Brad wrote:
>For the record: Bullshit. Total bullshit.
language! Don Roper might kick us off the archive at csf.
and: >People like Michael Keaney--people with no social skills whatsoever,
who never learned how to behave in any company, polite or not--ruined
USENET as a forum. In my view, the--unfortunate--prevalence of such
<censoreds> makes an unmoderated email list unsustainable and non-viable in
the long run.<
I see no reason for personal insults. I also see no way how anyone can do
instant psychoanalysis -- individual such-and-such has no social skills --
based on e-mail discussion groups, since the form of communication
undermines normal social conventions.
and: >The only strategy I have found that works in the short-run is
tit-for-tat. The only strategy I think will work in the long run is to
adopt the rules of propriety that legislatures typically adopt.<
unfortunately, a Hatfield/McCoy-type feud may also result from tit-for-tat
retaliation. Tit-for-tat retaliation seems simply to be impoliteness
justified by "everyone does it." That in turn encourages everyone to
continue to do it. This seems to be the result of Brad's tit-for-tat
strategy in recent memory.
>Think about it: speech on the floor of the U.S. Congress is--in many
ways--the freeest anywhere.<
It takes a tremendous amount of money to buy a Congressional seat, which
means that only the richest campaign contributors can buy one for their
proxies. (It's also a risky purchase, since there's no guarantee of
victory, but that's why contributors often diversify, spending money on
both Republicans and Democrats.) Further, the scope of the debate is
severely limited, so that fundamental issues are hardly ever addressed
(while people are lambasted for using class struggle rhetoric if they make
obvious points about the regressivity of Bush's tax cuts). So the speech is
hardly "free."
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
