| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton writes:
> > Yes you did. You acted because you *thought* that he didn't want it.
>
> No. Because he SAID he didn't want it.
And that's what made you think he didn't want it.
> > Either way, how should we judge your action? Were you moral and/or justified
> > to do it? Why or why not? Let's say I think *you* want to be/should be
> > unsubscribed to the same list.
>
> Have I said I did? Do you have reason to believe I do? Your whim or feeling
> carries much less weight than what I say about my desire. Here, let me be
> clear... I explicitly state that I don't consider it junk mail and that I
> subscribed on purpose. Those two statements make it clear that my desire is
> to receive it. NO amount of your reasoning can refute that.
Sure it can. But only if my reasoning is faulty. Point being that people
aren't necessarily rational. If I'm mentally retarted perhaps I'll come to
that conclusion. And perhaps as such I'll want to unsubscribe you. Why
shouldn't I then? But you already answered that.
> Scott explicitly stated he considers it junk email and that he did not
> subscribe on purpose. Those two statements (if they are true) make it clear
> that his desire is not to receive it. No amount of your reasoning can refute
> that either.
>
> So either he lied or he didn't want to get it.
I agree that to me it also sounds like he didn't want to be on the list.
Hence, I *think* he didn't want it. So did you.
> Do you apologise to your children before you punish them? I do. I'm
> sincerely sorry for the inconvenience my punishment causes them. Yet I still
> punish them.
>
> This is nothing like that.... except in the nature of sorrow and of the
> distinction. I am sincerely sorry for violating Scott's privacy, but not for
> the larger outcome that resulted, to wit, he's unsubbed from something he
> previously said he does not want and did not subscribe to.
Alright then, I'll allow that. Though generally I think of an apology as
saying that in retrospect your actions were incorrect, versus "I'm sorry",
which perhaps merely denotes your emotional reaction.
> I gave one. Scott hasn't accepted it. Rather he has escalated it, and he has
> a point. What I did violates the spirit of the ToS and to deny it would be
> intellectually dishonest.
>
> No matter how big a liar he may be every day, it still doesn't give me a
> pass.... I freely admit that it was a violation in spirit of the ToS.
Interesting then. On threat of being banned from Lugnet/LP group/whatever,
would you do it again? IE do you hold that it is up to Lugnet Admins/LP
Email Systems to enact punishment? Such that until you're presented with an
actual threat you'll keep going? Regardless of whether or not you think you
*should* be punished?
DaveE
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Apology.
|
| (...) No. Remove "think". He SAID it. Either it is true, or he's a liar. (I am not going to argue epistemology with you on this) My mistake was twofold (1) First, forgetting that he's a consistent liar and thinking that I'd be doing him a service in (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Apology.
|
| (...) No. Because he SAID he didn't want it. (...) Actually, I apologised for neither of these reasons. I apologised because in hindsight it was a violation of his privacy to unsubscribe him, even if he *wanted* it done, which he said he did, just (...) (23 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
31 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
|
|
|
|
