Re: THe OverRelational Manifesto (ORM)

Bob Badour wrote:
> Marshall Spight wrote:
> >
> > I guess you have a hard time telling the difference between
> > commenting on a person and commenting on an idea
>
> I would guess the same about you.

How interesting! I find that a surprising result. I would have thought you would have considered the distinction irrelevant. Perhaps I simply misunderstand you.

I still don't like name-calling, though. I still think it's intellectually
unnecessary, and I still think ad-hominem reasoning is logically invalid.

> > that could perhaps explain your difficulty in understanding why
> > I acted as I did in that situation. I only object to the first one.
> > If they look the same to you, though, it may appear as if I
> > object to both, which would indeed be a problem.
>
> With all due respect, I find your methods no different than mine.

I admit that in this thread, I careen dangerously into the territory of becoming that which I criticize. This could perhaps be labelled hypocracy, but I will plead simple human weakness.

> I believe I have a more realistic expectation of outcome and
> a more solidly fixed moral compass.

I am not sure I have ever said what my expectation is, so I don't know to what you are referring here. My expectations are quite low, however this is tempered with hope and patience, such as I can muster, and these are often considered virtues.

I also do not see this as a moral issue, but rather a civil one.

> I question whether your measurement method is accurate. I recall Bob
> from the mid-nineties at least, and I suspect Google has an incomplete
> archive prior to 2001. I could be wrong about that.

Ah. Yes, it's hard to say definitively, but I will defer to your memory.

> If one accepts your position that length of
> participation establishes legitimacy, then [name deleted] has greater
> legitimacy than the willful ignorant you championed at his expense.

I am the champion only of politeness.

> > I still find it useful, and a valuable resource. If you don't, why
> > stay?
>
> Good question. I stayed away for a couple of years. Did that enrich the
> newsgroup?

Honestly? You're asking me?

I really, really, REALLY thought it did. My heart sank when you returned. I knew the amount of substantive discussion would go way down, and it did.

> If the handful of willful ignorants selling their snake-oil
> here left, would anyone really lose anything of value?

Not that I accept your labels as such, but I believe I know to whom you are referring, so I can answer: not much.

I do believe there is some modest value to vigourous dissent, though; it sharpens the mind.

The most valuable members of the newsgroup, though, are the ones who are the most patient and the most educated. This week, that would not include either of us, sadly.

> > Mostly I also find it a pleasant place, as long as the commentary
> > stays focused on ideas, and stays polite.
>
> Good for you. So, then, is it okay to drive out people who can make
> substantive and reasoned contributions as long as it suits what you want?

I do not believe in driving people out, so no. That is why I try to reason
with you. I reject insults as a rhetorical technique.

> If that is okay, is it any less okay for me to drive out
> self-aggrandizing ignorants when it suits what I want?

It is identically not okay.

> >>It's a free world. The self-aggrandizing ignorants can post diarrheic
> >>nonsense if they want. I can point out to the world what the diarrheic
> >>nonsense means: they are nothing more than a self-aggrandizing ignorants.
> >
> > Agreed. Also, I can point out when people are not being polite, and
> > when people are name-calling. And you can call me names for
> > doing so.
>
> And I can question you on your expectation for doing so. What do you
> hope to achieve?

Politeness. Civil discourse. An end to ad hominem attacks, and a return to on-topic, substantive discussion of data management. I do not particularly expect this to happen, but I have some modest hope.

 Marshall Received on Thu Apr 20 2006 - 19:57:23 CEST