> I am a freedom of speech advocate more than I am a Linux advocate. I
> also have lived long enough to know that even the biggest idiot will
> sometimes posses insight that eludes the wisest man.
I'll speak to this only superbriefly, because your freedom-of-speech
point is a good one. Think of this less as trying to draw up a charter
for COLA and more like antitrolling countermeasures.
Quote:> Your list indicates a few individuals that, while I do not agree with
> them 99.999% of the time, do have opinions that are important to hear
> refute, argue, or even think about.
It's only a newbies guide. Chances are, no matter what, if a response
is a good one (even by some of the people higher up on the list), then
it will generate productive debate, and the length of that thread, more
so than anything, will draw people in. This is to discourage response
to the kind of garbage S puts in on a regular basis, as well as
the "Latest news that proves Lx sucks" garbage that I've seen Chad put
or crosspost into here. If one of their posts strikes a chord, it's
going to generate response no matter what. All I wanted to do was shed
some light on the people who might be involved in the "anti" side of
the debate. That's why there are categories. The humour was just for
Quote:> Hey it's a free news group. If you don't like it, don't read it.
I love freedom of speech too. I also love freedom to discriminate
against idiots. The two aren't mutually exclusive, and what I was
trying to do involved the latter, not the former.
Quote:> Addendum: If you don't like it, don't oppose its expression, for
> it may be you or your ideas that people don't like.
Ha, too late, that's already happened. I've seen this has already been
cross-posted to windows.nt too.
> Lastly, who are you to discount anything that someone says to anyone
> else? I mean, seriously, if you have been able to create this list
> your own viewing, would not anyone else? What is the value of "you"
> telling "others" that "they" are bad. Your motivation is clearly
> questionable, no one can argue that "they" can't be infuriating, but
> black lists are a form of censorship. Censorship of any form, except
> self discipline, is wrong.
I'm hoping this black-list fosters a certain degree of self-discipline.
If I'm wrong, then nothing changes. If I'm right, then there's a chance
that the debate could develop more focus, and that those far off truths
that everyone seems to be striving towards with each developing
argument will get a little bit closer. There's a difference between
McCarthyism and what I'm doing here. McCarthyism was a black-list taken
so far that it ruined lives. How far can you take a newsgroup
blacklist? Most of the names listed were pseudonyms anyway. Nobody's
preventing "S" from coming back as "J". The real world should have all
sorts of freedoms. Productive debate should not. In my opinion, the
onus should be on the arguer to proove that they belong. If you ever
try to act as a mediator or a chair in a debate, you'll learn this the
hard way. But I'm not trying to proclaim myself chair. I'd much prefer
something approaching concensus, even if you could never get it
As for who I am, I'm just a guy who hates debate on stupid things.
There's no learning going on with most of these trolls, but there IS a
definite sense of hysteria to them that a happenstance reader might
pick up that could turn them off Linux for good. This list isn't meant
for the Anthony Ords in this newsgroup -- it's meant for people like
who I was several months ago. Is it presumptuous to presume that my
opinions should be taken as gospel? Of course it is, and I'll try to be
clearer next time that this isn't my intent. But it is even more
presumptuous to presume that people in this newsgroup should have to
put up with TCO arguments only after Microsoft has made TCO a *
buzzword, that we should care if MSNBC thinking that Microsoft isn't a
Just so you know, I briefly start a thread a while ago to figure out if
this idea was a good one, and it didn't get many responses (the ones
that I did were generally favourable to it). Chances are the reason it
didn't get many responses was because the majority of people thought it
was a silly idea to begin with. Still, I'd have no way of finding out
without actually doing it.
I guess I could have been more clear that these are just my opinions,
as is anything that gets posted here. I'll make sure that's very
evident in version 1.2.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.veryComputer.com/
Before you buy.