To the list, But, but why would ANYONE think I'm a Nazi? (note the shaking lower lip)
REH ----- Original Message ----- From: "pete" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2002 6:27 PM Subject: Re: Godwin's Law > > On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Harry Pollard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Ray, > > > >You're a Nazi - further, an Indian Nazi. They're the worst kind! > > > >So there. Godwin is saved and the thread is ended. > > > > Of course, as you might expect, there is an addendum, called > [Somebodyorother's] Exception, which says that if you try to > kill a thread deliberately by invoking Godwin, it doesn't count. > That doesn't stop people from trying to inject the idea, usually > into interminable irritating arguments which are clogging up > the group, as a subtle hint that everyone else is getting really > tired of the nonsense. Typically the post will read something > like this: > > >You're both a pair of bloody Nazis! > > > >**Godwin!** > > > >Can we stop now? > > -PV > > (I've just discovered my latest version of linux has a built in > mini-browser which searches the "Jargon File" on the net for > word definitions.) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Ray wrote: > > > >>Hi Pete, > >> > >>Does anyone notice that the opposite seems to be happening on this list? > >> > >>REH > >> > >> > >> > > >> > The contention was that all arguments would eventually lead to the > >> > invocation of Nazis or Hitler regarding characteristics ascribed to > >> > the opposing side in the argument. This hypothesis is called > >> > "Godwin's Law", and is a universally familiar part of Usenet culture. > >> > It has a further extension: by convention, a thread (topic under > >> > discussion) is declared to be "Godwinized" when the Nazi reference > >> > has occured, and by further convention, when this happens, the thread > >> > is pronounced dead, and discussion is terminated. > >> > -PV >
