Re: THe OverRelational Manifesto (ORM)
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 14:05:51 GMT
Message-ID: <3zM1g.62911$VV4.1177683_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
>
> Whoa, that is something nobody ever realized! Do you really think Bob
> or anyone else here cares about whether a person is an idiot in real
> life? A post in Usenet calling someone an idiot is based on the
> empirical observation: the content of his/her posts. Period.
>
> And Bob does have a good eye in identifying the someone's intellectual
> mediocrity based on his/her very first few posts. I am often surprised
> to see so many here still encourage mediocrity by further engaging
> themselves seriously with such posts.
>
> The problem with such engagement is that a naive reader who cannot
> distinguish usable material from nonsense can be misguided by the
> mediocre discussant's snobbery and articulation.
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 14:05:51 GMT
Message-ID: <3zM1g.62911$VV4.1177683_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Dave Greenwood wrote:
>>Bob Badour wrote: >> >>>Marshall Spight wrote: >>> >>> >>>>This does not mean one cannot strongly refute others' ideas. >>>>But the above words don't address ideas at all, do they? They >>>>hypothesize qualities of the opposite speaker. >>> >>>When I use them, they are empirical observations. I don't know about >>>when others use them. >> >>They are not empircal observations about the people, because >>you can't observe the people. You can only observe their usenet >>posts. This is not sufficient to judge the individuals, but it is >>sufficient to judge the posts themselves.
>
>
> Whoa, that is something nobody ever realized! Do you really think Bob
> or anyone else here cares about whether a person is an idiot in real
> life? A post in Usenet calling someone an idiot is based on the
> empirical observation: the content of his/her posts. Period.
>
> And Bob does have a good eye in identifying the someone's intellectual
> mediocrity based on his/her very first few posts. I am often surprised
> to see so many here still encourage mediocrity by further engaging
> themselves seriously with such posts.
>
> The problem with such engagement is that a naive reader who cannot
> distinguish usable material from nonsense can be misguided by the
> mediocre discussant's snobbery and articulation.
Dave, I have a quibble. I have no objection to mediocrity. I only object to mediocrity or worse that attempts to forcefully present itself as excellence.
Honest mediocrity, honest ignorance, even honest stupidity and honest laziness won't evoke a harsh word from me. I admire anyone who wants to improve himself or herself and who is willing to put in the work to achieve their goal -- no matter how modest the goal or how difficult the work. Received on Thu Apr 20 2006 - 16:05:51 CEST