[no subject]

The actual political discussion was pretty civil...


--j

On May 12, 2005, at 2:06 PM, Brian Stanaland wrote:

> I didn't look at it that way.  People who don't us the OT won't use
> any other kind of label, either.  I sometimes enjoy these threads.  I
> get to see things from all kinds of perspectives.  Points are brought
> up that I never would have thought of.  Not saying I've "changed" my
> mind about some things because of it, but I have without a doubt
> modified my thinking some.  And isn't that what lists are about?  It
> may be OT, sometimes VERY OT, but it's all about the exchange of ideas
> and information.
>
> Brian....
>
>
> On 5/12/05, ChangingLINKS.com <groups at changinglinks.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thursday May 12 2005 07:53, Geoffrey wrote:
>>
>>> ChangingLINKS.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Next time, argue that people should use OT in the subject line.
>>>> Everyone agrees that the use of [OT] is considerate and allows  
>>>> those not
>>>> wishing to see these political threads a way to filter.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Better yet, use [PT] 'Political Topic', hence folks who simply  
>>> aren't
>>> interested in building on the flamewar can filter on that.
>>>
>>
>> I vote against the [PT] .
>> My thinking is that if we can't get people to USE [OT]  
>> consistently, there is
>> no way they will remember to use [PT]. I thought that telling  
>> people to use
>> [OT] would be a solution, BUT then there will be tons of flamewars  
>> on what is
>> "[OT] or not." A better solution is to charge $1 for failing to  
>> use [OT] -
>> but again, enforcement of that rule would cause enforcement  
>> flamewars. :)
>>
>>
>>> Seriously,
>>> there's never been any productive discussions on politics on this  
>>> list.
>>> Nothing is gained, people just blow the bandwidth.
>>>
>>
>> There IS something gained in these flamewars.
>>    If there wasn't, they wouldn't happen.
>>     I can think of numerous benefits off of the top of my head.
>>
>> Likewise, the "wasting/blowing bandwidth" objection gets repeated  
>> everytime a
>> discussion is [OT]. The objection is not only invalid, but just as
>> "non-productive" as the original thread. Still, apparently there  
>> IS a benefit
>> for restating the false argument of "saving bandwidth."
>>
>> Flamewars, Saving bandwidth and other seemingly pointless  
>> behaviors will
>> always be a part of this list. The "wise" don't participate, post  
>> worthless
>> objections, or even post objections TO those objections.
>> --
>> Wishing you Happiness, Joy, and Laughter,
>> Drew Brown
&gt;&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ChangingLINKS.com";>http://www.ChangingLINKS.com</a>
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt; /objection to an objection
&gt;&gt; _______________________________________________
&gt;&gt; Ale mailing list
&gt;&gt; Ale at ale.org
&gt;&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
&gt;&gt;
&gt;&gt;
&gt;
&gt;
&gt; -- 
&gt;
&gt; &quot;Anyone who has the power to make
&gt; you believe absurdities has the power
&gt; to make you commit atrocities.&quot;
&gt;
&gt; -- Voltaire
&gt; _______________________________________________
&gt; Ale mailing list
&gt; Ale at ale.org
&gt; <a  rel="nofollow" href="http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale";>http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale</a>
&gt;

Jerald M. Sheets jr.
Sr. UNIX Systems Administrator
McKesson, Inc.
404.293.8762



</pre>
<!--X-Body-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-MsgBody-End-->
<!--X-Follow-Ups-->
<hr>
<!--X-Follow-Ups-End-->
<!--X-References-->
<ul><li><strong>References</strong>:
<ul>
<li><strong><a name="00171" href="msg00171.html">[ale] Big Brother Wins,	We lose...  From /.  Real-ID Passes U.S. Senate 100-0</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> rsj at radio.org (Randal Jarrett)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00221" href="msg00221.html">[ale] [OT] Big Brother Wins,	We lose... From /. Real-ID Passes	U.S. Senate	100-0</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> groups at ChangingLINKS.com (ChangingLINKS.com)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00224" href="msg00224.html">[ale] [OT] Big Brother Wins, We lose... From /. Real-ID Passes	U.S. Senate 100-0</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> esoteric at 3times25.net (Geoffrey)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00232" href="msg00232.html">[ale] [OT] Big Brother Wins,	We lose... From /. Real-ID Passes U.S. Senate 100-0</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> groups at ChangingLINKS.com (ChangingLINKS.com)</li></ul></li>
<li><strong><a name="00237" href="msg00237.html">[ale] [OT] Big Brother Wins,	We lose... From /. Real-ID Passes U.S. Senate 100-0</a></strong>
<ul><li><em>From:</em> brian.stanaland at gmail.com (Brian Stanaland)</li></ul></li>
</ul></li></ul>
<!--X-References-End-->
<!--X-BotPNI-->
<ul>
<li>Prev by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00244.html">[ale] OT: U.S. National Identity Cards All But Law</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by Date:
<strong><a href="msg00246.html">[ale] OT: U.S. National Identity Cards All But Law</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Previous by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00240.html">[ale] [OT] Big Brother Wins,	We lose... From /. Real-ID Passes U.S. Senate 100-0</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Next by thread:
<strong><a href="msg00223.html">[ale] Big Brother Wins, We lose...  From /.  Real-ID Passes	U.S.	Senate 100-0</a></strong>
</li>
<li>Index(es):
<ul>
<li><a href="maillist.html#00245"><strong>Date</strong></a></li>
<li><a href="threads.html#00245"><strong>Thread</strong></a></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>

<!--X-BotPNI-End-->
<!--X-User-Footer-->
<!--X-User-Footer-End-->
</body>
</html>