From: Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 15:15:38 MDT
Hubert Mania wrote:
>
> Mark Walters writes:
>
> > I'm not sure I understand the relevance of the voting discussion. I'm not
> > suggesting that we vote people off the list, I'm suggesting that people
> > might change their behavior in response to the signals they get about the
> > value of their posts. Think of it as somewhat like a market. We are
> > producers of messages and we want as many people to "buy" our messages as
> > possible. If I send out messages that have a high perceived noise to
> signal
> > ratio many people will put me in their killfile, so I will have fewer
> > "buyers". I agree about the perennial dangers of centralized authority,
> and
> > while what I am suggesting is not immune from distortion, I also think the
> > dangers of corruption are fairly minimal. The public display of the
> > killfiles might look like a table with everyone's name on this list (there
> > is what about a 1000 people on this list?) on the X and Y axis. I could
> look
> > up your name and see if I am in your killfile and you can look up my name
> > and see if I am in your killfile. One conjecture then is that if people
> can
> > signal their dislike of someone's posts by using the killfile this may
> > reduce the acrimonious exchanges that sometimes go on. If we are having
> such
> > an exchange I might put you in my killfile and you might retaliate by
> > putting me in your killfile--and so would end the exchange. Next to each
> > person's name would be the number of people that have entered him or her
> > into their killfiles. The conjecture is that people might change their
> > behavior so as not to be entered into too many killfiles. Take an extreme
> > example. Suppose an individual posts tons of Nazi propaganda to the list
> > every day. I conjecture that almost all will enter this person into their
> > killfiles, hence the Nazi's voice will go unheard. This Nazi cannot
> complain
> > about a centralized authority squashing her voice since the killfiles are
> > set by individuals. As I said, the right to free speech does not entail an
> > obligation on others to listen. The reason this system would be relatively
> > impervious to corruption is that each person's killfile would be
> displayed.
> > If there was an attempt to discredit someone by artificially raising their
> > killfile quotient this could be easily detected because each killfile is
> > assignable to a specific individual. If the list managers tried to
> > artificially raise your killfile quotient they would have to assign it to
> > some individuals, say one of them is me. When I look and see that my
> > preferences have been tampered with I will scream bloody blue murder on
> and
> > off the list.
>
> In your message you use the word killfile fifteen times.
>
> Maybe it has to to with a language barrier, but when I read the word
> killfile 15 times in a 35 line message I get the impression there is a war
> going on in the heads of the posters. All this scoring and voting,
> collecting
> points, making impressions, being competitive, getting adapted to the rat
> race of a mental market place.. Scoring, statistics . . . well I simply
> don`t like it. The use of this very word "killfile" suggests a hostile
> atmosphere, at least a competitive one with this
> noise-to-signal-ratio-correctness, always this obsession to be efficient.
My preference is unmoderated lists; however, the proposed moderated list
for discussion and another for chit chat is a workable approach. On our
TLC (Thailand-Laos-Cambodia) lists one is for mission and the other for
chit chat. It appeals to those with varying employment restrictions and
interests.
> I never implemented a killfile in my whole Internet career. I want to *know*
> what my opponents think. That's why I read their messages with a special
> care and interest. Sometimes I learn from them more than from persons I
> always agree with.
>
> Hubert "Killthekillfiles" Mania
I too prefer not to killfile anyone, even the most (IMO) arrogant, bombastic,
and ignorant poster. I dislike stereotyping. Here is a quote from my
Humanistic Psychology textbook: " [...] one may have a mystical experience -
een one which may change one's life. This is not controllable: and if there
is one thing which academics are about it is control. It doesn't matter
whether they are old nasty positivists of new shiny constructionists, they
are all about control. Nietzsche would have laughed."
Terry
"We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we
speak."
Epictetus
early stoic
-- “Only a zit on the wart on the heinie of progress.” Copyright 1992, Frank Rice Terry W. Colvin, Sierra Vista, Arizona (USA) < fortean1@mindspring.com > Alternate: < fortean1@msn.com > Home Page: < http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Stargate/8958/index.html > Sites: * Fortean Times * Mystic's Haven * TLCB * U.S. Message Text Formatting (USMTF) Program ------------ Member: Thailand-Laos-Cambodia Brotherhood (TLCB) Mailing List TLCB Web Site: < http://www.tlc-brotherhood.org >[Vietnam veterans, Allies, CIA/NSA, and "steenkeen" contractors are welcome.]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 15:26:43 MDT