[MD] The MoQ.org STRANGLES Creativity

[Horse]

Hi Case

I'm still trying to work out if you're taking the piss or being serious!

Do tell  :^)

Horse

Case wrote:
> In post after post, year after year, Platt has waxed on about the beauty and
> value of individual freedom. He uses the MoQ hierarchy of value to justify
> his belief that armed communists and Mexicans are camped in the bushes
> waiting to march all freedom loving folk off to the Gulags.
> 
> I find it ironic then that he continues to participate in the MoQ.org
> listserve where his freedom of expression is so unjustly and arbitrarily
> restricted. For make no mistake the MoQ.org is a society. Its individual
> members contribute and each plays a specific role in the social structure.
> Arlo and Khalad the token liberals, Platt the right winger, Matt the
> professor of philosophy, DMB the mad rambler, Marsha the artist, Ant the
> certified academician, Mark Maxwell the angry jester in disguise, SA the
> philosopher poet, and the host of us other students, seekers and agitators. 
> 
> But we are, none of us, free to express ourselves. There is a subtitle
> tyranny at work. But I think this tyranny speaks volumes on the nature of
> Freedom and Platt's failure to understand both it and the MoQ. We are, all
> of us bound by text. Not the obvious limitations of the English language or
> our inability to vocalize. But by TEXT. We are forced into the bygone age of
> the manual typewriter. We can not change our fonts to suit our modes. We
> cannot change their color or size to match our personalities. We can not
> boldface or underline. We cannot even control how other members of our
> society see what we type, as we all use different e-mail clients and have
> different default font settings respecting the font face, color and size.
> 
> The injustice is we are all forced to speak OR TO SHOUT AT EACH OTHER TO
> MAKE A FRICKIN' POINT.
> 
> I can tell by the number of odd characters strewn among people's posts that
> others either consciously or unconsciously feel the pinch of this tyranny.
> This antitypography rule is a static latch taking us all back to the 1960's
> an era near and dear to some but so irritating to Platt I can not imagine
> why he voluntarily chooses to remain confined by its rules.
> 
> This set of rules is completely arbitrary. I can not say how many times I
> have longed to bold face or italicize a point. Or to insert a picture to
> illustrate a point. Or insert the sound of my screaming outrage. 
> 
> Please know that I am not advocating for a change here. I am not suggesting
> that Horse change the format of these discussions anymore than I would argue
> the music would be more dynamic if we abandoned the chromatic scale. Things
> are working very nicely thank you. I do not think the Quality of these
> discussions would be improved by the use of smilies. What Ian Shoales called
> the graphical equivalent of baby talk. 
> 
> It is not the Static Quality of the rules we live by but the Dynamic Quality
> of each individual's ability to work within those rules that make this forum
> interesting. There are intelligent and creative people here but these
> Qualities are foreground against a background of Static and arbitrary social
> conventions. Rules and Static Quality do not strangle the individual they
> set us free. Freedom without restriction is Chaos it can only lead to
> disorder and dissolution. 
> 
> The Metaphysics of Quality is always about the union of opposites. To argue
> that one level has primacy or that one aspect is supreme misses the point.
> Quality shines not from freedom but from the balance of freedom and the rule
> of law.
> 
> 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.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>