----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2002 9:15 PM Subject: Re: [Brin-l] Re: Attack Iraq, Alone If We Must
> At 11:26 AM 9/21/2002 -0500 Robert Seeberger wrote: > >> John, can you please make an effort to not be so obnoxious in the way you > >> respond to people on this list. You are surely intelligent enough to be > >able > >> to make your points in a nicer way. Perhaps if you wrote in a way that > >does > >> not bludgeon your "opponents", you would have a much greater chance of > >> infecting us with your memes. > >> > >I would add to Rays comments that the skill is called diplomacy. > >It is very usefull when you desire a discussion that is less volatile than > >the subject matter has potential for. > > O.k. after writing one response to this early yesterday, sleeping on it, > and waiting until this evening, I've toned down what I was going to say. > > Nevertheless, I would like to ask one serious question: Does the > double-standard here apply just to me or to all conservatives/Republicans > in general? I've thought a lot about this over the past two ideas, and I > honestly can't decide. > > Let's review the course of events here: > 1) A Brin-L poster accuses a certain individual of rallying a nation to war > and ordering people to their deaths for political and personal economic > gain. > > 2) The same Brin-L poster admits that they have not actually kept up on > events regarding the said rallying of a nation to war. > > 3) Only *one* Brin-L poster bothered to object to this incredibly insulting > and slanderous comment. This second poster did not attack the first > poster, but simply asked if the first post ever felt guilty about casting > such incredibly vicious insults when, by her own admission, without > actually keeping up on the situation. > > 4) This second Brin-L poster then reserves twice as many criticisms for his > post (2) than the original poster received for hers (1). > > Conclusion: If anyone ever wants another Brin-L poster to take their > friendly advice and criticism towards that poster seriously, offer that > advice/criticism in private, not on-list in front of that poster's friends > and the entire community. Another good idea is to avoid the appearance of > hypocrisy whenever dispensing advice/criticism to anybody, as that > appearance can certainly alter the reception of that advice/criticism. Actually, I think you missed the real unwritten rule. It is assumed, by most folks here, that it is a truism that anyone with any political power at all is fair game for any criticism. The worst things you can say about Bush are probably true. But, its not just Bush. Most folks are willing to think the same about Clinton. So, its perfectly good manners to say anything you want about public people not on this list. However, its considered bad manners to criticize anyone on this list personally. I think that there is some sound understanding of how most groups work that underly this. After all, it is very unlikely that GWB will get in a flame war with Kat over her statement. I think the unspoken assumption, though, is that no-one will take insults to national leaders personally. I think that there is a fundamental cynicism about politicians among most folks, so everyone believes that anyone running for office must be morally defective. Actually, that's not really true. I did notice that Kat stated that she voted for third parties. I guess the real rule is that honest folks may be able to run for office, but if honest they won't get many votes. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
