Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> > In the interest of list quality, we have strengthened our stance
> > on ad hominem (attacking one's character as opposed to debating one's
> > ideas) attacks, with a zero tolerance policy.
>
>I am disappointed that a organization like ExI, which ostensibly values
>rational thought, has chosen to follow a zero-intelligence policy on
>anything. Human beings have marvellous minds that to date no machinery
>has been able to duplicate (despite our best efforts). Why are so many
>authorities afraid to use them? Zero-tolerance policies substitute
>blind automatic rules for what should be the exercise of human judgment.
The problem though, Lee, is that human judgment is prone to bias. If the
list rules were to reflect that ad hominem is essentially not good, but the
list admin(s) will choose whether or not the offender should be banned,
there are the ramifications of subjective bias. It has been decided by
ExI's executives that ad hominem has no place on the extropians list. That
goes for everyone from folks like Anders to the newest newbie. Personally,
I can't envision any practical reason for an ad hominem exchange, and
unless someone can make a really good case for when and how ad hominem is
productive, the rule should remain.
As it says in the List Rules, we most certainly *don't* like rules for
their own sake. But for the sake of list quality, a few guidelines are
obviously necessary.
________________________________________________________
E. Shaun Russell Operations Officer, Extropy Institute
e_shaun@extropy.org http://www.extropy.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~K i n e t i c i z e Y o u r P o t e n t i a l~
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:25 MDT