Dissenter

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

John,

You might be surprised (I know I was), but the more OL grows, the less "peace-keeping" problems I have. I have seen several recent heated and passionate discussions so far without people at each others throats.

I admit that after the hacker attack, I am now a little less lenient when posters start insulting each other. Putting this site back together was a major headache and some small tasks are still not done. But OL is becoming concrete proof that snarky pot shots and obnoxiousness are not inherent to Objectivism. (I was actually starting to have doubts about this myself.)

It seems like the active members here prize a peaceful environment and do not give much attention to those who would disrupt the one they helped construct. I know I highly prize people who think for themselves. Civility usually comes with that virtue and I admire this mentality enormously.

I hear a voice... one from the distance... faint... with echo... something about a field... a dream...

"If you build it they will come."

Michael

[Rich Engle]

Oh yeah, Maestro. The field is being populated.

[John Dailey]

Mike:

~ WHAT? *You* had...doubts...about how this 'enterprise' would/could continue? With the (but then, I haven't read EVERYthing here) predominance of non-insulting (well, I caught a few name-calling ones, ok) posts amongst all herein? --- For shame! If that doesn't call for 'kitchen duty', I don't know what does! Report to Kat!

~ As I said, I think you're doing a good job (or, something to that effect) with what, and how, you're dealing with this new (dare I say 'mission'?) of yours with this forum-site. --- As I also said in a pvt e-m, hope you got a sharp 'hacker'-buddy who knows how deal with that...'cracker.'

~ Ntl, I think different forums should have different (to a point) 'styles', and yours is one (the 'loosest' one around, I'd say, O'ist-discussion-wise, that is); RoR is another, more restrictive...as I think it (or one like it) should be.

~ I think Rich specified (whether joshingly or not) JUST how I think the likes of RoR should be done, given it's discrimination-policy (not inherently wrong, as I see it; merely tactically [PR?] biased.) Actually, he was merely more specific than I about how I think a discrimination policy should be applied: Ya gonna have 'segregation', do it for both ends of the spectrum, just for 'clarity'-sakes. And all other areas...irrelevent to either terr. --- Else, do an ARI (and, GL with being a 'competitor' of them like some are trying to be, rather than 'complementer', which I see O-L and RoR as being.) As an aside: ARI-type forums 'should' be the way they are, btw. Well, I could quibble with some details, but, I'm sure you get my drift. --- There should be places where 'anything goes', and, places where they say "...NOT past 'this' line!" Just be 'up-front' about it, and, if one's a 'loose' type, then if restricting one side, restrict the other, and neither arbitrarily.

~ Well, I 'ranted' enough on this.

~ As I've said to Chris S: "keep on truckin'"

LLAP

J:D

[Dragonfly]

Well, they may do as they like on RoR, but since I no longer post there it has become a very dull forum...