I do not think harsh terms for others are always avoidable in public
life. I try to get by, applying two flexible standards--
1) Never commence writing with an objective of picking a fight with a
person and insulting a person. Let your criticism flow from your facts
and your reasons, not from your personal animadversions. Whenever those
arise, always be prepared to set them aside and meet somebody face to
face later, with an open heart and an open mind.
2) If you call somebody an unpleasant name, and you have no evidence and
make no effort to document your charge -- you should pull the plug on
yourself before a moderator does the honors. Think before you write. If,
on the other hand, you call somebody an unpleasant name which you can
document with factual evidence -- you should do so. It is not "ad
hominem" or illegitimate in any way to call a correspondent wrong in
heart or mind, if you can show why by citing honest details. But never
lie in this case! Be fair and do not exaggerate, before you dish out the
slurs.
-- Tony West
Have you been out in public in the last few years? This is SOP for the
majority of the population as far as I'm concerned. This list is
almost reserved in comparison.
Frankus
Sleek. Edgy. Infinitely flexible.
On Jul 29, 2007, at 03:31 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What bothers me is the lack of civility especially common among many
big posters. Name calling (including intentional reversal of names,
use of last names or diminutives as insults, gender based attacks,
etc), open hostility, personal attacks, etc., are included routinely
in a lot of posts.
