Text 4798, 80 rader
Skriven 2005-01-11 00:03:02 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
   Kommentar till text 4745 av Matt Bedynek (1:106/1)
Ärende: Pee-Four
================
Hello Matt,

 >>> I guess it depends on your outlook.  When one breaks the
 >>> rules one has to be willing to accept the consequences of
 >>> that action.  At least I have and I guess that is why I
 >>> have only received two citations since I started driving.
 >
 >  MvdV> And again the difference in culture is illustrated. You
 >  MvdV> stop for red lights because of the cop that might catch
 >  MvdV> you and give you a fine.
 >
 >  MvdV> I stop because running red lights is dangerous! With
 >  MvdV> or without a cop watching.
 >
 > I do not know whether you are being presumptuous or ignorant here.

I go by your own words. You talk about "facing consequences" and "only getting
two citattions". Not a word about being a careful drives who avoid accidents,
no you just talk just about avoiding citations.

 > I find it odd that someone of your intelligence could make such
 > a comment without any corresponding data.

The date are in what you write.

 > No physisist I know ever makes an assumption.  :-)

I made no assumption either, just read what you wrote.

 >>> How presumpuous of you.  Who are you (or me) to define the
 >>> task of the moderator?  I say simply provide a secure
 >>> environment for the moderator to operate and if he chooses
 >>> to operate your way then so be it.

 >  MvdV> That's not a moderator, that's a dictator.

 > A dictator controls all aspects of behavior and forbids
 > choice.  You are not forced by the moderator to participate
 > in his echo.

I am forced to live by his edits or move.

 > You are not being forced to carry on this discussion with me.
 > You have a choice and the moment that choice is taken away can
 > you then label someone a true dictator.

The choice that I want to make is not among the options. So I am not free in my
choice and therfore I am forced.

 >  MvdV> I merely say that EP1 can only work for those that adopt it. You
 >  MvdV> choose not to adopt it, so of course it didn't work for you.

 > And my method with allow you to resolve disagreement with
 > me if you adopt it.

Your method is imcompatible with the methods I already have agreed with many
others to resolve disagreements with them.

 >  MvdV> In fact you (as in you guys from Z1) did not adopt any
 >  MvdV> echomail policy at all and even declared echomail outside
 >  MvdV> P4. Your choice of course. But by your own words, you
 >  MvdV> have to face he consequences of your actions. And the
 >  MvdV> consequence of rejecting all rules is chaos.

 > I believe P4 should apply to echomail.

Than you are barking up the wrong tree. Talk to the powers that be in your own
zone. They are the ones that keep saying echomail is not part of FidoNet.

 > In fact, had policy been applicable, some in your zone might
 > have been the recipient of a complaint over their behavior in
 > fn_sysop.

I very much doubt that it would have stuck. Anyone or anything specific you are
thinking of?

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 2.50
 * Origin: If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws have privacy. (2:280/5555)