[MD] Intellectual honesty

[Steven Peterson]

Hi dmb, Dan, Horse


> Dan said to John:
> I never thought Bo should be banned...


> dmb says:
> Right. Exactly.


Steve:
If those supporting Horse's action don't think Bo ought to be banned
then I am as confused as Matt is about what administrative action we
are talking about here. I mean, yeah, yeah, yeah...I agree that Bo is
all these flavors of horrible (and probably also a pretty good guy),
but what specific administrative action are we talking about? Is it...

1) a new forum rule where anyone claiming that SOL is Pirsig's idea
risks being banned?
2) a administrative request that Bo shut the hell up about SOL for a while?
3) a specific threat leveled at Bo that he will be banned if he in
particular continues to say that SOL was Pirsig's idea?
4) something else, like Bo will be banned if he continues to try to
woo every newbie that comes along by flattering them and telling them
about how they have blessedly managed to stumble upon the Great
Insight?

None of us think that Bo's SOL thesis is worth a darn and wish he
would stop harping on it, but what action are you defending here? I
thought it was 1) at first, but maybe it is 2) since you don't think
Bo ought to be banned. I thought Horse had done 1) in which case forum
rules are now:

#1 You must have read Pirsig's 2 books
#2 You may not say that SOL was Pirsig's idea

(Are there other rules to add to this list?) But perhaps Horse only
intended 2). I normally delete any posts addressed to or from Bo, so
I'm not at all clear about what has transpired. Is there a new forum
rule or not?

Best,
Steve