From: Emlyn O'regan (oregan.emlyn@healthsolve.com.au)
Date: Thu Mar 20 2003 - 18:07:37 MST
I really like this approach, Alex. I haven't checked myself out for trolldom
using your metric, but I think I'd probably come up positive :-(
As to how to deal with it, this is my approach (which I will now use more
forcefully in the face of this wake-up call). Bear in mind that I only use
the email interface, not the web interface (ie: I am eCroMagnon man).
Simply put, the killfile is the way. As I'm an outlook user (boo, hiss), I
use a message rules to delete particular posters. It took me a long time to
get up the courage to do this, and I still have difficulty with it. Why?...
Firstly, I find it very hard to see something said that I disagree with, and
to let it pass without comment. I'd say this is very, very common in
general, and on this list in particular. I find that one of my fears
regarding killfiling is that comments would pass me by to which I *should*
respond, but I wont because I wont see them.
Secondly, I worry that those I've plonked might say something interesting
once in a while, and I'll miss it. That's actually happens, in my
experience, and so is a valid fear.
Thirdly, it feels like a violation of free speech to killfile people. It
seems so harsh, to just shut them out of my universe.
In response to this, I've had to do a *lot* of thinking. I think that a
general philosophy of individualism has come to my rescue, somewhat, to give
me a framework for addressing this stuff.
About letting things pass without comment, all I can tell myself is that
this is the only way to deal with trolls. It's about engagement, and the
solution is to not engage. If I think someone speaks crap, why read it?
Foremost I must convince myself that *it is not my job to save other people
onlist from being swayed by bad arguments*. That'd be individualism; each
person is responsible for his/her own mental life. I judge that those onlist
are capable individuals, and have chosen to read the list; thus I have no
duty to go up against opinions of others unless I personally feel motivated
to. Further, I believe that in the spirit of extro-l, I really should only
be posting when my post will add something, in an extropic sense, to the
list.
(aside: I believe that other list members should also believe this, but I
also believe that when the word "should" pops up in my thinking, big
flashing lights and sirens must go off. Individualism says to me that
"should", when it applies to me, can be enforced; however, if I am applying
it to others, I don't have any right to enforce it. With others, I can
initiate communication, but no coercive behaviour, excepting where I think
others are infringing on my personal liberties (ie: stopping me from
thinking and/or living as I see fit))
About missing useful post from the plonked, I've learned that it's a risk
worth taking; cost/benefit analysis puts me ahead. After all, these are
people that I've judged, for me personally, to be extremely low s/n. Also,
as a back door, these people's posts go to a Deleted folder for a while,
giving me a chance to reinstate useful posts if, for instance, I see a reply
to such a post and want to see the original. Also, posts are retrievable
from the website if it turns out I really did delete something I would like
to keep.
In terms of free speech, a killfile is not an infringement. Free speech
doesn't require that I listen. As long as my killfiling doesn't affect
anyone else's ability to access these posts, I've not trampled on anyone's
liberties; it's my choice. Incidentally, I'd be concerned about too much by
way of reputation tracking/management on the webserver, if they were to
start setting defaults about which posts were most valuable, or in other
ways directly modifying other people's views of the list. Although, if the
mechanisms were openly published, and everyone was consenting, I guess
that's ok. I can't imagine the extropian list members agreeing to mechanisms
like that, however.
About plonking, I have found it imperfect. What I am trying to achieve is,
partially, to stop myself from replying to crap that I should ignore by
making sure I never see it. Unfortunately, I often see other people's
responses to said crap, which usually includes the original, and sucks me
in. I don't really know how to cope with that problem, except to get a bit
more self control (ie: I'm buggered).
Finally, as a related aside, I think that moderating a list, or banning
people, doesn't necessarily impinge on free speech. I think that web lists
in general, for example, can be taken as a whole; in that context, kicking
someone off a list doesn't stop them from going to others, starting their
own, or even creating massive websites to publicise their views. Lists just
have to be true to their charter, whatever that may be. In the case of
extro-l, I think it'd have to be a very, very good reason before you started
banning people (given the charter of the list), but there are cases where it
is necessary. And that's ok.
Emlyn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: alexboko@umich.edu [mailto:alexboko@umich.edu]
> Sent: Friday, 21 March 2003 6:50
> To: extropians@extropy.org
> Subject: Re: POLITICS: How to tell an extropian from a mere
> stealth-conservative
>
>
> From: "Alex Future Bokov" <alexboko@umich.edu>
> X-Mailer: YaBB
>
>
> [quote from: dehede011@aol.com on 2003-03-20 at 12:07:26] How
> come you don't
> mention the many stealth left wingers on her? How
>
>
>
> My bad. Search their archives, same tactic will flush them out too. I
> guess disagreeing with them comes naturally, and I rarely
> even notice them
> anymore. Disagreeing with you guys feels wierd and annoying.
> Hopefully, by the
> end of this month my pledge will have helped me get over this
> hangup, and I
> will gain equal facility in ignoring both types of trolls.
>
> [quote from: dehede011@aol.com on 2003-03-20 at 12:07:26]
>
> do you distinguish a stealth-conservative from a libertarian?
>
>
>
> Ah! Good question. I've been kicking it around for a while.
> Let's see if I can
> answer it without breaking my pledge (see start of this
> thread). How many of
> the following organizations do you find distasteful out of
> all proportion to
> any specific arguments you put forward to justify your distaste:
>
> ACLU (IMHO this one is the strongest bellwhether of what you
> really are)
> Amensty International
>
> Planned Parenthood
>
> Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation
>
> NAACP
>
> American Indian Movement
>
> Women's Health Action Mobilization
>
> National Organization for Women
>
>
> The more of them tick you off for, the more you fit into the former
> category. If you are indifferent to all of them, or even
> agree with many
> of them on bits and pieces of their agendae, that places you
> in the latter
> category. Obviously, only you know for sure... hopefully
> we're all at least
> honest with ourselves.
>
> Other people can only INFER which end of the spectrum you
> fall on. Although
> the more emotional and dogmatic you sound, the less Extropian you are
> automatically, regardless of what kind of non-Extropian you are.
>
> [quote from: dehede011@aol.com on 2003-03-20 at 12:07:26]
>
> How do I
>
> distinguish you from a person that does not believe in free
> speech?
>
>
> Dunno. Good one. Let me know if you come up with a good heuristic. One
> that comes to mind is the fact that I want to ignore trolls
> with greater
> efficiency rather than call for their banning, suing, fining, jailing,
> flogging, etc. Also, this medium isn't terribly conducive to
> someone who
> doesn't believe in free speech, don't you think?
>
>
> ----
> This message was posted by Alex Future Bokov to the
> Extropians 2003 board on ExI BBS.
> <http://www.extropy.org/bbs/index.php?board=67;action=display;
threadid=55245>
***************************************************************************
Confidentiality: The contents of this email are confidential and are
intended only for the named recipient. If the reader of this e-mail is not
the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any use, reproduction,
disclosure or distribution of the information contained in the e-mail is
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please reply to us
immediately and delete the document.
Viruses: Any loss/damage incurred by using this material is not the sender's
responsibility. Our entire liability will be limited to resupplying the
material. No warranty is made that this material is free from computer virus
or other defect.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 20 2003 - 18:14:54 MST