From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Sat Mar 29 2003 - 01:17:25 MST
I vote "What?"
I truly don't understand the rules, Eliezer. Perhaps it's just the "other
minds problem". Beyond that, I note that {"mandatory", "enforced"} !=
{"asked", "gentle reminder"}. There's a semantic gap there, though it's not
very diplomatic to say so.
I *did* label _my_ most florid transgression clearly as a FLAME. Perhaps
you could add that keyword to your plonk list? Or is it too likely that
most correspondents will not be as forthcoming?
Whatever. Me, I'm going to recreate my focus contributor email A-list of a
dozen or so--I got into much less dudgeon back then. Don't _see_ nothin',
won't _be_ nothin'. Call me Eugen(e).
MMB
... I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a
civilization. Sometimes I forget. ...
PS, to whom it may concern: while I'm flattered at your quoting the above
with attribution (as I think you have on some Web page somewhere), I would
ask that you include all three sentences, please.
Not as tidy, but more true.
On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 02:03:48 -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal@smigrodzki.org>
wrote:
> Yes.
>
> Rafal
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience@pobox.com>
> To: <extropians@extropy.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 11:51 PM
> Subject: META: Enforcement of mandatory subject labeling
>
>
>> Well, just out of curiousity, with all these nonlabeled vitriolic
>> useless
>> flames filling up my Extropians mailbox, I checked my Trash to see
>> whether
>> *anyone* was still using the IRAQ keyword. And what do you know, all
>> the
>> *intelligent* posts were politely using the IRAQ keyword and had thus
>> been
>> moved to the Trash.
>>
>> The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again.
>>
>> I move to make the inclusion of the IRAQ keyword a mandatory list rule
>> enforceable by temporary bans on posting - i.e., anyone who posts an
>> IRAQ
>> message without an IRAQ keyword will be asked not to post for two days,
>> as
>> a gentle reminder. All messages, flames, uncivil retorts and heated
>> remarks even loosely related to Iraq should get an IRAQ label, in
>> addition
>> to any POLITICS or WAR labels. Why? Because I don't want to lose all
>> POLITICS posts just to filter out the Iraq flamewar - someone might have
>> something real to say at some point. And plonking WAR would also plonk
>> "warning", "warm weather" and so on.
>>
>> Do I hear a second?
>>
>> --
>> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/
>> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
>>
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 29 2003 - 01:23:32 MST