To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *11206 (-20)
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) I think I know the post to which you are referring, and it was so well crafted that I doubt the moron in question will even understand he has been dissed (rather severely for that matter). Anyways, I don't think its right to ostracise a moron. (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) A large part of it seems to be the public performance -- if the only people who can see it are you and the person you're insulting, what's the point? But if you're caught in a cockfight it can be hard to back down without looking weaker, even (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) Hmmmm. I guess that doesn't really answer the question, does it? But following on from what I said I guess when the negative feeling generated by a discussion out-weighs any positive interest, it's time to start thinking about going elsewhere. (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) Interesting topic. I'd say there are a couple reasons to both keep it online and to take it offline. The reason to keep it online is it's a newsgroup. As long as the topic pertains to the newsgroup, it MAY be of public interest to someone now (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
"Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GFB6DI.KC7@lugnet.com... (...) of (...) that (...) is (...) how (...) I think it ALWAYS a reasonable course of action. That doesn't necessarily make it correct. But I think anything (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:GFBCqy.Dw1@lugnet.com... (...) that (...) is (...) how (...) the (...) this (...) their (...) your (...) I think you should also start thinking even more carefully when others start emailing (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) Ok. (...) :) (...) Well, ask yourself: Does my post, or my argument with this person, needlessly take away from the enjoyment of other users? Is this debate unnecessarily flooding the group? How many people am I currently engaged in argument (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) It was 101 for me!... Two years ago for me. Which is prolly why I remember better. ;-) -Shiri (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
 
(...) I would like to dig into this notion a bit more. I think there are situations where it is flatly incorrect to advocate this. I want to stay out of the particular situation that provoked the request and not use it as an example, but I would (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Privatised endangered species
 
Christopher Weeks wrote: <snipped a good reference that i'll read on my next trip to the public library> Part of today's" Diane Rehm show" on NPR focused on the conservation of Monarch Butterflies that I brought up in the same thread. I wasn't (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) Ignore all the rubbish I wrote above I've now totally changed my mind. Steve (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is it.....?
 
It's the cheese. (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) Ah, well. The point remains the same. Let me amend by statement thus: "It was too vague a punishment to have any lasting effect, even in terms of the removal of an desirable stimulus, to wit, dinner." And, anyway, it wasn't Psych 101--it was (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) Surely the term Violence only covers actions that are meant to cause injury, permanent or otherwise. I'd be the last person to assult or injure a child, I just think with the undeveloped mind of a child sometimes a smack is probably the only (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Is it.....?
 
I wanna know Is it the WINNING, OR the TAKING PART that matters!!!!? Steve (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Nothing personal, but...
 
(...) Below this line, you quote his stating that it was a hunch. What the hell more do you want from him. He stated clearly that it was just a hunch. (...) What the F are you talking about? What asinine story? Read the quote of him that _you_ chose (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." :-) Bruce (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) First off, quick comment. Negative reinforcement is the wrong term here - negative reinforcement refers to the removal of a bad effect, in response to a good action. Negative reinforcement receives the *same* effect as positive reinforcement, (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
 
(...) I agree with Dave and it's not like you have to smack the child for every transgression. Once you've smacked them for crayoning on the wall when they discover another inappropriate action you can inform them if they do it again, that too will (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Nothing personal, but...
 
Firing up the ol' paranoia machine... (...) Matt who? Unplugging the paranoia machine... (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR