[Hermit 3] Having read the replies, I don't think this is the case at all. But if Joe Dees does think this, and if I am correct about the list, then I would appreciate people saying so in no uncertain terms. Simply because, it is possible that if others tell Joe Dees that his claims are false and his behavior indefensible, he might change his behavior.
[Elvensage 4] Change his behavior? Can you elaborate a bit more on what you are referring to when you say "his behavior." Being a bit more specific could totally change how I respond to that statement.
[Hermit 5] Joe Dees' behaviors, which, in my opinion should, ideally, be improved, would include:
[*]Stopping flooding. Perhaps by consolidating posts (although the posting of URLs is a massive improvement on c&p articles).
[*]Posting replies to the thread they came in, on instead of starting multiple new threads a day on topics that have run for months.
[*]Starting to "justify" assertions with arguments. Gratuitous insults are not arguments.
[*]Stop calling fellow members names without good reason. Disagreement of interpretation is not a good reason.
[*]Learning that it is possible to disagree without making an interminable issue about it (and that it is not always necessary to have the last three dozen words).
[*]Learning that repetition is not persuasion.
[*]Stopping the attempt to swamp others with replays of opinions – especially opinion by proxy.
[*] Learning that when others continue to disagree after Joe has pronounced on something, it is not a capital offense.
[Hermit 5] Let me also identify some of what is not included in "his behavior":
[*]His opinions he is welcome to - and he is entitled to discuss them within reason - but that does not mean barraging the list with articles about some hobbyhorse and then claiming that this was to support something which never materializes or to instigate some discussion which is quite clearly not of general interest.
[*]His critiques may be interesting and a few quotes or articles once in a while may be helpful to understand his position. URL’s with a summary are preferred
[*]Identification of questions about unfounded assertions are always welcome.
[*]If the advocate of something will not or cannot support their position, incisive attacks on their assertions or ideas are justified.
[*] If ad hominem is resorted to, then responding in kind (in the absence of other moderation) is acceptable (although instigating it is not).
[Hermit 5] However, while the above would be ideal (and some of which is important to me), the important thing is to stop monopolizing the list on a single issue with pure cut and pastes not written foir the CoV. It should be appreciated that this entire saga is related to the request not to post political material to the main list, originally made by Lucifer. [quote from: David on 2002-08-21 at 09:17:58]
Effective immediately all messages with political content should be posted to the Serious Business board on the BBS
(http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=7) instead of the mailing list. Discussion of this new policy should also go on the BBS, in the Suggestion Box board (http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=7).
David
[Hermit 5] While it certainly is possible to simply declare certain classes of material off topic – and bounce any mail on that subject - which we have had to do before, and may have to do again - I thought that my proposal was less intrusive, and is vastly less work - so I sought an opinion from the list. Essentially, my various suggestions on this topic have boiled down to:
[*]Postings written for the CoV are always welcome here.
[*]Cutting and pasting the works of others to the list, particularly repetitive material in bulk, should rather be posted in the appropriate places on the BBS and a link (or for multiple posts, a consolidated link) be sent to the mail-list, so that those disinterested do not have to deal with it.
[*]My recommendation was that seeing as this was being ignored principally by Joe Dees, that we enforce the policy selectively, doing as little active moderation as possible (and needed for the reasons shown below).
[*]Allowing a reasonable level of political comment through, while preventing floods of C&P.
[Hermit 5] As previously observed, it would seem that the list regards implementing a more gentle policy as being equivalent to censorship. Which takes us back to the fact that the alternative appears to be either a non-selective topic-ban or largely abandoning the growth of the church via the mail-list. This is undoubtedly implied by not imposing moderation when self-moderation fails, as we see large numbers of members leave the mail-list when the volume rises above that which people can reasonably handle, or the invective becomes too aggressive (and while I have used this tactic myself in the past, I now attempt to avoid it simply because of this effect). The same happens on any BBS – particularly when visitors arriving there see mainly post after post on the same topic for page after page, most especially when it is largely C&P made by a single person. At the end of the day, these comprise a major part of the issue to which I was referring when I discussed “the tragedy of the commons.”
[Hermit 5] Now, if it isn’t already beaten to death, shall we move this particular discussion over to the “Suggestion Box” (http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=7) which is where it seems to now more properly belong?
[Hermit 5] Apropos of something else: Joe Dees’ self-valuation* is a tad higher than I'd have placed on it. The important point is that the CoV is a church. Not a cult. And it is defined by its entire congregation. Individuals - and individual works -are not critical to our success, although some members may do more for (or against) the church than others and some work may better represent what we would like to aspire to (or not) than others). While Joe Dees hasn’t been asked to leave (only to behave less aggressively towards the commons and other members), there are a lot of good people on this list who have written superb material. Joe is one of them, but not the only one - by a long shot. Were his older writings to vanish, a few might notice (me for one). But not many new people would. And if his newer scribblings were to vanish from the archives, I suspect that those perusing the archives in the future would be more likely to regard him with respect. But that is my opinion. He is welcome to disagree.
*[quote from: Joe on 2002-09-06 at 00:20:00]
Towards a Virion Ethics
Poetry
Phenomenologies of
a) extremists
b) conspiracy theorists
Various and sundry analyses and commentaries
If I am asked to leave, I ask in return that my many contributions also be excised (inluding not only those, but also TOOLS, LANGUAGE AND TEXT, THE HUMAN DIALECTIC OF ABSOLUTE PREMISES, THE MEMETIC STANCE, A SHORT PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY, and THE GATOR FATE), and that I leave this list as the cored and impoverished shell that it would subsequently be.
---- This message was posted by Hermit to the Virus 2002 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=51;action=display;threadid=26399>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Sep 22 2002 - 05:06:22 MDT