On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, snitsnat wrote:
> have you ever noticed that your approach to discussion is the minority
> approach? :) could there maybe be a reason for it, particularly since many
> of us are no strangers to being professors?
>
> You, Jus', Heartfield, Lacny, and Chuck0 use it. There may be a few other
> irregular posters, but the vast majority of people treat this as a discussion
> between colleagues over dinner --not necessarily dyadic.
I just don't see any kind of clear consensus about the style or content of "discussion" here on LBO. We have data dumps, blog pointers, monologues about video games, political gossip, and yes, debates about philosophical and scientific issues. I try to contribute when I have something important to say, and I'll call bullshit when I know that a person is making a claim that is not consistent with evidence or well supported theories.
Color me clueless, but I didn't even know I was egregiously violating list etiquette. I'm a bit confused, because you (Kel) use most of the same rhetorical devices that I do when you post about various debates. Where do I cross the line?
I guess I'm full of myself, but over the years here I've been goaded and misrepresented and patronized by the best of them (remember Dawson?), and not once did I respond with a "fuck you" or any other invective (check the archives!). I believe that we should treat with other with love and respect, and I do that here, even when I disagree with people's posts and even when I dislike the tone of people's posts.
(As I write this, I realize I must be pretty fucking bad if someone who just called a person "asshole" in a recent thread is complaining about my bad manners! I'll try to play nice, although I'm a little uncertain about the rules of the game.)
Miles