Randy Smith wrote:
> >From: Samantha Atkins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> >Reply-To: email@example.com
> >To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> >Subject: Re: List Rules Part 1 (Was: Ad hominem? I think not.)
> >Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 02:33:38 -0800
> >"E. Shaun Russell" wrote:
> > >
> > > Jeff Davis wrote:
> > > >The list supposedly has rules as to what is and is not
> > > >allowed, but enforcement is all but non-existent. It
> > > >seems to me that the ambitions of the Extropy
> > > >Institute--more specifically Max, Greg, Natasha, et
> > > >al, ie, those who have invested huge parts of there
> > > >life to make ExI what it is, and to make its mark in
> > > >the world--are being sacrificed--at least here on the
> > > >list--by a failure on the part of the list "owners" to
> > > >enforce a minimum standard of courtesy/respect (dare I
> > > >say "adult" behavior).
> > >
> > > Well, I haven't seen anything lately that I feel is contemptible enough
> > > deal with in an authoritarian manner. Also, no one has contacted me
> > > directly regarding any extraneous offence that has been dished out. I
> > > would rather not have to "enforce" anything, and as has been the case in
> > > the past (both recent and more distant), a spontaneous order of sorts
> > > always sorted things out in the long run. Threads about improving the
> > > pop up a few times each year, but the general consensus has always been
> > > that the current method (hands off except for in extreme circumstances
> > > as the gun discussion moratorium in '99) is the best.
> >The bilge that some have dumped on me is not contemptible? I
> >hold it in great contempt. If you want a formal complaint or
> >require one before you take notice then consider this a formal
> >complaint. The treatment I have received from John Clark and
> >Mike Lorrey does not belong on a civilized list. The list rule
> >says no personal attacks. It has obviously been violated.
> >Either the rule means something or it doesn't. You decide.
> >Not that I can't deal with such and ignore them largely. But it
> >certainly does detract from my enjoyment and willingness to
> >participate and ability to share what I am actually here for.
> >So, yes, I do experience such as a degradation of the list
> >personally. Enough so that I have been tempted multiple times
> >of late to give this list up as a bad job.
> As for ad hom attacks, you yourself are probably the worst I have seen on
> this list, and only about three or four other people are in the running.....
Prove it. I once called Mike an asshole it is true, and
apologized later. I think any rational person would clearly see
that the stuff dished out by John and Mike lately against me far
and away swamps any lapses on my part.
> Don't make me break out the archives, either, cuz you aint gonna like their
Bring it on. And when you do please have the grace to apologize
for a blatant lie.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:21 MDT