Text 4794, 193 rader
Skriven 2007-07-21 13:46:38 av Jeff Smith (1:14/5)
   Kommentar till text 4759 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
Ärende: R&R exchanging insults
==============================
Hello David.

21 Jul 07 08:52, you wrote to me:

 DD> Jeff Smith -> David Drummond wrote:

 DD>>>>> Is Felten on his own in this "illegal" behaviour?

 JS>>>>      No he is not alone in his behavior. I'm not sure why you
 JS>>>> would call it "Illegal" but you are entittled to your opinion.

 DD>>> Illegal - as in "against the law, the rules (of the echo)".

 JS>>      I will attribute the use of "illegal" to a differance of
 JS>> opinion on what constitutes an illegal act. Rules of an echo are
 JS>> not what I would consider legal or illegal. But I think I
 JS>> understand what you were trying to convey.

 DD> The rules of an echo are the laws of that echo.

      The point being, is the meaning of what we are saying the same?

 DD> [...]
 DD>>> Are you suggesting that he was first, and, like little children,
 DD>>> the rest followed his lead? Yeah, sure.

 JS>>      No actually. I think that in the beginning of Felten's
 JS>> tenure as editor and moderator. He did care about Fidonews and
 JS>> Fidonet and was considerably more active as moderator.

 DD> He has never done more than make polite requests of posters to tone
 DD> down their content. How do you feel he was "more active"?

     Maybe that was the problem then. Sometimes you have to go beyond
being polite. Especially with those that do not normally want to listen.
If Felten has never done more than that then I can see why he got frustrated
and gave up.


 JS>> But as he has stated here he got burnt out and
 JS>> frustrated in dealing with the "idiots". And as I have told him I
 JS>> understand
 JS>> the frustration as I have been there too. When someone reaches
 JS>> that point they either need to handle it or move away from the
 JS>> situation that is causing the frustration. A move that in this
 JS>> case would be as good for Fidonews as it would be for Felten.
 JS>> Both would benefit.

 DD> It obviously doesn't bother him now -

    That is because he no longer cares. He has to care what happens in
this echo for it to bother him.

 DD>  and there is nothing anyone can do to alter the content of the
 DD> messages (other than the posters themselves).

     The posters are responsible for the content of their posts. It looks
like you are sharing in Feltens defeatest attitude. " I can't do it so it
can't be done. I give up."


 DD>>> The rules ARE the problem if everyone is ignoring them.

 JS>>      Why are you choosing to avoid the real point here David? The
 JS>> rules are not the problem. Rules don't mean anything to anyone
 JS>> regardless of how good they might be if noone is enforcing those
 JS>> rules.

 DD> Why must they be enforced? Must you always be forced to do things just
 DD> for the sake of being forced?

     Simple David. Rules that people know will not be enforced are
meaningless. What if the police made it clear that even though there
was a law against stealing the police would not enforce that law? The
result would be that those so inclined would steal to their hearts content.
Same priciple here David. If Felten chooses to not enforce his own rules
and even breaks them himself. He shows everyone just how meaningless those
rules are.

 JS>>   A law that the authorities never enforce means nothing to the
 JS>> people and will get broken constantly.

 DD> We, the posters, are the authorities here. If we decide to ignore the
 DD> riles then those rules should go. We are not little children
 DD> constantly in need of telling what to do. We decide what should be
 DD> done! WE are the law here!

    Is it alright if I quote you on the above statement when you later
contradict yourself trying to defend Felten?

    This echo is not a free-for-all echo where we have mob rule. It has
a rather narrow purpose and function. That being to support the Fidonews.
The fact that Felten has chosen to give up and turn over his responsibility
as moderator to the users should not mean that we are now the law here.


 JS>> The same applies here. The rules are ok but if they do not get
 JS>> enforced and especially if they are visibly broken by the same
 JS>> person whoose job it is to enforce them. Noone is going to take
 JS>> those rules seriously. As can be seen in this echo.

 DD> The why must they be taken seriously? If no-one wants to take them
 DD> seriously they should be discarded.

     This echo has a specific purpose David. A purpose that you think
should be ignored just because you don't agree with it or don't want to
be limited by it. If you don't like the limitations of the purpose of
this echo then I challenge you to go elsewhere. The people should not
expect the echo to change to accommodate them. The people should change
to accommodate the rules of the echo and not expect those rules to be
change to their liking. If the rules are changed it should be done for
the benefit of the Fidonews and Fidonet. Not for a particular person
or a group of people who want no more than one more echo where they can
swear, insult, and call people names. We have plenty of echos already
that can be used for that purpose. This echo is and was not intended to
be one of those.


 DD>>> In that case they are not worth the paper they are written on,
 DD>>> and should be discarded.

 JS>>      Which would be convenient for who? Certainly not the users
 JS>> of this echo I would think. Course that IS the moderator. Who has
 JS>> shown us how hindering the rules are to his posting style.

 DD> Who wants to obey the current rules? Do those who want to obey them
 DD> have to be forced to obey them? Sorry, I come from a free society - we
 DD> are not forced to do anything here, we choose to do things.

 DD>>> Do you remember the concept of "democracy'?

 JS>>      When was Fidonet ever a democracy?

 DD> The hierarchical structure of the technical network never has been -
 DD> however some echoes (including this one) are.

     That is merely your opinion David. This echo is a Fidonet based echo
for the support of the Fidonews which is a Fidonet newsletter. This echo
also has a specific purpose. A purpose that you wish to ignore just because
it suits you.

 DD> [...]
 DD>>> I don't have taps into his netmail so I cannot say the last time
 DD>>> he sent a moderation message. Do you?

 JS>>       To the extent that I have asked people on both sides and
 JS>> gotten and gotten responses. Yes.


 JS>>       When was the last time that Felten showed any attempt to
 JS>> moderate anyone in this echo. Anyone from either side can claim
 JS>> the (non)existance of private moderation netmails having been
 JS>> sent.

 DD> And anyone can deny that they were.

     Your avoiding the question David. When was the last time that
Felten moderated someone IN this echo?

 DD> [...]

 DD>>> Why do we have laws? If most people think a law is wrong, it
 DD>>> _is_ wrong.

 DD>>> Just as what is "right" is what the majority consider to be
 DD>>> "right"

 JS>>      If the majority where you live decide it is right to steal
 JS>> and kill. It is then right in your mind for them to do so?

 DD> If the majority decide that is right then it is right. That's how
 DD> democracy works.

     Even though you choose not to accept it. Fidonet and this echo are
not governed by mob rule. They are not a democracy. They both have policies
or rules. If we choose to accept them then fine otherwise we are free to go
elsewhere.

 DD> Who do you think gets to decide what is right in your draconian model?

 DD> --

 DD> regards

 DD> David

 DD> ---
 DD>  * Origin: Repeal the bad rules! (3:640/305)

Jeff

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - region14.us (1:14/5)