From: Jake Sapiens (every1hz@earthlink.net)
Date: Tue Jul 29 2003 - 12:44:57 MDT
I personally don't make much effort to referee between people on
here. Ad hominem is a frequent feature of online CoV. I don't really
see the point in so much hand wringing when it happens. The world moves
on. I don't think it is really the rule so much as a frequent exception to
it. However, since it is attention getting when it happens, it is what you
remember. Just remember that it isn't the only thing going on here.
I don't really encourage ad hominem myself, but I do recommend that people try
some restraint if not some rules about ad hominems. First of all, do not
make this a prisoner's dilemma. This is not a prisoner's dilemma
situation. It is rather a tragedy of the commons. If you find
yourself engaged in tit-for-tat flaming, then you have either lost sight of this
fact or never appreciated it in the first place. Oh sure, you can blame
your opponent for throwing the first or last stone, but that won't absolve you
one whit, except to indicate that you have lost your head. If you must I
suggest throwing your flame and following it up either by ignoring the response,
or keeping the next one extremely brief to clarify your animosity (three
rounds is almost always unreasonable). Going on and on is really the more
sinful aspect of ad hominem, and there is where group discussion begins
collapsing. Oh yes, and plus ad hominem is irrational, but y'all already
know that. I just don't hold unreasonably angelic expectations that it
won't happen. If you open up the forum to controversial or
important things, ad hominem is a likely result. I happen to think we can
collectively withstand this eventuality without allowing it to become
the rule. The easiest thing of course is to not do it in the first place
if you can help it, but in the second place when you find that you have
unleashed the scorcher, don't let it dominate you next posts.
Also if someone scorches you, please consider silence as an appropriate
response. Turning the other cheek IS a reasonable move in a tragedy of the
commons, and often silence can imply a lot more criticism than an
explicit response.
Just some thoughts,
Love,
-Jake
----- Original Message -----
From: Kalkor
Sent: 7/29/2003 11:49:50 AM
Subject: RE: virus: asinine remark
No one ever gives anyone else the fuckin' benefit of the doubt on
this
list. There's a lot of good ideas and good debates and reasoning, but
almost none of you trust each other worth a damn.
That strikes me as a less than good thing.
Just pointing this out...
I think everyone sees some "key" things that need to be changed within
the
CoV to make it more functional. Perhaps we should have a
scheduled public
chat too for just this reason. Maybe we can all work together to
form some
plans to tackle our domestic problems. Just a thought.
And we will *ALL* continue to do so when you make assertions that start
with
"no one ever"
I'd like to quote Jake for a moment... 30 Nov 2002:
http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=4;action=display;threadid=27071
reply #1
Some have taken the route of emphasizing the virtues reason, empathy,
and
[vision], and avoiding the sins of apathy, hypocrisy, and
dogmatism.
Some have viewed this as an exercise/experiment in community building
and
organization, in the pursuit of watching memetic forces at work.
Some see this as a place to exchange ideas and conversation with like
minded
people, and find quality opinions as well as reliable sources of
knowlege.
Some see this as an audience for their soapbox.
Some see this as a place to play with new brain toys.
Some are simply interested in the people here aside from the ideas.
Some indulge in a little hand to hand flaming, and others prefer to
avoid
that.
It is by turns one of the more exalted places in the Internet, and by
turns
one of the more depraved.
It is in its darkest moments strangely optimistic.
Love,
-Jake
--- --- Jake Sapiens --- every1hz@earthlink.net --- EarthLink: It's your Internet. --- 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 : Tue Jul 29 2003 - 12:43:44 MDT