Subject:
|
Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 23 Jan 2001 02:47:13 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
170 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
>
> Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message
> news:G7KAE9.MFt@lugnet.com...
> > And why shouldn't I have the right to point out irrational anti MS bias?
>
> I didn't (and don't) dispute your rights.
>
> > Especially when it's posted in a non useful way, as I said.
> > Todd does have a special responsibility to keep the line between
> > his private persona and his public one distinct.
> I don't accept that at all. Anyone who wants to express their opinion in a
> public forum should be allowed to do so, whether they are involved in
> running it or not. If someone else takes exception to that, that's fine, but
> I don't think in this situation you (or anyone) has the right to dictate
> Todd's (or anyone's) "responsibility" (special or otherwise).
I'm not dictating. Not now, not ever.
That (not dictating) is a longstanding and consistent position I've held,
you can check back as far as you like... back to the very start of
LUGNet(tm), and farther.
Note that I distinguish between things I have a right to do, and things that
are a good idea. No one should prevent me from folly if I insist, but
friends offer advice against it.
Do you dispute that Todd needs to be clear when he's being just one of us,
and when he's speaking officially? Divorced of the anti-[anti-MS] rhetoric,
that's what I'm saying. And farther down in your post (which I snipped) you
agree, or seem to. Can you clarify?
> > Is he claiming that LUGNet officially has an anti MS bias, and
> > therefore by extension, an anti TLC bias, inasmuch as they have
> > allied themselves in this area?
The above was illustrative.
> Well, that's Todds call, but my view is that unless it shows up in the
> official terms of use (or other LUGNet doco, it's not an official LUGNet
> view.
I feel that is an incorrect view based on events here in the past. It's an
official LUGNet view as soon as Todd says it is, whether he's crisp about
signing his name with official flourishes or not, no matter how long (if
ever) it takes to get into the ToS. ... c.f. auction listings, which
seemingly took forever to get clarified in the ToS. Unless of course it
isn't, and the only way to tell *that* sometimes is to follow the thread all
the way to the bitter end, and ask repeatedly what was meant until clarity
finally comes. (Sometimes to Todd's great annoyance, because he's way ahead
of us in thinking through the implications, but hasn't had time to explain
so we ask what appear to him to be silly questions.)
All I'm asking for is crispness... the same crispness that Todd asks of TLC
employees when posting here, for consistencies sake. And note that all I do
is ask.
But I'll go farther, and this is in the vein of take or leave it advice,
possibly worth no more than what was spent to obtain it (nothin').
LUGNet *does* have an anti-MS bias, and it goes farther than it should.
It goes far enough to color important decisions here, technical decisions
that may make this site harder to use for users, political decisions that
may affect perceptions of the owners, and emotional decisions, too, a bit
anyway... Todd's nickel, of course, to spend as he sees fit, but I think it
dilutes effectiveness just a bit.
But then, that's the same argument I make against those that are out of
touch with TLC economic reality as well. With about the same effectiveness
(i.e. not much). In this case, though, I actually care, as I consider myself
a LUGNet fan and stakeholder. Contrast that with those who are out of touch
with reality... they will or won't fall victim to their folly soon enough in
any case so I don't really care.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Not at all a pact with the devil...
|
| Larry Pieniazek <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:G7LH2p.It4@lugnet.com... (...) a (...) but (...) Then perhaps you should have worded it "Todd should think about making the line between ....". It just sounded to me like you were (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
45 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
|
|
|
|
