Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
"be consistent"
 
PerlMonks  

Re^4: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement (speak)

by chromatic (Archbishop)
on Apr 17, 2013 at 04:55 UTC ( #1029054=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^3: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement (speak)
in thread Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement

What does chromatic deserve again?

I posted it on purpose and I deleted it on purpose and I stand by both of those purposes.

Unlike almost everything from Anonymonk, it's tied to my professional identity. Reasonable people will interpret it as something intended as satire and unreasonable people—well, there's no reasoning with them, by definition. If I'd thought for one moment that Ratazong would have taken it as a personal attack, I wouldn't have posted it.

Reasonable people may very well disagree whether it made its point well or at all, but that's a debate that bores me. I care a lot more about the silly false equivalences in that thread and this one, or about the idea that "don't feed the trolls" is a stronger guiding principle than "all that is required for incivility to stand is for civil people to say nothing".

  • Comment on Re^4: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement (speak)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement (practical)
by tye (Sage) on Apr 17, 2013 at 21:42 UTC
    "all that is required for incivility to stand is for civil people to say nothing"

    And yet...

    If I'd thought for one moment that Ratazong would have taken it as a personal attack, I wouldn't have posted it.

    Civil people saying something can be regrettably uncivil, it seems.

    I am not advocating that uncivil behavior be completely ignored and not dealt with. "Speaking up" (in a text-only public forum) isn't a particularly successful strategy, even for you, even based on your own assessment. But it certainly can make one feel better about having "tried to help".

    I think it quite useful to evaluate guiding principles based on whether or not they actually yield benefits and how much harm they cause. Though that might not be particularly satisfying from a philosophical or moral judgement perspective. Some might even find it "boring" to consider such things.

    I guess it depends on whether one cares more about actually making things better or about stroking one's moral self image.

    I haven't been talking (here, now) about the things that I think one can do to help that I find more likely to be successful. That's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

    - tye        

      I think it quite useful to evaluate guiding principles based on whether or not they actually yield benefits and how much harm they cause. Though that might not be particularly satisfying from a philosophical or moral judgement perspective.

      "Help" or "harm" are difficult to measure, especially in a public community like this which allows anonymous posting as well as anonymous reading (and anonymous search indexing).

      What's the right balance between not feeding the trolls—especially the very subtle ones—and challenging behaviors which one perceives to continue to drive good people away from the community?

      On my own sites, I quite happily delete personal attacks and unredeemable rudeness. Here, that's not an option.

Re^5: Additions to the FAQ and a Community Statement (speak)
by educated_foo (Vicar) on Apr 17, 2013 at 22:51 UTC
    Reasonable people may very well disagree whether it made its point well or at all, but that's a debate that bores me.
    After all, honesty and accountability are for the little people.

    EDIT: I should quote the whole message, since he may change it later...

    What does chromatic deserve again?
    I posted it on purpose and I deleted it on purpose and I stand by both of those purposes.

    Unlike almost everything from Anonymonk, it's tied to my professional identity. Reasonable people will interpret it as something intended as satire and unreasonable peopleŚwell, there's no reasoning with them, by definition. If I'd thought for one moment that Ratazong would have taken it as a personal attack, I wouldn't have posted it.

    Reasonable people may very well disagree whether it made its point well or at all, but that's a debate that bores me. I care a lot more about the silly false equivalences in that thread and this one, or about the idea that "don't feed the trolls" is a stronger guiding principle than "all that is required for incivility to stand is for civil people to say nothing".

    Just another Perler interested in Algol Programming.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://1029054]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (5)
As of 2021-02-24 21:28 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    No recent polls found

    Notices?