[MD] Noise

[rapsncows at fastmail.fm]

X Acto,

On Sat, 8 Jan 2011 06:57:34 -0800 (PST), "X Acto" <xacto at rocketmail.com>
said:
> 
> "Noise" is part of the process of any healthy discussion forum.
> The mud and murk is required for the lotus.
> I'm not sure it is useful to try to draw a distinction
> by legislating it. I believe the responsibility
> must lie on each subscribers ability to make that distinction.
> I believe it is the development of this ability which we all
> endeavor towards.
> 
> Fact is we only "know" eachother based on the way the we post
> here, a very small part of who we are so we really should'nt be taking
> these masks too seriously as representations of personage.
> But, this means that perhaps we should take a harder look at how
> we do post here, why we communicate our ideas and how we 
> craft our reasons for holding certain beliefs and values more than
> others.
> 

[Tim]
Thanks, this was real nice and concise.

I am replying here for two reasons.  The first is kind of trivial,
housekeeping.  In case most people missed it, I have discontinued my
trial of 'WT'.

Second, I wanted to address an issue about 'who we are <---> the way we
post'.  Mary brought up, in her very much appreciated reply to me of
earlier this week, something that I had brought up: e-people.  While I
think you are absolutely right that this is only 'a very small part of
who we are', I think this e-format is very empowering for letting us
reach our highest potentials.  Great tools can be used for great good as
well as great not-so-good.  That is, I think these representations of
personages you refer to as masks, give better insight into the person
that real life - at least most times, or at least: well, caution with
that.  This is not to say that the mask shown reveals the person, but
that the person behind the mask is revealed by the mask he shows.  If
you don't recognize that the person is using the mask...  But if you
recognize ...

maybe I can say this best by mentioning something of Andre from
yesterday.  He was talking about something he was reading.  I didn't pay
close attention to the precise use of his words, but the gist of it was
how this fast paced lifestyle, where decisions might be made based on
the first thing to pop into your head, etc. and etc., clogged up the
pipe, so that Quality didn't flow as it might, if we took just a bit
more time to let things wash over the whole of our brains before making
the best decision.  Fast paced life gives to the one willing to
sacrifice this Quality endeavor, to the one willing to go with his first
instinct.

Anyway, I don't think it takes an inordinate amount of time to let the
evidence wash over the whole of your brain.  IF you are motivated, in
tune, and somewhat prepared for what is coming.  I would say that this
e-forum has worked very well for me.  IF I speak here unlike I do in
person, it is not because I am putting up a false mask here (though, to
be sure, there is some challenge about pixelated script and what not),
but because the weight of the fast-paced, in-person experience, can
stifle.

Hopefully I can take some of the skill I have developed here (along with
the new knowledge, etc.) and use it more effectively in the face-to-face
forum.  Hopefully, also, I can train my first instinct to better give
what I would want from a thorough reflection, such that I can best
reflect my best self even when the situation doesn't afford that luxury.

Your conclusion... well, I don't see anything at all that I can add at
the moment.  To be sure, I have let it wash over the whole of my brain.

all the best,
Tim
-- 
  
  rapsncows at fastmail.fm

-- 
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different...