Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!cartan!brahms!gsmith From: gsmith@brahms (Gene Ward Smith) Newsgroups: news.misc Subject: Re: Abuses of the net and Talk.rand Message-ID: <555@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Sun, 14-Dec-86 10:34:10 EST Article-I.D.: cartan.555 Posted: Sun Dec 14 10:34:10 1986 Date-Received: Tue, 16-Dec-86 02:20:43 EST References: <8612080908.AA08813@jade.berkeley.edu> <517@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> <1484@hoptoad.uucp> Sender: daemon@cartan.Berkeley.EDU Reply-To: gsmith@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Gene Ward Smith) Organization: Math Dept. UC Berkeley Lines: 119 Summary: Tim Maroney Solves the "Censorship" Problem! Expires: Sender: Followup-To: Distribution: Keywords: In article <1484@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes: >I feel I ought to respond to this description of a recent exchange by >Gene Ward Smith: >> I find it amusing that one of the net.old-timers popped into the group, >> saw our harsh anti-Objectivist flames and went into a dither. >First, thanks for acknowledging my seniority; I was beginning to doubt >my own identity after tens of people on sf-lovers acted as if I had >suddenly appeared from nowhere in October 1986.... Tim is here referring to a well-known exchange of viewpoints one of whose high points was Tim's stentorian "YOU LIE!!!" to a person who in fact was telling the truth. >> It was suggested by us, between epithets, that he read Rand's "philosophy", >> and upon doing so he concluded that it was total garbage, one major >> fallacy per page, and gave up reading the book as a result. >True enough. >> This was after telling us in e-mail what close-minded anti-fringe >> jerks we were. >I feel that this sentence is a deliberate attempt to distort the truth. >I did not initiatre electronic mail contact with you; your version seems >to state that I spontaneously wrote you insulting letters. In fact, >the three of you wrote me several insulting messages, to which I responded >with calm and equanimity. I was called a "moron" more than once, but >at no time did I respond with similar insults via mail. My "version" implies nothing beyond what it says. Your "version" implies that I am a liar. Whose "version" is right? This is a good example of why enforcing a politeness standard is an idea whose time should never come. People's ideas about it are just too different. I think Steven Harnad was very impolite indeed; Steven presumably thinks that he was merely serving as the Voice of Reason. Tim Maroney apparently thinks that in the light of all that has gone before, implying I am a liar is perfectly polite and acceptable. I think this is so hilarious as to hardly even be insulting, and (as you will see should you care to read further) I have my reasons also. >> The point is that if there are flames, perhaps it is for a reason. >I am a long-time supporter of this idea. I also support as an equal >principle that the reason for the flame must always be made clear, and >rationally supported, within the same message. Well, let us see if you have succeeded this time. Did I call you a moron, gibbering or otherwise? Did you carefully refrain from insulting remarks? Is it possible that we have here a case history wherein it can be clearly seen that one person or group was gratuitously rude, and should perhaps pay the penalty of their misdeeds? Inquiring minds want to know! Let us turn now to the "flames more insulting in any one instance than my entire output for a year". First, let us look at the cool and temperate remarks with which Tim begans: In article <1351@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes: >Personally, I don't oppose Michael Ellis. I just feel that errant fuckheads >should jump off high buildings rather than inflict their puerile spewings >on the network. >Is this some kind of sick joke? This is stupid even for Ellis. >Shouting insults and nothing else is not about to convince anyone of >anything, except your own cretinism. Now we see my violent and savage response (I can't give Michael Ellis' brutal and deranged attack since apparently he didn't even reply!) In article <445@cartan.Berkeley.EDU> gsmith@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Gene Ward Smith) writes: >Under the circumstances, I question the validity of your observation; >it seems bombastic insult is what draws their attention. (Another thing >which seems to work is to post something with obvious flaws, but this >is self defeating). > Considering *your* "analysis" of Robert Heinlein a while back, which >achieved new heights of blind obduracy and general silliness, this complaint >is a little much to take coming from YOU, boyo! Stung by these terrible insults which Tim hadn't yet seen, but had heard about, Tim fires back another calm and reasoned reply: In article <1365@hoptoad.uucp> tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney) writes: >Oddly, I haven't received Gene Smith's flame yet. Normally, the propagation >delay from Berkeley would be almost negligible. >I think it may be interesting to examine how it is that people can post >such inane flames as those of the anti-objectivists, obviously content- >free and purely insult, and then insist that they are irrefutable reasoning. >They have no idea that to someone outside the clique, their constant >slurs appear not as well-deserved denunciations of incredibly foolish >people, but as a group of over-inflated geeks inflating themselves at >the expense of others, though only in their own eyes. >Observation of these people in other conversations shows that they employ >insult routinely, in fact whenever possible. The whole reason for their >participation in public discussions seems to be to show their superior >intelligence by putting others down, not to communicate or to learn. >Obviously there is nothing to be learned from such a person. I think it is clear that Tim has a good point here: obviously anyone whose last name is not "Maroney" must be an over-inflated geek to insist on flaming. Only Tim Maroney should be allowed to flame anyone ever. A consistent application of this useful and logical principle would go a long way to ending this whole "censorship" discussion and would make life easier for Tim Maroney besides. ucbvax!brahms!gsmith Gene Ward Smith/UCB Math Dept/Berkeley CA 94720 ucbvax!weyl!gsmith "Slime is the agony of water" -- Jean-Paul Sartre