[plug] Arguing on list

[Beau Kuiper]

Hi,

LOL, Its funny when a flamewar diverts from its original topic, to of all
topics, about having flamewars.

<pulls out flamethrower, adorns asbestos suit>

Sendmail is painful to use, Postfix is much best, in my experence :-P
And about flamewars, they are fun to watch, fun to participate in, and are good
as long as people don't get too personal and put forward good arguments.

What I say is correct, you cannot win (and other stuff) :-)

Its too hot in perth and that thunderstorm fizzled out
Beau Kuiper
ekuiperba at cc.curtin.edu.au

On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, Leon Brooks wrote:
> 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.