Subject:
|
Re: Porthole alternative
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:17:06 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
611 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Matt Hein writes:
> In lugnet.admin.general, Tim Courtney writes:
> I just meant that it gets a bit annoying when
> someone goes out deliberately, throws in a nasty comment, and then starts a
> posting war.
Luckily, that didn't happen here.
> For example, when Lar correctad Bram, he said something about
> "Hey, nice advertisement for your BrickLink store! And you turn your nose up
> at banner ads!", and then he went off later to follow up on another messsage
> to drive his policing in further, at that point, probably starting this
> argument, which is completely senseless.
He wrote "Hey, nice advertisement for your BrickLink store! And you turn your
nose up at banner ads! :-)" And it seems to me that "friendly ribbing"
describes it aptly. It even seemed that Bram considered it so. This is so
barely policing, that your claim suggesting he went on to do more is suspect.
It was a slight nudge.
Further, you claim that Larry's second note started the argument. I disagree.
His second note said that Bram's followup "...should have went to
lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade only." That's not an argument it's an assertion.
And quite a reasonable one at that.
> Now, I don't know about you, but if someone told me that, I would be angry,
> not only because it's like a public court hearing, but because it is plain
> wrong.
I think that if someone wrote that in response to my note I would likely be a
bit chagrined at having been caught pushing the envelope. But not angry. That
seems like kind of an odd reaction. It's not like it was a full-on lambasting,
it was a straight-forward suggestion. But what I _really_ don't get is the
"plain wrong" comment. What's "plain wrong?" Larry writes "In my view..." Do
you mean his view is wrong, or that it's not his opinion? Which part?
> It's like having the cops arrest you twice for the same crime.
It seems more like having them issue you a warning for speeding twice on the
same road trip.
I think (if I'm reading things right) the real issue is that Bram's response to
Larry's second note seemed cavalier to Larry and his third note seemed kind of
abrupt to some others of you (and me a little, I suppose).
The real issue at hand seems to be when and how (not if) we should provide peer
guidance in an attempt to keep LUGNET a great place. Do some of you out there
_really_ think that no one should ever correct a misplaced post or the use of
foul language? I'm glad I have Usenet and I'm glad I have LUGNET. But they
aren't filling the same niche.
Should corrections be public or private? How polite or blunt should they be?
From whom should they issue? How serious should the infraction be before a
response is warranted?
In this case, I can look back and think it probably would have been better for
Larry not to post his third post in the thread. But I can also hear him in my
mind pointing out that if we let mistakes/infractions go (for whatever reason)
then we're setting a precedent and being inconsistent. And that's true. I
think larry's first note was beautiful, his second note was fine, and his third
note was a little over the top. But I'm not sure I can quantify why it seems
that way. He never was _wrong_ -- just a bit gruff.
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Porthole alternative
|
| (...) Yo, I didn't mean it that way, I just meant that it gets a bit annoying when someone goes out deliberately, throws in a nasty comment, and then starts a posting war. For example, when Lar correctad Bram, he said something about "Hey, nice (...) (23 years ago, 2-Mar-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
39 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
