it does no good for me to filter out the crackpots if the rest of you are just going to keep on replying to same. so, as RAH had LL say: "never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
I believe it is still necessary (and a good thing) to post messages on the record that debunk technical fallacies. This mailing list is archived on more than one website and indexed by search engines. If we ignore technical fallacies without explaining why and how they are wrong, then there is a risk that learners will read those technical fallacies and create future de facto standards based on them. However, Jay Ashworth has now set up the Best Practices wiki at http://bestpractices.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page Perhaps that is a better place to have these technical arguments? --Michael Dillon
On Tue, 3 May 2005 Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
it does no good for me to filter out the crackpots if the rest of you are just going to keep on replying to same. so, as RAH had LL say: "never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and annoys the pig."
I believe it is still necessary (and a good thing) to post messages on the record that debunk technical fallacies.
Thats right. That's why I debunk them. The lying children call me names. They really hate it when you debunk their fallacies. Vixie is a "screamer", like John Bolton. I'd love to say "procmail Vixie", but he has too much control over DNS root servers to ignore him. I did that back in the early 90's. He was a jerk then, and I decided I had better things to do, than work on DNS. But his judgement is so poor (on so many subjects) that he needs close supervision, regardless of how detestable his personal behavior is. Indeed, his detestable behavior over the years is what has caused people not to want to deal with him or his bad judgements. --Dean -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000
Thats right. That's why I debunk them. The lying children call me names. They really hate it when you debunk their fallacies.
Vixie is a "screamer", like John Bolton. I'd love to say "procmail Vixie", but he has too much control over DNS root servers to ignore him. I did that back in the early 90's. He was a jerk then, and I decided I had better things to do, than work on DNS.
But his judgement is so poor (on so many subjects) that he needs close supervision, regardless of how detestable his personal behavior is. Indeed, his detestable behavior over the years is what has caused people not to want to deal with him or his bad judgements.
--Dean
Okay. Paul is an asshole. You got your point across. Now what? Did you prove him wrong? You going to such a personal level on-list makes you a **** (chose 4 letter word). Why do I write this? Because if you can send such things to the list and waste bandwidth, so can I. I guess some people find it difficult to respond on a technical level, so they rather go BOO. Where are our brand new and shiny moderators? Gadi.
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
Where are our brand new and shiny moderators?
When you respond quoting someone can you please include the quote attribution line so our procmail filters can work properly? most of us have procmail'd dean out, but your response cutting off his name from the quote let it get through. -Dan
Dan Hollis wrote:
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
Where are our brand new and shiny moderators?
When you respond quoting someone can you please include the quote attribution line so our procmail filters can work properly? most of us have procmail'd dean out, but your response cutting off his name from the quote let it get through.
My apologies. I was stupid to send it anyway. Gadi.
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 10:59:37PM +0400, Gadi Evron wrote:
Okay. Paul is an asshole. You got your point across. Now what? Did you prove him wrong? You going to such a personal level on-list makes you a **** (chose 4 letter word).
Why do I write this? Because if you can send such things to the list and waste bandwidth, so can I.
I guess some people find it difficult to respond on a technical level, so they rather go BOO.
Where are our brand new and shiny moderators?
Remember that part of the process of revamping the moderation after previous unfairness involves giving everyone a second shot. This means that a few legitimately certifi(ed|able) full-time kooks are going to get back onto the list along with the rest of the part-time kooks and wrongly persecuted. In order to make certain that the process is as fair and even-handed as possible, the moderators have to treat these kooks as though they had a clean slate. This means warnings are given, and the kooks are given a chance to step back into line. If they choose not to avail themselves of this opportunity, the warnings will run out and they will be moderated. The best thing that we can all collectively do to help de-kook the place is to give them the rope then sit back and let them hang themselves (if they so choose). This means refraining from making personal attacks of your own, or personal retorts even if provoked. You know they are idiots, I know they are idiots, clearly they haven't listened before when they have told to their face that they are idiots, so there is no need to call them idiots with every post. If you are going to correct technical misinformation that is fine, but personal attacks only give them grounds to argue that so-and-so did something back and that the process is unfair. If everyone would please make the effort to not respond to the blatant personal attacks, no matter how justified the response may be, it will help the process along. In the end this is the important part of not feeding the trolls. -- Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/ras GPG Key ID: 0xF8B12CBC (7535 7F59 8204 ED1F CC1C 53AF 4C41 5ECA F8B1 2CBC)
Where are our brand new and shiny moderators?
why? what damage is dean actually doing other than to himself? and some would contend, and i tend to agree, that it is not possible for him to further damage himself. don't create or invoke forces that are not needed lest you are willing to regret it forever. randy
----- Original Message ----- From: "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.com> To: "Gadi Evron" <ge@linuxbox.org> Cc: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 4:42 PM Subject: Re: On the-record - another "off-topic" post
Where are our brand new and shiny moderators?
why? what damage is dean actually doing other than to himself? and some would contend, and i tend to agree, that it is not possible for him to further damage himself.
don't create or invoke forces that are not needed lest you are willing to regret it forever.
bingo. he's already procmail'ed off by anyone who cares. reserve moderation for cases where such doesn't work (eg when the person in question deliberately evades filtering). -p --- paul galynin
bingo. he's already procmail'ed off by anyone who cares. reserve moderation for cases where such doesn't work (eg when the person in question deliberately evades filtering).
i would be much more restrictive/specific. i would leave the list self-moderating except for users who repeatedly violate one of the following: - dominates the list to the extent that others can not use it. and note that, even with all of the folk replying to the pathetic trogs, this is far from the case - posts for-profit commercial use, job ads, ... - sends email bounces and vacation messages to the list or to legitimate posters to the list and, while i dislike html, top posting, ... as much as the next person, they somehow don't strike me as capital crimes. otoh, censorship does. randy -- "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" is widely attributed to Voltaire, but cannot be found in his writings. With good reason. The phrase was invented by a later author as an epitome of his attitude. It appeared in The Friends of Voltaire (1906), written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall under the pseudonym S[tephen] G. Tallentyre. Censor, n. An officer of certain governments, employed to supress the works of genius. Among the Romans the censor was an inspector of public morals, but the public morals of modern nations will not bear inspection. -- Ambrose Bierce, The Enlarged Devil's Dictionary, 1967
- dominates the list to the extent that others can not use it.
