From: Kevin Freels (megaquark@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Jul 18 2003 - 16:47:11 MDT
I'm new here, but it seems odd to me that the largest, most often visited
topic on this board is "flame wars". Over half the traffic on the list seems
to be people complaining about being insulted, complaining about the
complainers, or complaining about the complaining about the complaining.
One of the risks of putting an idea into the open is that you are subjecting
your opinion to ridicule. If I put an idea out there and someone shoots it
down or makes me look like a fool, I have the option to ignore them just as
much as they have the option to ignore my statements. Someone has to take
the higher ground.
Why is it that a board full of brilliant people seems to have trouble
putting things behind them and moving forward? Why is everyone so sensitive?
Personally, when I throw out an idea, I want to hear exactly what everyone
has to say about it; even if it isn;t very nice. That doesn't mean I want to
hear name-calling, but I have thick skin and I can take it. Asking people to
censor their opinions to keep me from "feeling bad" would be
counter-productive to my reasons for being here in the first place.
So can we PLEASE put this "flame wars" topic behind us? I know I am fairly
new to this board, but it just seems to be a huge waste of time!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
To: <extropians@extropy.org>
Sent: Friday, July 18, 2003 12:18 PM
Subject: RE: flame wars
> Spike wrote,
> > Ja, this list is indeed flamey, always has been. I
> > would suggest that it is possible to have totally
> > open and honest discussion of difficult topics while
> > maintaining diplomacy, good will and having some fun.
>
> I wish. But history has shown differently. For whatever reason, the
> Extropian List has not been able to do so.
>
> > We can maintain the spirit of Crocker's rules while
> > still being open, diplomatic, kind and honest.
>
> I find that most people quote Crocker's rules as an excuse to participate
in
> insulting or ad hominem attacks in violation of the list rules. I am not
> sure if Crocker's rules and the current list rules are compatible.
>
> > As a thought experiment, think of the most honest
> > never-tell-a-lie person you can imagine, one who is
> > also a kind-hearted soul. Consider him in a typical
> > extropianesque no-win situation, translated into an old
> > familiar setting: "Jesus, do these pants make my butt look fat?"
> >
> > Now, he could use my usual technique of feigning an
> > epileptic seizure, but that in itself is a form of
> > dishonesty and they don't fall for it after the
> > fourth time. It would be perfectly honest for him to
> > answer with a simple "no", even if he is actually thinking:
> > "No, those pants dont make your butt look fat. Its your fat
> > butt that makes your butt look fat." Notice that a simple
> > "no" is true, is far more diplomatic,
> > spares feelings, follows the spirit of Crocker's rules
> > of internet exchange.
>
> This is a straw-man and has nothing to do with insulting behavior or
> personal attacks. The problem with arguing for "truth" and "honesty", is
> that all attackers are sure they are being truthful and honest in their
> attacks. Even the 911 terrorists claimed truth, honesty and integrity for
> their actions. Such a standard, while theoretically sound, is almost
never
> useful in practice. Humans always seem to be able to justify their
actions
> in their own minds such that they are the good guys.
>
> > We deal with some difficult topics on this list, but
> > I call on people to eschew heated argument in
> > favor of controlled argument.
>
> You can "call" for this all you want, but it never happens. Why would
this
> call be any different? Seriously, do you think you have just solved our
> problems? If not, what would be a good solution to stopping flame wars.
I
> think they are self-destructive behavior which nobody wants. But we do
not
> seem to want to stop them either.
>
>
> > ExI's best days are yet before of us. Let us
> > cut down on rancor and fan the flames of progress.
> > We are on the eve of construction.
>
> OK, but let's not just say it as a matter of faith. Let's take real
action.
> What exact changes do you propose to make that will cut down on rancor?
If
> no changes are made, none will occur.
>
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISM, CISSP, IAM, IBMCP, GSEC
> Certified InfoSec Manager, Certified IS Security Pro, NSA-certified
> InfoSec Assessor, IBM-certified Security Consultant, SANS-cert GSEC
> <HarveyNewstrom.com> <Newstaff.com>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 18 2003 - 16:45:47 MDT