Excellent again Arlo. You really have put some thought into this.
Ian
Sent from my iPhone
On 14 Sep 2010, at 20:07, Arlo Bensinger <[email protected]> wrote:
[Krimel]
I am not at all sure what "topical boundaries" one could put around
a metaphysics.
[Arlo]
I think we have a lot of leeway here to relate our metaphysical
speculations to Pirsig's work, either in agreement, revision or
disagreement. But I think ultimately, at the end of the day, at last
call, it should find some string that ties it in with Pirsig's
ideas. Ham does this by presenting critical alternatives (so it
needn't always be "supportive"), DMB (and others) do it by
considering parallel in either works Pirsig himself has found
similarity (James) or in works Pirsig never mentions but list
members feel there is a parallel worth discussing (Royce). Right or
wrong, correct or incorrect, all these things tie back to Pirsig's
metaphysics in some way.
But try joining the Peirce discussion list and talking endless about
Kant's philosophy (with no relation or regard of Peirce), and see
how long you last. The communities have boundaries, as DMB mentions,
for very constructive reasons. If someone really wanted to do
nothing but talk about Kant, there are better forums for his
involvement out there.
While I do wholeheartedly support the social presence of people
here, while I think its great we think of ourselves (or subgroups
here) as friends and have genuine mutual interest in each other's
lives apart from our discussions about Pirsig, I think that topical
boundaries are necessary and valuable (for the reasons DMB
mentioned). I do not think its asking too much to except that the
bulk of one's involvement here ties in someway to evaluations of
Pirsig's ideas. Maybe some days it's a series of social posts, and
that's fine. And I think Horse gives ample fair warning, nor do I
think (as I said) he feels the boundaries are some etched-in-stone
non-negotiable absolute, and if there was one person here I think
capable of doing this job with the most fairness, it is Horse.
[Krimel]
But I think your analogy of AA and PTA meetings is flawed. What you
say might apply well to face to face meetings of people who are
trapped in direct contact with each other and for whom time is an
immediate concern. While virtual communities do mimic real life
communities I think some of the "real" life time constraints don't
apply here. Deleting and ignore posts is not time consuming and is
hardly the problem it is in real world meetings.
[Arlo]
Disagree. Just because I have the ability to filter emails, does not
mean that the forums I belong to should devolve into un-topical free-
for-alls. What's the point of even calling it "MOQ Discuss" in that
event? In all seriousness, if I have to filter through 1000 emails
to find 1 about Pirsig, I'd likely give real consideration to being
on the list. I don't mind a few, as I said, but there is a line
there, and I trust Horse to maintain it.
[Krimel]
I guess my problem with this is how is Horse supposed to enforce
this? He can't delete a post that has already been sent.
[Arlo]
I think Horse is very open about cause-and-effect when he feels
those boundaries are being pushed. And I would think if you made a
legitimate appeal he would listen. I don't think posts should be
deleted unless in extreme cases of criminal activity or fraud. And
to my knowledge, such a thing has never happened. On the other hand,
I have to seriously wonder about the value of the archives for some
threads that reach hundreds of posts and do not even mention or
relate to the MOQ in any way.
[Krimel]
People need to be more careful about what they wish for because what
I see trends that are not conducive to community flourishing.
[Arlo]
I think Horse is trying to reign in the noise a bit, and I think
that's a good thing. I don't see anyone being asked anything
unreasonable. I can beg Horse all day long to remove you from the
list (just an example, I certainly would not do this), and I don't
see that as something Horse would do unless he himself saw evidence
of abusive or detrimental behavior. And I am sure he would give you
a chance to voice your view. In the end, we have to trust his
judgement. I do.
(Seriously, I have seen some list moderators that would blindly drop
people from the list for making as little as two off-topic posts a
month. Elsewhere, I have seen a list member dropped without question
because he made a flirtatious remark (in general, not even to a
specific woman) because someone reported it as "offensive". Boom.
Gone. No explanation. No saving roll.)
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
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
