Prohibition isn't going to work unless we get a moderator, is that what we
want to do? That being said, we can, as individuals, ignore inflammatory
rhetoric and avoid inciting it. Now I know you're all saying look who is
calling the kettle black, and you're right, I'm as guilty as anyone, but I am
going to make a concerted effort to avoid responding to remarks I find
particularly insulting or inflammatory. I think if most of us do this, The
hostile debates will expire due to lack of interest.
And I don't think that the list has become any more conservative than it used
to be, it's about the same. I know that there have been times when it seems
that John is the only member of the list arguing a certain point, but I rails
that there are many that agree with at least some aspects of his opinion.
Hell, I remember the first gun debate I was involved with on this list and how
shocked I was at the number of members that took the pro-gun side. That was
over three years ago so based on the more recent discussion, you might make a
case for the list being more liberal than it was then.
Anyway, I guess that makes me a qualified Nay.
Doug
Michael Harney wrote:
>
> It's easy enough to see what has caused Charlie (among others) to leave the
> list. The problem is that there is a perpetual debate between two extremes,
> and no moderator to say when the debate is over or who has won. Eventually,
> people become frustrated with this and leave. If we want the list to heal,
> the solution is obvious, we simply have to realize that each of us has our
> views, and none of us are going to give in on those views, and simply agree
> to disagree and drop the talk about politics.
>
> So, I move to add an amendment to the list policy of "All is Brin". I move
> that we amend it to say "All is Brin except politics". If we wish to
> discuss the policital systems of Sci-fi Novels, that's fine, but let's keep
> real world politics out of the discussion.
>
> All in favor say "Aye".
> All opposed say "Nay".
>
> The Dolphin
