Text 4828, 238 rader
Skriven 2007-07-22 11:38:36 av Jeff Smith (1:14/5)
Kommentar till text 4814 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
Ärende: R&R exchanging insults
==============================
Hello David.
22 Jul 07 18:12, you wrote to me:
DD> Jeff Smith -> David Drummond wrote:
DD>>>>> Are you suggesting that he was first, and, like little
DD>>>>> children, the rest followed his lead? Yeah, sure.
JS>>>> No actually. I think that in the beginning of Felten's
JS>>>> tenure as editor and moderator. He did care about Fidonews and
JS>>>> Fidonet and was considerably more active as moderator.
DD>>> He has never done more than make polite requests of posters to
DD>>> tone down their content. How do you feel he was "more active"?
JS>> Maybe that was the problem then. Sometimes you have to go
JS>> beyond being polite. Especially with those that do not normally
JS>> want to listen.
DD> What else could he do, swear at them?
Communicate David. He no longer even tries. He has made his moderating
job that much harder by alienating almost everyone that it is his job to
communicate with.
DD> [...]
DD>>> and there is nothing anyone can do to alter the content of the
DD>>> messages (other than the posters themselves).
JS>> The posters are responsible for the content of their posts.
JS>> It looks like you are sharing in Feltens defeatest attitude. " I
JS>> can't do it so it can't be done. I give up."
DD> Only the posters can moderate their messages. There is nothing the
DD> "moderator" can do but request that of them.
Yes, the posters control their messages. They would control their
messages based on the level of respect and confidence that they have
in the moderator. If they have little or none for the moderator then
the moderator will get little or no complience. As is the current
situation.
DD> [...]
JS>>>> Why are you choosing to avoid the real point here David?
JS>>>> The rules are not the problem. Rules don't mean anything to
JS>>>> anyone regardless of how good they might be if noone is
JS>>>> enforcing those rules.
DD>>> Why must they be enforced? Must you always be forced to do
DD>>> things just for the sake of being forced?
JS>> Simple David. Rules that people know will not be enforced
JS>> are meaningless.
DD> So why have them?
Because this echo has a purpose David. And that purpose is not to be
a yet another flame echo as you and Felten would seem to want it to be.
Ruled only by the mob mentality.
JS>> What if the police made it clear that even though there
JS>> was a law against stealing the police would not enforce that law?
JS>> The result would be that those so inclined would steal to their
JS>> hearts content. Same priciple here David. If Felten chooses to
JS>> not enforce his own rules and even breaks them himself. He shows
JS>> everyone just how meaningless those rules are.
DD> You are comparing apples with oranges.
No, I am trying to show you that if Felten posts rules (Reasonable
rules) and then makes it clear based on his own actions and words that
he will not enforce those rules. He can't blame anyone but himself when
people do not follow those rules, Yet he does just that. He blames the
users of the echo for the problems. He blames everyone but himself for
the problems that HE helped create.
DD> [...]
JS>> This echo is not a free-for-all echo where we have mob rule.
JS>> It has a rather narrow purpose and function. That being to
JS>> support the Fidonews. The fact that Felten has chosen to give up
JS>> and turn over his responsibility as moderator to the users should
JS>> not mean that we are now the law here.
DD> This may be your interpretation of the rules. It is obviously not for
DD> all of those who appear to be in contravention with your
DD> interpretation.
I am simply going by the intended purpose of this echo. There is little
there to misinterpret.
DD> [...]
DD>>> The why must they be taken seriously? If no-one wants to take
DD>>> them seriously they should be discarded.
JS>> This echo has a specific purpose David. A purpose that you
JS>> think should be ignored just because you don't agree with it or
JS>> don't want to be limited by it.
DD> What purpose? According to my interpretation of the rules, this echo
DD> is primarily for discussing articles appearing in Fidonews. It hasn't
DD> been used for that in years - there is nothing in FidoNews to discuss.
