.
[Hermit 5] Rudeness ... can be ... just a creative mind or even intelligence. This isn't a putative defense - an argument not to attempt to manage it?
[Hermit 5] And the idea that it is a document that tells people how to behave is a strawman. It is the librarians telling people how to behave. The document tells the librarians how to go about it and allows others to know how it works.
[Hermit 3]...it does not make for an attractive environment or pleasant reading.
[Mermaid 4]Are we going for attractive environment or pleasant reading as our 'common goal'?
[Hermit 5] If our goal is to spread our memeplex, then yes. An attractive environment and pleasant reading are critical to achieving it. At least, if we can believe that many Virians feel embarrased at suggesting others come here. Do you remember saying anything like that yourself?
[Hermit 3]It also leads to rapid escalation. The difficulty of defining subjective issues is precisely why we don't have "laws" but instead rely on "reconciliation committees" to determine whether people have crossed the borderlines.
[Mermaid 4]Sure. But its a tad too much when it comes to dictating on how people should talk. People's words and actions speak for themselves. They will be judged accordingly by the members of the community. Their reputation will be directly affected by their actions and words.
[Hermit 5] As yours and mine have. But it is a slow process and everyone has to put up with it while it happens, and then it remains in our archives forever as a memorial.
[Hermit 5] But we haven't planned to dictate "how people talk" have we? This is a strawman of your own manufacture. We have said that when people feel offended, we invite them to say so. So the community will decide if it thinks that what you say is "rude" (your word - live with it). And then a committee of people who care about how the CoV is seen and how the members relate will decifde if it is worth reacting. And if necessary, will act. And by doing this, we make it uneccessary for members to "defend themselves." Which usually escalates.
[Hermit 3]The primary intent of the Disciplinary Process being to ensure that the CoV is an attractive and pleasant environment. People who wish to be "creatively rude" to others, need to seek other places to do it.
[Mermaid 4]So, the DiP is to make CoV look 'clean'. Only those who can adhere and conform to 'desirable and accepted behaviour' need apply to CoV? And you imagine that this will attract valuable membership? Those who are willing to conform to 'desired and acceptable behaviour' dictated by DiP...not to mention willing to sign a written apology to be accepted in the group after someone high up finds the person 'rude' and subjects them to DiP proceedings?..Really..cant you see the blind stupidity of a concept like DiP? Its glaringly obvious why its a bad idea....
[Hermit 5] What nice tactics you use. I must remember them. Let me, for a moment pretend that I am not blind stupid fool to bother resonding and see if I understand them correctly.
[Hermit 5] If I may reverse your words, is it that you like the current environment where you can stretch your claws without being slapped? Where, "Only those who cannot adhere and conform to 'desirable and accepted behaviour' need apply to CoV" Where only those who having been determined to have harmed the CoV by its most reputable members, absolutely refuse to sign a written apology, are worth having in the group?
[Hermit 5] Really..cant you see the blind stupidity of a concept such as you are advocating? Its glaringly obvious why its a bad idea....
[Hermit 5] Did I get it right? Is this really how you think we should increase the quality of our debates? Can you see why we need a policy to prevent "communication" like the above. Do you know how very hard it is for me not to answer you in like vein. Over and over and over again? If I don't, it appears that you have "won" the discussion. And you may have inspired some people to try your tactics. See, even Hermit can be defeated by them. When you know damn well I could respond and am holding myself in check. Largely because, if I don't, even if it would help my argument here, I'd end up looking as obnoxious as how you appear to wish to be seen. The already instituted policy is there to prevent exactly this sort of situation. And the lousy quality of debate that follows. Which yes, I think rather damns our Virtues as a fraud. Because we don't exhibit them ourselves in our own community. Not that many Virians don't want to, but it is rather difficult for them when continuously faced by folk who prefer a bit
of a riot.
[Hermit 5] Now, have I understood you correctly? Does this say anything about what you think of our goals? Have I "misquoted you"? Take an hour to think about it before you reply.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29437> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 06 2003 - 07:37:58 MDT