Steve:
If those supporting Horse's action don't think Bo ought to be banned then I am
as confused as Matt is about what administrative action we are talking about
here.
dmb says:
Well, I was agreeing with Dan, who said "I never thought Bo should be banned.
But I appreciate what Horse is saying too." Or, as I said in a post prior to
Dan's, I don't know what the solution is but I do think it's a real problem. I
think Horse is trying to solve a real problem. For me, it's mostly about
clutter. If we had to make a rule out of it, let's say anyone claiming that SOL
is Pirsig's idea FOR MORE THAN A DECADE IN THE FACE OF KNOCK-OUT EVIDENCE
AGAINST IT risks being banned.
If you fart at the party once or twice it's no big deal. Nobody particularly
happy about it, but it's not a crime. But if you fart every 20 minutes at every
party for 13 years, I'm probably gonna have to ask you to leave. I don't know
if it would really take that specific amount of time but at some point,
especially after asking you to quit it a hundred times, I'm probably gonna draw
a line. That's how I see Bo's situation here, except the MD is not as fun as a
party and "SOL" is not as substantial as a fart.
That's me being catty. Sorry.
Steve suggested:
the forum rules are now: #1 You must have read Pirsig's 2 books. #2 You may not
say that SOL was Pirsig's idea.
dmb says:
I don't think any rule has to be that specific. Horse has a slightly different
idea, but I just think it should be against the rules to disrupt or interfere
with the point and purpose of this forum. That's the reason behind rule #1,
right? No one can discuss the MOQ without reading the books first, obviously.
That's the basic principle behind any specific rules that might be formulated
or any administrative actions that might be taken. Or so it seems to me.
Horse said:
"Should Bo continue, as has done over the weekend, to insist and declare that
Pirsig supports the SOL, is the originator of the SOL etc. then he will be
removed from MD. Anyone else who maliciously, mischievously or otherwise does
the same will be similarly removed."
Steve said:
If you don't think Bo ought to be banned as you said, then it sounds like you
are disagreeing with Horse. Are you?
dmb says:
Well as Horse said, removal only follows if the problem continues. He's trying
to get rid of the problem without getting rid of any people. Bo probably thinks
banning his favorite topic amounts to the same thing, but I honestly can't
think of a way to make it any more fair than Horse has.
If there is a better way to deal with it, I'd like to hear it.
Yea, I already know about the ignoring thing. Obviously that doesn't work and
it only gives him more of a chance to lead newbies astray. Again, I think this
is a fairly serious problem. It's not just that the ideas are wrong. Who isn't
guilty of that? The problem is that it's all being done dishonestly. Any
discussion is going to break down into meaninglessness unless some basic
standards are met by everyone involved and intellectual honesty is right there
at the top of the list of standards. Without that, we're just of barking dogs.
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
