| |
Larry:
I think that you are seeing your own role in this in too positive a light, I
even perceive that you are trying to dress up your contest with Scott as
somehow heroic on behalf of the greater community on your part. It just
ain't so -- at least not for every member of the greater Lugnet community.
Scott does things that I don't like. Fine. He doesn't exist to please me,
nor you, nor anyone else. He has unpopular economic and political views --
but they are JUST his opinions, everyone should feel free to ignore what he
says. When I see some 5-10 posts from Scott in succession (yes, I actually
use the Web Interface), I may read one or two to get the gist of where he is
at, but I just don't care enough to hang on his every word. I read most
everyone's posts in the same way. Sometimes I want to read it, sometimes I
don't. But you two have become a special case. Frankly, the many posts
going to and fro between the two of you is just not "good-natured" enough to
read in most cases (I think many agree with this opinion, BTW). This
probably suggests that you two should either take it elsewhere, or just stop
it -- no one else cares to see it. Really, it's so simple a thing.
FWIW, the whole LD auctions thing does not have just one side. What Scott
had to say wasn't necessarily wrong, it's just that most people disagree
with his views. [As I saw it, his point of view had *some* merit -- but
then, I admit to being coldly cynical in the first place. Lot's of people
have jumped on the 911 thing as another means to advertise stuff, sell
music, increase their soundbite time, etc. Isn't this simply a fact? If
others see it otherwise, I strongly disagree with them.] You chose to defend
the LD people in their actions. Fine with me. But this doesn't make you a
saint. I think it might have been refreshing to see them defend their own
actions -- that newsgroup is intended as a "dialogue" with LD, not a series
of "monologues" from all of us! But like you say, whatever...
I agree that Suz is often more terse than seems called for in the given
situation, but again that's her choice to make. I have tried to respond
more thoughtfully to what is going on here, but I am no saint either. I
have my own interest in returning the off-topic.debate newsgroup into a
friendlier place. Sometimes, the ideas that get tossed around are genuinely
thought-provoking and I enjoy that. Do note that if we are all arguing on
the same side of an argument we end up with nothing to say because we all
agree. Scott may be a bit of a jerk at times, but it IS possible that he
adds something of interest at least occasionally -- if for no other reason
than that everyone else seems to disagree with him! I will give him that
much credibility, and I am pretty sure I am not wrong to do so. The
marketplace of ideas isn't always the most friendly of places. You know
that. I will go so far as to assert that it is an idea that you politically
hold dear. Am I wrong?
BTW, there is no "I told you so" part here. We are just trying to solve a
human problem that has arisen between two persons and the community they
interact within. Paint yourself in the colors of heroism if you must, I see
it as being something a lot simpler: two persons have lost the means to
communicate civilly with one another.
I have been there before, it is no great shame to admit it -- actually,
doing so might be the first step in resolving the problem.
In friendship...
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Whatever
|
| (...) Yes, but do they care enough to do what needs to be done? And if they care, is that thing a doable thing just because they care? I don't think so. Any call for a penalty for anyone is just whistling in the wind because it's not the community (...) (23 years ago, 27-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
65 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
