| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I suggest
> you post some ideas of your own, I'm trying to get some brainstorming going...
Well, as soon as I can come up with an idea that I myself can't pick apart on
1000 levels, I will. Unfortunately, thus far I've been unsuccessful...
> Right now the last word goes to whoever is persistent enough to keep trying
> for it until everyone else gives up.
Yeah, but that's the default way of "winning" an argument or flamewar on
Usenet. :D
> > I think this would cause many more problems than solutions. Think back to
> > lugnet.admin.council- except that by definition these reviews would be forced
> > to take place offline.
>
> Yes, that experiment worked quite well. :-) Mostly because we started in
> before we knew what Todd actually wanted it for, and got it stunningly wrong.
Hey, don't blame me, I never even admitted to being a member of said council
publicly until the whole thing had folded. I pretty much grokked what Todd
wanted from the get-go, though even I'm not sure why. Might have been
something he said offline (I'm not thinking of something specific he said
offline, I honestly don't remember).
I did keep the black robes and mask, though, in case we were ever called out of
retirement. :D
> This time, since the end goal is much clearer (stop the madness) and smaller
> (in only the one group) maybe we'd have a chance. Or maybe not, maybe it
> would be a way to alienate people wholesale instead of retail.
I think more the latter than the former. At least the idea behind
admin.council was that things would be hashed out publicly. There was not
going to be any behind-the-scenes discussion or anything, and people still
immediately became afeared of the Cabal of the Council; this time, that fear
would be justified to some extent (as opposed to "no extent", which is how far
I feel the fear of admin.council was justified. But that's a story for
another time).
> It may be simpler to implement than some of the others too. And we could get
> a nice barter economy going in which I'll sell you my post slot in exchange
> for you selling me yours in a thread later on that I care about?? :-)
Oh, god no. I guess you popped a hole in that one. :D
> >
> > Of course, you would have to find a way to stop someone from simply starting • a
> > new "thread" to respond more than once to actually make this work, and I • don't
> > see how that can be done.
>
> Thread moderator? Only one new thread a day?
A moderator is by definition bad, IMHO (see above) and who decides, then, which
thread it will be? I promise you I will set my alarm for whatever time allows
me to be the first one to post a new thread, and they will all 100% be debating
the age-old question "Oatmeal: Brown sugar or fruit?" just to keep anyone from
debating anything anymore.
> Well, some would argue that the god debate has meaning, since those of us on
> the wrong side are in danger of losing our immortal souls, etc.
But they'd be wrong, so who cares?
Ha! That was a joke.
Anyway, I'm sure I'll go to Valhalla when I die, so I'm all set.
> But ya.
> Definintely unresolvable, no matter what, though.
Not true- God can sign up for posting priviledges on Lugnet just like any other
intelligent entity, and His presence would probably end the debate pretty
quick.
> ++Lar (stuck in detroit for many hours)
Larry=Motor City Madman. Got it.
eric
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| (...) <puts facilitator hat on> No no... post your ideas, no matter how wacky, as long as they haven't been posted yet. That's brainstorming. Even if you know there is a flaw in idea E1 and E2 of yours, and in L1 and L2 of mine, someone may come up (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Uselessness of .debate
|
| I *said* they had flaws and were thought starters... so you'll see a smiley behind every one of my responses, I'm trying to be funny in them. I suggest you post some ideas of your own, I'm trying to get some brainstorming going... (...) Why not? (...) (26 years ago, 18-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.admin.general)
|
90 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
|
|
|
|