I've suggested to the list admins that we should have a middle way in which the offender is limited to one post per day. I think that they could easily implement this and it may actually be enough to keep the list on track so that banning is almost never needed. IMHO "limited speech" is a form of freedom of speech and cannot be compared to "no speech", i.e. banning from the list. --Michael Dillon
On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 10:37:59AM +0100, Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
- dominates the list to the extent that others can not use it.
I've suggested to the list admins that we should have a middle way in which the offender is limited to one post per day. I think that they could easily implement this and it may actually be enough to keep the list on track so that banning is almost never needed.
^m :) (and it is almost always tru that bManning is almost never needed... ) seriously, one would think that adults should have enough forberance and insight to moderate their contributions. email, unlike street speach or party conversation is -NOT- realtime or interactive...
--Michael Dillon
--bill
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Gadi Evron wrote:
Thats right. That's why I debunk them. The lying children call me names. They really hate it when you debunk their fallacies.
Vixie is a "screamer", like John Bolton. I'd love to say "procmail Vixie", but he has too much control over DNS root servers to ignore him. I did that back in the early 90's. He was a jerk then, and I decided I had better things to do, than work on DNS.
But his judgement is so poor (on so many subjects) that he needs close supervision, regardless of how detestable his personal behavior is. Indeed, his detestable behavior over the years is what has caused people not to want to deal with him or his bad judgements.
--Dean
Okay. Paul is an asshole. You got your point across. Now what? Did you prove him wrong? You going to such a personal level on-list makes you a **** (chose 4 letter word).
That's rich. People are posting ad hominems of me. By contrast, my criticims of Paul's personal problems are not ad hominem. "Ad hominem" means attacking the messenger. That's what Paul and a few other people are doing to me. However, most of the others have no position of trust, and so their childish behavior, while inappropriate, is essentially meaningless and harmless. My comments about Paul's personality are about what his ad hominems reveal about his personal judgement and character. This is not an ad hominem. I _don't_ say he doesn't have a right to his opinion because he's an asshole or idiot or anything that is similar to what is being said about me. I say that personal judgement and character is an issue for someone in control of critical infrastructure. Paul is in control of a root nameserver. His personal judgement and character is a valid concern. His (mis)behavior is reflective on his personal judgement and character. So far as the technical arguments go, I've already won all of the arguments I've presented here in the last few days in other forums where people aren't allowed to resort to ad hominems and then run off. When they are forced (either by their lawyers or by other protocol) to address technical issues honestly, they have lost on each of these questions. Basically, when the discussion degenerates to "dean is a troll", on a forum like this, it means they've run out of ideas, but don't want to concede anything, and are looking to divert attention to something else. And of course, one can't make someone (on a forum like this, anyway) concede anything, and they wouldn't do so willingly. --Dean -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Dean Anderson wrote:
Basically, when the discussion degenerates to "dean is a troll", on a forum like this, it means they've run out of ideas, but don't want to concede anything, and are looking to divert attention to something else. And of course, one can't make someone (on a forum like this, anyway) concede anything, and they wouldn't do so willingly.
Pot calling kettle, pot calling kettle, come in, kettle. As long as we're explaining fun words: If neither party is willing to back down from their point of view, *right or wrong*, that's called an impasse. Since nothing any part is saying is changing anyone's mind, agree to disagree and take it offlist. - billn
On Tue, 3 May 2005, Bill Nash wrote:
Since nothing any part is saying is changing anyone's mind, agree to disagree and take it offlist.
Some progress is being made, in spite of the wailing and name-calling. The people doing the name-calling aren't contributing more than disruptive noise, but others are. While I have a chance, and before I forget, I'd like to single out Richard Steenbergen for making the most progress. Many years ago, he might have been in the thick of the noise makers. But he managed to get past namecalling and offer a nice bit of helpful information. Lincoln Dale was also quite helpful in updating me a bit on routing architecture. My thanks to both of them. --Dean -- Av8 Internet Prepared to pay a premium for better service? www.av8.net faster, more reliable, better service 617 344 9000
On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 04:40:51PM +0100, Michael.Dillon@radianz.com wrote:
However, Jay Ashworth has now set up the Best Practices wiki at http://bestpractices.wikicities.com/wiki/Main_Page Perhaps that is a better place to have these technical arguments?
Thanks for the plug, Michael. Knowing this crowd (and I don't excuse myself, there) as I do, I've even created an obvious mechanism for dealing with the circumstance wherein different people differ on the appropriate approach to a problem or situation; hopefully this will avoid the sort of problems <strike>that get everyone mad at me here</strike> :-) Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer Baylink RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me
participants (10)
-
Bill Nash -
bmanning＠vacation.karoshi.com -
Dan Hollis -
Dean Anderson -
Gadi Evron -
Jay R. Ashworth -
Michael.Dillon＠radianz.com -
Paul G -
Randy Bush -
Richard A Steenbergen