| |
In lugnet.market.theory, Allan Bedford writes:
>
> Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in article
> <Fq3o8y.6nK@lugnet.com>...
> > In lugnet.market.theory, Allan Bedford writes:
> > > > For example, if it was just about anyone other than Larry (or maybe a • few
> > > > others) who had posted what Larry did, then it certainly may have • raised
> > > > a few eyebrows. How do we explain to newbies, for example, that what
> > > > Larry did was an extremely delicate gray-area case, probably not • something
> > > > to be followed by example?
> > >
> > > Why is it that if someone else had done this it would likely have been • more
> > > controversial?
> >
> > I think it's because people who know Larry (and that's a lot of people) • know
> > that he wouldn't do something questionable on purpose[1] (or probably • even
> > accidentally, because he "doesn't make misteaks").
>
> I'm glad you used that last little quote. It highlights my point exactly.
> I've been reading LUGNET for well over a year. I read probably 30 - 40
> different messages a day, both via NNTP and the web interface. I read
> messages from all sorts of people, in all sorts of groups. But I have
> absolutely no idea what this 'misteaks' thing is, or how it relates to
> Larry and his posting abilites/priviledges.
I can answer this much - when Larry makes a mistake (which, people say, he
never does), he answers by saying "I never make misteaks." Or someone else
says it for him - because this is 'his' line, his little pun, a trademark of a
sort. (CMIIW)
> You see, for all the postings
> I've read, and many by Larry, I've yet to discover what it is that makes
> Larry any different than any other person on LUGNET. I've been here since
> 1998 and I still feel like a newbie.
> I understand that many people revere
> him but I do not know the history behind it. No offense Larry, but I
> thought you were just another person interested in LEGO like the rest of
> us. :)
That I don't know. I've been lurking since '98 and involved since '99, I don't
know *what* makes him special... I just know he is very respected in the lego
community. Perhaps he was here long before everyone... I have no idea. But
people trust him, his name walks far before him.
> So my question is, how can even newer newbies grasp what's going on, and
> understand not to follow Larry's example?
That's the problem - that's why Todd found this post not OK.
>
> > So it's not that it's OK simply because it was Larry and everything Larry
> > does is automatically OK, it's the other way around: because it was • Larry,
> > there's a much higher probability that it was OK. Now, whether or not it
> > actually *was* OK (that's open to debate) is a separate issue. But • because
> > it was Larry, and people trust Larry, it's got much less of a chance of • being
> > controversial. That's my take on it, anyway.
>
> Ummm..... you lost me at the third OK. Todd, were you a math teacher in
> another lifetime? :)
The third meant, simply, that because Larry is respected, people don't see a
point of arguing. Maybe they think they'll lose anyway, because 'Larry doesn't
make misteaks', or maybe they just think, 'Well, Larry does OK things, so it's
probably OK.'
>
> > > In other words... Todd, you hint in your response that what Larry did • was
> > > *somewhat* incorrect, but because it's Larry it's really not as bad.
> >
> > Well, not quite... It's not 'less bad' if Larry does Xyz than if someone
> > else does Xyz. Xyz (if Xyz is bad) is equally bad no matter who does it.
> >
> > But if Larry happens to be the first person to do Xyz (as opposed to some
> > other randomly chosen person) then there's a higher chance that Xyz is OK
> > than bad, because statistically, Larry's behavior is very very far from
> > bad. That's why I think no one (except me) jumped on him for it.
>
> See above comment about math teacher. :)
He means that people won't think it's wrong, because they are used to seeing
Larry right. 'Larry is usually right, he's probably right now' sort of thought.
>
> > > But you don't tell us why. If Larry is to be held in such high regard,
> > > should he not try to lead by example?
> >
> > Well, that's part of the reason I thought it was worth jumping on.
>
> O.K. this I understood.
>
> > > Instead it becomes, "Do as I say, not as I do." And for newbies like • me
> > > who don't know why Larry can do something we can't, it becomes terribly
> > > confusing.
> >
> > That's the heart of the issue (in my mind) -- newbies seeing what Larry • did
> > and thinking it was OK. In my mind, what Larry did was _not_ OK (even if
> > well-intentioned), but his post was *so* borderline that I think I'm the • only
> > one who sees is that way.
>
> Well... I saw the questionability of it, but originally choose not to get
> involved, because I'm not normally interested in participating in this sort
> of thing on LUGNET, or Usenet in general for that matter. (ironically, here
> I am, getting involved)
...happens in the best families ;)
> > > [...]
> > > Again, how is a newbie to know that Larry *may* or *may not* have been • at
> > > or near a grey area?
> >
> > Exactly.
>
> So should there be a Larry P. FAQ for newbies to read, to better understand
> Larry's history within the LEGO/LUGNET/RTL community? I say this only half
> tongue-in-cheek. I wonder if sometimes these problems occur because
> someone who doesn't understand another person's background or history jumps
> on them or their postings when it isn't always appropriate?
It might cause problems, I agree. Maybe Larry should add another note to his
sig:
"Note: This is a family forum.
Note: I am a respectable member of the AFOL community. I never make misteaks."
(just kidding)
I honestly don't know. Putting a Larry FAQ would seem kinda silly, though.
HTH,
Shiri
FUT .debate
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
20 Messages in This Thread:
  
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
