I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
with this post.
As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).
Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
or two or three. All participating parties
contribute
by adding information on the subject or asking
questions motivated by a desire to gain some
knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
know each other. Everyone participates with
an open mind.
This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
parties in that everyone comes away with some-
thing they didn't know before or a better under-
standing of the subject.
This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
It can be a Win-Win proposition.
Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
"sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
premise. The process is structured, each side giving
their initial statement of position, a period of
exchanges of challenges and responses to each
other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
use facts to support their position, citing sources
for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
times do play a role in the decision making process.
The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
side" to change their position based on the
"points" one makes during the debate. The
participants make no attempt to keep and open
mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
- sort of.
In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
able enough on the subject to be able to take either
side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
away from the exchange with new information
about the subject.
Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
with an open mind nor the expectation of
persuading other participants, or anyone in
"the audience", to accept their position as
"right".
Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
may have an entertainment value, and
sometimes provide some useful information,
but that's fairly rare
Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"
There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.
So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"
charlie b
Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll piss off the pig
and waste your time.
--
Al Reid
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain
"mycroftt" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
> > yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
> > boots!"
> >
> > There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
> > a Flame War.
>
> Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
> misplet "your", would it?
>
> Mike
Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misspelled "misspelled", would it?
Al
In article <[email protected]>,
David Hall <[email protected]> wrote:
>Oh yeah? Well your mother wears combat boots!
"All the better to kick your *ss with", she says, sweetly.
>charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:<[email protected]>...
>> I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
>> that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
>> hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
>> with this post.
>>
>> As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
>> of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
>> hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).
>>
>> Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
>> or two or three. All participating parties
>> contribute
>> by adding information on the subject or asking
>> questions motivated by a desire to gain some
>> knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
>> exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
>> to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
>> and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
>> know each other. Everyone participates with
>> an open mind.
>>
>> This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
>> parties in that everyone comes away with some-
>> thing they didn't know before or a better under-
>> standing of the subject.
>>
>> This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
>> wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
>> It can be a Win-Win proposition.
>>
>> Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
>> "sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
>> premise. The process is structured, each side giving
>> their initial statement of position, a period of
>> exchanges of challenges and responses to each
>> other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
>> each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
>> and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
>> use facts to support their position, citing sources
>> for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
>> panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
>> rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
>> times do play a role in the decision making process.
>>
>> The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
>> side" to change their position based on the
>> "points" one makes during the debate. The
>> participants make no attempt to keep and open
>> mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
>> - sort of.
>>
>> In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
>> by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
>> able enough on the subject to be able to take either
>> side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
>> away from the exchange with new information
>> about the subject.
>>
>> Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
>> with an open mind nor the expectation of
>> persuading other participants, or anyone in
>> "the audience", to accept their position as
>> "right".
>>
>> Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
>> may have an entertainment value, and
>> sometimes provide some useful information,
>> but that's fairly rare
>>
>> Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
>> yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
>> boots!"
>>
>> There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
>> a Flame War.
>>
>> So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
>> a better use of my time?"
>>
>> charlie b
>>
>> Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll piss off the pig
>> and waste your time.
In article <[email protected]>,
Al Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>--
>Al Reid
>
>"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
>for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>
>"mycroftt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:<[email protected]>...
>> >
>> > Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
>> > yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
>> > boots!"
>> >
>> > There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
>> > a Flame War.
>>
>> Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
>> misplet "your", would it?
>>
>> Mike
>
>Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
>misspelled "misspelled", would it?
>
Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.
<grin>
In article <[email protected]>,
Doug Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>[email protected] (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>>Al Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
>>>for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>
>>>Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
>>>misspelled "misspelled", would it?
>>>
>>
>>Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
>>spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.
>>
>><grin>
>>
>And you, in turn, failed to spot Al's misattribution to Mark Twain of
>something that was actually said by Josh Billings. :-)
Not surprisingly, I've been told I have not a drop of Clemens-y in my soul. :P
Oh yeah? Well your mother wears combat boots!
charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
> that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
> hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
> with this post.
>
> As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
> of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
> hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).
>
> Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
> or two or three. All participating parties
> contribute
> by adding information on the subject or asking
> questions motivated by a desire to gain some
> knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
> exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
> to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
> and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
> know each other. Everyone participates with
> an open mind.
>
> This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
> parties in that everyone comes away with some-
> thing they didn't know before or a better under-
> standing of the subject.
>
> This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
> wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
> It can be a Win-Win proposition.
>
> Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
> "sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
> premise. The process is structured, each side giving
> their initial statement of position, a period of
> exchanges of challenges and responses to each
> other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
> each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
> and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
> use facts to support their position, citing sources
> for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
> panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
> rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
> times do play a role in the decision making process.
>
> The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
> side" to change their position based on the
> "points" one makes during the debate. The
> participants make no attempt to keep and open
> mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
> - sort of.
>
> In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
> by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
> able enough on the subject to be able to take either
> side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
> away from the exchange with new information
> about the subject.
>
> Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
> with an open mind nor the expectation of
> persuading other participants, or anyone in
> "the audience", to accept their position as
> "right".
>
> Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
> may have an entertainment value, and
> sometimes provide some useful information,
> but that's fairly rare
>
> Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
> yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
> boots!"
>
> There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
> a Flame War.
>
> So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
> a better use of my time?"
>
> charlie b
>
> Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll piss off the pig
> and waste your time.
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>In article <[email protected]>,
>Al Reid <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
>>for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain
>>Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
>>misspelled "misspelled", would it?
>>
>
>Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
>spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.
>
><grin>
>
And you, in turn, failed to spot Al's misattribution to Mark Twain of
something that was actually said by Josh Billings. :-)
--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)
For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.
charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:
<snippage>
> So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
> a better use of my time?"
>
> charlie b
Well, charlie b, that could SERIOUSLY limit my wReck time! ;-)
Patriarch,
who must have SOMETHING better to do....
charlie b <[email protected]> wrote:
> So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
> a better use of my time?"
MYFB
--
Bill
Robert, what happened to all the "*_-'"'s?? I can't
understand your posts without them! :)
dave
Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> charlie b <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll piss off the pig
>>and waste your time.
>
>
> nit-pick -- the correct quote is:
>
> "Never attempt to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time,
> and annoys the pig."
>
> The source is "Time Enough for Love", by Robert A. Heinlein, in the excerpts
> from "The Notebooks of Lazarus Long".
>
>
> (it's been a favorit quote of mine for 30+ years :)
>
In article <[email protected]>,
charlie b <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll piss off the pig
>and waste your time.
nit-pick -- the correct quote is:
"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time,
and annoys the pig."
The source is "Time Enough for Love", by Robert A. Heinlein, in the excerpts
from "The Notebooks of Lazarus Long".
(it's been a favorit quote of mine for 30+ years :)
charlie b <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
> yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
> boots!"
>
> There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
> a Flame War.
Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misplet "your", would it?
Mike