Hi, Dave, Yes, this is the problem that plagues those harmed by mis- or disinformation. If one ignores it, there will be a substantial number of people who believe it on the grounds that it was not refuted. If one does not ignore the disinformation and instead refutes it, by, of necessity, repeating the misinformation along with its counter, then the misinformation is more widely propagated.
It is an age-old conundrum and one that has not been resolved yet by humankind. Balance is always nice, except when it is a compromise between truth and deception. There are ill-intentioned people out there who will deliberately use disinformation to harm others. Remember Neville Chamberlain? He naively sought compromise where none was desirable. So the conundrum continues. Maybe someday we'll figure out a way to solve it. Until then, those who propagate disinformation will always gain some advantage in conning people, whether refuted or not. Generally -- and I've been studying patterns of propaganda for several decades -- I find that refutation is best, with the intention of damaging the credibility of the source of disinformation. Of course, in this digital age, the source when discredited simply creates a new avatar is is again off to the races. Do you remember the boardwalk game "whack-a-mole" or somesuch? It seems o me an apt metaphor <grin>. Cheers, Lawry On Jan 3, 2013, at 11:49 AM, David Roberson wrote: > Perhaps there is a problem with the spread of disinformation that you speak > of, but did you consider that every time a response is generated, it just > gives the subject more publicity? I have come to the conclusion that this is > one of the problems within the US that leads to more violence being > propagated. One awful act is repeated within the news for far too long which > tends to make individuals that are seeking fame to act irrationally. It > would have been better for nothing to have been said at any time about the > event on public news. Unfortunately, politics usually becomes involved in > such manners where there is a tendency to keep the issue alive far beyond > reason. Those that continue the process should be held accountable for > further problems akin to yelling fire in a crowded environment. > > Someone looking for an issue to set off their passions is not going to worry > about any counters. They most likely will not balance what they read, but > instead concentrate upon a narrow range of inputs that they find particularly > offensive. This seems to be the nature of the beast, so it is in the best > interest of all concerned to terminate the discussion at once and not keep > repeating and consequently spreading the issue. > > For balance, you should also be concerned about the extreme negativity given > to one of the Christian positions during the exchanges. I know that there > are people reading the list that hold these types of views in serious > contempt. This group in not the proper forum from which to conduct these > types of activities and I plead that they be terminated. > > Dave > > > -----Original Message----- > From: de Bivort Lawrence <ldebiv...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Thu, Jan 3, 2013 10:53 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: The Truth about islam and little girls. > > Hi, Eric, > > My motive for posting in Jojo's trolling is not quite the same as Abd > ul-Rahman's. I worry about the campaign of disinformation that Islamo-phobes > are spreading as widely as they can. It affects the ability of the American > people and Europeans to understand issues pertaining to the Middle East, and > so degrades the quality of our foreign policy. I know, not the concern of > LENR list. But people on this list nonetheless and fortunately form opinions > on other matters, and so the disinformation must (I say as a political > scientist involved in US foreign policy issues, as well as an engaged LENR > observer) be countered. And yes, I know that the disinformation is unfair to > list members and the countering of it tedious, repetitious, and, to many, > legitimately unwelcome. > > Hidden Islamophobic agendas and methods have spilled into our list. The > matter that Abd ul-Rahman raises of the troll's posting being archived is a > real one, even if we have had to waste time countering it. Short of stopping > the Islamophobic trolling at its source, I don't know what else to do. > Islamophobia is akin to anti-Semitism in its despicability, and one can make > the argument easily that the former is a variant of the latter. We should > accept neither. > > Lawry > > > On Jan 2, 2013, at 11:22 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> >> wrote: >> >> Oh, I'm quivering, shaking with the possibility that *Jed Rothwell* might >> filter me out. >> >> I am not going to subscribe to VortexB-l. This is supposedy a moderated >> list. If it stays unmoderated, I won't be here long. >> >> Hate to say it, but the troll is starting to win. People are starting to >> lose patience with one another. I think Steve Johnson has been on this list >> since early days. >> >> Any word on Bill? Is he ok? >> >> How long do we suffer the present situation until we reconstitute under >> something like Google Groups, with Terry or another longtimer as mod? Or >> should everyone who can't stand the situation add he who shall not be named >> to a killfile? If that's the best we can do for now, how to address Abd's >> pressing concern about having his background and religion subject to >> constant assault on this list? >> >> Eric >> >
