On 22 Oct 2009 at 8:48, Pollak, Edward wrote:

> Extinction hasn't worked because there always some list 
> neophytes who will respond. So we're really dealing
> with some form of partial reinforcement and we all know 
> the result of that vis a vis extinction. 

Not an accurate observation, I'd say. There is a wide range of 
response to his posts, and not always from list neophytes. 
Some write to express outrage, some to mock him, some to 
correct factual errors, and others to take his comments, 
misinformed, inane, or wrong-headed though they may be,  as a 
starting point for occasionally interesting discussions on novel 
topics. I think the list would be less lively without him, although I 
wouldn't miss the mean-spirited posts some on this usually 
tolerant and good-natured list generate in response.

I think the outrage is overdone myself, over such matters as 
whether "chick" is an intolerable insult, or whether a juvenile 
stick-drawing is "semi-pornographic", whatever that means. 
Surely members of this list are strong enough to withstand such 
shocking content.

But one thing does puzzle and dismay me. As others have 
pointed out, no one on this list is forced to endure such stuff, as 
it is easily avoided either by filtering or by hitting the delete key 
without reading it. So there's really no reason why this problem 
must be dealt with by expulsion. The purpose of these expulsion 
calls appears primarly vindictive: although we don't have to read 
your posts, we insist on doing so, and are predictably outraged 
at what you have to say.  Our response is to insist you be 
publicly punished and humiliated.  In addition, we want to ensure 
that others who may not feel similarly are also prevented from 
reading them.

Not a big loss, those outraged would respond. But why should 
you be the deciders for others as well as for yourselves? The 
fact that these posts often elicit serious and informative 
responses (e.g. most recently from Chris Green on John 
Dewey) suggests that there are those on this list who find 
educational potential in at least some of them. And while I may 
not appreciate the originating posts, I do find such thoughtrful 
responses valuable.

Stephen

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen L. Black, Ph.D.          
Professor of Psychology, Emeritus   
Bishop's University               
 e-mail:  [email protected]
2600 College St.
Sherbrooke QC  J1M 1Z7
Canada
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

Reply via email to