Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 19:21:03 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Dave Hayes <dave@jetcafe.org> Cc: Joshua Lee <yid@softhome.net>, nwestfal@directvinternet.com, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why did evolution fail? Message-ID: <3D814B8F.FC2DB77C@mindspring.com> References: <200209130103.g8D13n162137@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Dave Hayes wrote:
> > The mailing list exists to serve the group. That is its purpose.
>
> I disagree. The mailing list exists to enable communication between
> parties interested in the topic that the list serves. "Serving the
> group" implies it does or can do more than this.
Mailing lists on equipment *I* own exist to serve *me*.
If *I* am a group, then mailing lists on equipment the group
owns exist to serve *the group*.
> > I have responseded to a single troll message.
>
> This goes directly counter to what I suggested. Ok.
Failure to follow your advice is hardly damning. 8-).
> > I did so to belittle the troll. I did this as a means of
> > demonstrating to the group that I in fact did not support the
> > statements of the troll.
>
> But by responding, you gave the troll a small percentage of your time,
> and you implicitly acknolwedge the troll's existance, granting that
> troll beingness for the duration of your response. This is not
> "ignoring the troll". ;)
Nevertheless, it served me to do it.
> > Further, I did it in a way that acknowledged only the existance of
> > the posting itself, rather than acknowledging the content which the
> > troll wished me to acknowledge.
>
> Regardless, you still gave some acknowledgement of existence. This
> only incentivizes the troll further.
Nevertheless, it served me to do it.
> > I have, further, repeatedly responded to your argument about the
> > "maturity level it takes to ignore something you don't like". I
> > have done so by pointing out that I prefer the participation of
> > immature, by your definition of "mature", contributors to the
> > participation of trolls.
>
> At last. We see that it is your "preference" and not some "moral
> imperative" or "deduced axiom of behaivor".
My preference in this case derives from a definition of the group
which the mailing list serves, said group being exclusive of trolls,
by definition.
It is not merely a product of my own desires.
> > You have repeatedly pointed out that you do not value participation
> > of people who do not meet your criterion for "maturity".
>
> Yes, this is my preference.
However, this is at odds to the groups goals, which is participation
in the project.
The mailing list is an instrumentality of the project. It does
not exist outside the context of the project, in that it is hosted
on a mail server belonging to the project.
> > I have pointed out that it does not *matter* to the community
> > what you, personally, value, what matters to the community is
> > what the *community* values.
>
> This all brings back the very first posting I made:
>
> > To see trolls as a bad thing is to ignore what brings communities
> > together in the first place.
Since you want do deperately to be asked...
What brings communities together in the first place?
How does seeing trolls as a bad thing ignore this?
> This entire conversation is analogous to the following short skit:
>
> Dave: <points> Look at that shooting star
Terry: We need an asteroid defense system
Dave: But getting smacked by an asteroid is a good thing!
Terry: Are you out of your freaking gourd?
Dave: You get to learn about celestial events close up!
Terry: I'd rather keep on living, thanks!
Dave: But you not only learn about celestial events close up, if
you are one of the luck one percent of survivors in the
aftermath, you can study chunks of asteroid close up, and
learn about their composition, without having to launch a
sample-and-return-probe!
Terry: In the period of time between the impact, and the time that
all food crops die because of the dust cloud it kicked up!
Dave: Exactly! Won't that knowledge be worth a little asteroid?!?
Terry: Uh, I value the other 99% of the population of the planet!
Dave: You are a fool to value them. If they were worth valueuing,
they wouldn't have been standing where the rocks landed! Why
destroy all possible impactors, just because you want to save
a few people?
Terry: Uh, maybe I can explain it this way... 100 minus 99 is less
than 100.
Neal: God created asteroids! They didn't evolve! None dare critise
them!
Terry: Uh, Neal, we don't need asteroids landing on our heads...
Neal: Nonsense! If one lands on your head, that's God's will in
action! Are you trying to say that it wasn't God who made
all those people?!?
Terry: Can't I have just a *little* asteroid defense system?
Dave: No! [Holds up "Terry unfair to asteroids" sign]
Neal: No! [Holds up "Terry defies God's will!" sign]
...
-- Terry
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3D814B8F.FC2DB77C>