[plug] Arguing on list

[Leon Brooks]

Bret Busby wrote:
> Leon Brooks wrote:
>> Bret Busby wrote:
>>> Leon Brooks wrote:
>>>> Heck, arguing on lists has gone on for a long time, at least it
>>>> has for the twenty years I've participated,

> I wasn't aware that PLUG was that old.

Not PLUG, lists.

>>>> and was going on
>>>> when I arrived.
>>> That doesn't make it right!
>> Maybe not, but it does make it acceptable, else it would have been
>> stopped by now.
> That depends on whether a moderator does their job.

OTOH, when moderators do carry out their mandate, do they get accused of
bowing to "mob rule?"

>> And maybe it _does_ make it right. Perhaps a forum for argument is a
>> useful function for a list.

> So much for Linux!

Please describe the connection? You haven't even explained your previous
rant yet, and you want me/us to accept this bizarre conclusion out of
hand?

> Perhaps, if any of the PLUG committee read this,

Stand by on Camera 3 for the impassioned, emotion-charged appeal to
higher authority. )-:

> they might consider the purpose of the mailing list, and
> whether it is to be a forum for belligerent argument, or,
> whether it is to serve the purposes to which I referred
> in my previous email on the matter, relating to Linux.

Hance the potential proposal to have a more belligirent list and a
belligigrence-free list.

> If they choose the former, and go along with what Leon has put,
> then PLUG may as well be wound up, as it will have abandoned its
> objectives.

Yes, O Great Chocolate Lips, definer of words, final authority in
matters digital, PhD in social sciences! (-:

Bret, are you serious?

> If what Leon has suggested is upheld, then the committee cannot
> seriously expect any new people to be encouraged to give much
> credibility to either the mailing list, or to Linux.

Please explain?

> I do not know how other subscribers to the mailing list feel
> about the mailing list being used as a fighting pit,

...or for pontification...

> as opposed to being a constructive medium for learning about
> Linux.

"Fighting pit" is an entirely emotive phrase, and anyway, my proposal
was to continue the more lively discussions _on_another_list_. Read my
lips^H^H^H^Hfingers! The proposal was *NOT*, *NEVER* to encourage lively
debate on the main list (or to waste time, vitriol and badwidth
meta-debating it), but for a separate list on which to exhaust disputes!

> With this and my previous email on this thread, I believe that I
> have said what I have to say on the matter, and that there is not
> much more for me to say.

Mmmm. How am I to interpret that? "I've said my bit, and if anyone else
says anything, it'll be their argument and not mine?" Abdication of
responsibility? Pardon me for expecting reasoned debate toward an agreed
(rather than dictated) solution! (-:

Perhaps we need an "unplug" list for those who like posting or listening
to grand orations?

Bret, the essence of the point you appear to be aiming for in this
thread is "moderate the main PLUG list my way or it will all end in
tears." That doesn't make any sense to me. You're not committee (nor am
I) and have no authority yourself. In the unlikely event of committee
acting on your suggestion, I will also suggest that they make available
an ungelded list. But whatever is resolved (if anything), I'll use it as
best I'm able rather than spending all my time trying to decide whether
other users are debating to too spirited a fashion or not.

-- 
Confidence is the feeling you have before you understand the situation.
If at first you don't succeed, try a shorter bungee. When in trouble,
when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout. The two great secrets
of success are: don't tell anyone everything that you know.