Be still my heart. <g> We agree. Yes, that is my interpretation too. As
I and others have said the rules are not the problem. The implementation of
those rules is the problem. Rules serve no purpose if they are not enforced.
DD> IF you think this is its ONLY purpose, why are you discussing this
DD> topic now?
To try to make this echo better and bring it back to where it was
intended to be.
JS>> If you don't like the limitations of the purpose of this echo
JS>> then I challenge you to go elsewhere.
DD> Sorry, the majority out number you. Perhaps YOU should move somewhere
DD> else...
Are you sure about that? As for me, I am here to stay as long as needed.
JS>> The people should not expect the echo to change to accommodate them.
DD> Obviously they do, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.
No David. A vocal handful I would suspect do (Including you and
Felten) but not the majority. Many have I would think gotten tired of the
crap and chaos in this echo and ceased to post anymore.
JS>> The people should change
JS>> to accommodate the rules of the echo and not expect those rules
JS>> to be change to their liking.
DD> I understand that you don't get to taste democracy much in your area,
DD> but if the majority of people want the purpose of this echo changed,
DD> it will be changed. You cannot stop the people.
So far David you have failed to understand a number of things. Even
when they are spelled out to you. Either by choice or inability.
Let me try to spell it out to you more directly. At the risk of maybe
comming across a little to strongly for some. This echo is NOT a democracy.
It is NOT to be ruled by the mob mentality. This echo has rules and a
specific purpose. The only real problem is that those rules need to be
enforced.
JS>> If the rules are changed it should be done for
JS>> the benefit of the Fidonews and Fidonet. Not for a particular
JS>> person or a group of people who want no more than one more echo
JS>> where they can swear, insult, and call people names.
DD> If the majority want that, that's what they get.
JS>> We have plenty of echos already that can be used for that purpose.
JS>> This echo is and was not intended to be one of those.
DD> It has evolved into that.
No.... It has been neglected and allowed to degrade into that. It
took neglect to allow thos echo to become what it has and it will take
work to get it back to where it was intended to be.
DD> [...]
DD>>> The hierarchical structure of the technical network never has
DD>>> been - however some echoes (including this one) are.
JS>> That is merely your opinion David. This echo is a Fidonet
JS>> based echo for the support of the Fidonews which is a Fidonet
JS>> newsletter. This echo also has a specific purpose.
DD> That purpose has become redundant - the echo has evolved beyond that.
Evolved? Me thinks you are headed in the wrong direction there
David. Evolved suggests a positive movement.
DD> [...]
>> Your avoiding the question David. When was the last time that
JS>> Felten moderated someone IN this echo?
DD> We both know that that is not the method he uses for moderation.
We all can clearly see the method that he uses to moderate. He
chooses to moderate in absentia.
DD> Is that what you want, you want to see people getting told off?
No David.
DD>>> [...]
DD>>>>> Why do we have laws? If most people think a law is wrong, it
DD>>>>> _is_ wrong.
DD>>>>> Just as what is "right" is what the majority consider to be
DD>>>>> "right"
JS>>>> If the majority where you live decide it is right to steal
JS>>>> and kill. It is then right in your mind for them to do so?
DD>>> If the majority decide that is right then it is right. That's
DD>>> how democracy works.
JS>> Even though you choose not to accept it. Fidonet and this
JS>> echo are not governed by mob rule. They are not a democracy. They
JS>> both have policies or rules. If we choose to accept them then
JS>> fine otherwise we are free to go elsewhere.
DD> Current use of the echo proves you wrong. Majority decision _does_
DD> decide the use of the echo. Rules mean nothing in these Fidonet echoes
DD> any more.
The current use of this echo only proves the moderator of this echo
to be ineffective.
DD> --
DD> regards
DD> David
DD> ---
DD> * Origin: Repeal the bad rules! (3:640/305)
Jeff
--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
* Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - region14.us (1:14/5)
|