[MD] Rules of Engagement

[Horse]

Hi Ian

Personally, I think DMB, Dan, Arlo, Ant etc. have shown great restraint 
when communicating with some of the 'contributors' to this list.
When you consider some of the utter shite that some on this list have 
tried to pass off as philosophy in general, and MOQ related philosophy 
in particular, I can quite see where they are coming from.
It's not just that there is some degree of initial difficulty moving 
from a GOF/SOM view of reality to an MoQ view (we have all, as both DMB 
and Dan have stated, been there and done that) but the absolute refusal 
to listen to anyone or any argument that disagrees with their own 
misinterpretation of Pirsig's work - including in some cases where their 
view directly contradicts Pirsig's specific dismissal of a particular 
position!!! This has to be the ultimate instance of disrespect - i.e. 
saying that the author is too stupid to understand his own work!!
And how, pray tell, do I enforce the rules that you are proposing when 
even the most simple rule of 4 posts per day is sometimes ignored (or to 
be more charitable maybe, accidentally transgressed!!!)?
Sanctions, shame, removal?

I understand what you're saying but, let's be honest here, if some 
contributors have such little respect for what Pirsig has said with 
great clarity then there will be fuck all respect for others that wish 
to ensure that this clarity is maintained and/or promoted.

Perhaps that's where I should start with regard to disrespect - but then 
again I'd like to have a list that contains sufficient members to 
continue conversations!

Cheers

Horse.

On 25/04/2013 10:28, Ian Glendinning wrote:
> Given my exchanges with Dan and dmb, and David Harding's recent post on
> argumentation towards agreement .... I though I'd post a set of Rules of
> Engagement .... I've proposed elsewhere:
>
> *Rule #1 RESPECT – Understand & Question before Disagree & Criticize.*
>
> *Critical debate is essential to our agenda and anyone voicing direct
> disagreement with or criticism of the arguments of another must be seen to
> have understood, or sincerely attempted to understand, the others’ argument
> and to have related their counter argument to it.*
>
> * *
>
> *Rule #2 RESPECT – No “Ad Hominem” attacks on the Individual.*
>
> *Absolute no-no. Anyone having trouble with an individual should resolve
> with that individual, and involve moderator(s) in absolute confidence if
> mediation or moderation is considered necessary.*
>
> * *
>
> *Rule #3 RESPECT – Duty of Care when using Rhetoric or Irony.*
>
> *OK, but life (mine and yours) would be boring and sterile if we politely
> agreed with each other. So lively, critical, robust, intelligent debate is
> positively encouraged. What will not be tolerated is any perceived intent
> to circumvent Rules #1 & #2 under cover of rhetoric or irony.*
>
> * *
>
> *Beyond the rules above, here are a few guidelines.*
>
> *(Snipped here.)*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Moderation / Applying the Rules*
>
> *(Snipped here.)*
>
> * *
>
> * Enjoy.*
> 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/md/archives.html
>

-- 

"Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid."
— Frank Zappa