 | | Re: Suddenly Chris makes it personal (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) to (...) time. (...) If he had been so severe that I thought the other children needed their rights protected, I would have done so. In the instance that I'm thinking of, that wasn't the case. He wasn't bein egregiously abusive, he just wasn't (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Suddenly Chris makes it personal (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) And in the meantime everyone ELSE has to put up with your child being a brat? You disgust me. You're one of the people that lets their children run rampant over everyone else, letting them "learn", and then "discuss" it with them afterwards. (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
|
|
(...) But not unreasonable. Sure, some others may miss out on stuff of interest, but I don't think that makes it any less reasonable. (...) Thats a sweeping statement, and not always true. Sometimes continuing a conversation privately *can* bring (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: When is it appropriate to "take it to email" and when isn't it?
|
|
(...) Sure. Let me clarify the above. If we consider a spectrum of discourse from perfectly normal well intentioned fact and issue centric debate at one end, on through somewhat worse all the way to vitriolic insult orient fact free flamage at the (...) (24 years ago, 23-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Suddenly Chris makes it personal (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) (And (...) I can see what you're saying, but that wasn't my intent. I would be satisfied to discuss the results of her (or your) attempt to codify (even with the understanding that the edges are hazy) what "too much," "too little," and (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Suddenly Chris makes it personal (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) You're creating a false dichotomy; by forcing Shiri to assert a hard line of distinction--knowing that such a hard line is by its nature impossible--you are attempting to say that no distinction can exist between "too much," "too little," and (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) I do agree that as much as possible the "punishment" (consequences) should be related to the "crime". The consequences for mouthing off could result in no TV for the day if the consequence is actually "since you refuse to be civil today, you (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) Why is there a limit? What is it? What is it based on? You go on to say some pretty commonly accepted stuff, but I'm not infering what this limit is. (And simply by being popular, doesn't make it right.) (...) It sounds like you think I'm (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it.....?
|
|
(...) Hmm.... I guess it depends on the contest. I mean, take the following three examples: 1) The Lottery. This is self evident-Winning is the only thing that matters. If you don't win, you don't get nay feeling of satisfaction or (...) (24 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?
|
|
(...) Well, would saying that mean that we would advocate keeping it public? I wouldn't. I'd just advocate dropping it, not spreading it into the public domain. (...) Again, are you suggesting that keeping it public would be better than keeping it (...) (24 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?
|
|
(...) Aint diversity wonderful? 8?) (...) Are you disappointed because you didn't get the answer you expected? Or just surprised? (...) Um, careful with the out-of-context quotes, Larry. I said "always a reasonable course of action". I then went on (...) (24 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?
|
|
I think we have discussed this before(?). I remember thinking that we are constrained by the attributes assigned to the "partisan" in the final para on this page: (URL) do not think the text I quote answers you question, because I doubt there (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
|
(...) Moulton (...) (24 years ago, 22-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
|
(...) It is the source of the collberation data I am taliking about. I have said this so may times, I fail to see how you could have missed this. Anyhow, I am actually fed up with all this now as it is clear to me that Larry is unwilling to justify (...) (24 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?
|
|
Some good discussion but nobody answered this question the way I expected, perhaps because I was a bit too subtle in trying hard to disengage from a particular situation (and Tim, you get marked down because you didn't stay general... :-) ) (...) I (...) (24 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?
|
|
(...) 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. (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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. (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it.....?
|
|
It's the cheese. (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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 (...) (24 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 (24 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, (...) (24 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 (...) (24 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... (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
|
(...) Blah blah blah...WHO CARES!! I see you've been totally ignoring the point of this thread (The Scott and Larry Show has been reduced to childish actions carried out to the nth nitpick - and a bunch of us are totally annoyed with it) and my (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it ~OK~ for government to subsidise profit making industry?
|
|
(...) I agree with you. Like you say, it does make some sense. If there were jobs in that state it would make more sense (to me) to re-train them rather than export them. However, if you read the whole text, it is clear that they are moving from (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Child rearing (was: Nothing personal, but...)
|
|
(...) Postmodernist "power structure" drum-beating, if you ask me! Your assertion depends on the assumption that people can never grasp a concept of (culture- and society- based) right and wrong but instead must languish in an attitude of "the power (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it ~OK~ for government to subsidise profit making industry?
|
|
(...) Related: I had heard from a friend of the family when we lived in NY that NC had a history (in the 60s and 70s) of giving NC welfare recepients one way bus fare to NY. This got the person or family off the NC welfare rolls, and NY welfare (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Is it ~OK~ for government to subsidise profit making industry?
|
|
If it both saves money in the long run and gets people viable work, I don't see the problem (except of course that any government program is open to abuse or expansion beyond all reason). Reduces my taxes, too. This is a much better use of public (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
