Stathis, you are close to have written what I wanted to add to Russell's outcry. I wrote some time ago to Roger asking him to "give back our list" - to no avail. Now I would add only one 'catch'phrase of Russell to your invaluable post: ..."*the list has been remarkably troll-free*...." implying that whoever disregards WeiDai's initiatives does misuse his generosity in maintaining the list. I went through crises on other lists generated by closed minded religious terrorists and most lists survived. I hope this one will as well, in spite of much discussion I really do not understand with my limited science.
John Mikes Ph.D.(chem) D.Sc.(polymers) and for the past 3 decades a (ret.) homespun agnostic philosopher. On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 5:05 AM, Stathis Papaioannou <[email protected]>wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Kim Jones <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'm getting a bit jack of this term "metadiscussion" becuse it only ever > gets applied to what other people are choosing to discuss. People talk > about what people want to talk about. It's about taste, perception, > preference and prejudice. Even WITH rigidly adhered-to rules and > conventions, this still applies. The challenge is to take WHATEVER is > spoken about and MAKE that relevant somehow (to whatever you want to make > it relevant to). That's harder, more interesting and dare I say it - more > relevant a process than simply corralling all thinking under one topic or > heading. As soon as you start to set up rules, conventions and expectations > the population divides into those who feel that it is to their advantage to > play by the "rules" and those who believe that this is a constraint. This > list is remarkably troll-free. For that very reason I see no need to > restrict what is spoken of. The ensemble theories of everything probably > won't come from the brains of those who are exclusively obsessed by these > things anyway since by now their perception is circular and their belief > supports their belief. You need random thinkers, people who will break the > local equilibrium and who will introduce the creative concept of "idea > movement" from time to time. > > I like the idea of a moderator-free list, but nonetheless I agree with > Russell. The list was set up with a particular purpose in mind but in > the last few months the range of discussion topics has changed > radically. The Internet is large and there are plenty of other forums > in which to discuss politics and religion. Could we return to the old > list please? > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
