[EM] Name capitalization. Utopian ideals. Enforcement.

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

First of all, I didn't, do anything that I'm aware of to cause my name to be 
capitalized on the list. I have no idea why it's capitalized, or why that 
should bother anyone.

James--

You said:

	Mike, you seem to have missed the point of Rob's recent post. I will copy
it here:

>I don't know who started this flamewar, and quite frankly, I don't care.
>Please stop the personal attacks and profanity.  Attacking ideas is fine.  
>Attacking people is not.

I reply:

I didn't miss that point, and I agree that it's a good point. Let me reply 
to it:

>I don't know who started this flamewar

I reply:

It results from Russ's anger and hurt when, in spite of his pleading, I 
insisted that he no longer had permission to have materials written by me at 
his website.

Rob continued:

, and quite frankly, I don't care.
>Please stop the personal attacks and profanity.  Attacking ideas is fine.  
>Attacking people is not.

I reply:

I really like those utopian ideals. As someone pointed out, all it takes is 
one person who doesn't share those ideals and has no honesty or principles, 
and then those ideals are out the window. Such a person joined this list 
fairly recently.

You continue:

	According to the list moderator, we shouldn't engage in personal attacks.


I reply:

There isn't a list moderator. There have been postings to EM that make that 
abundantly obvious.

I agree with the list-owner that we  shouldn't engage in personal attacks.  
In fact, it's probably stated in the guidelines. It would be good if the 
guidelines also prohibited postings that whose entire topic is another 
list-member.

You continue:

This is not supposed to be a forum for you to establish that your "worth"
is greater than that of Russ or anyone else.

I reply:

Whoa. When did I initiate a discussion of my own worth? There have been long 
postings with that as their only topic, but not by me. What I said was that 
I resented the impliation that I share Russ's negative worth. I said that in 
reply to someone else's statement on that subject, and I wouldn't have 
brought it up myself.

You continue:

It is supposed to be a forum
for us to discuss election theory in a productive, cooperative, and
mutually beneficial manner.

I reply:

Yes that would be nice.

I've been objecting for a long time that EM's guidelines aren't enforced, 
even in the most extreme violations of those guidelines (which haven't been 
by me).

You continue:

	You cannot "enforce" the EM list guidelines via personal attacks, because
personal attacks are in themselves contrary to EM list guidelines.

I reply:

They indeed are. But if the guidelines aren't otherwise enforced, and 
violations of those guidelines are already going on, then why not try to 
deter them, even if that itself involves a violation of the already-ignored 
and unenforced guidelines?

At least my criticisms have been about specific statements in postings, as 
opposed to general postings devoted entirely to criticism of another list 
member.

I'll clarify that this time that I don't have a job that involves cleaning 
toilets, contrary to what Russ was saying or speculating on the list. Nor 
have I posted messages whose only topic was another list-member, or posted 
messages full of false statements to criticize someone. In fact, I haven't 
criticized anyone except in regards to a particular statement by them in a 
posting of theirs. That fact alone completely sets me apart from someone 
like Russ or Craig.

You, James, are barking up the wrong tree again.

To Rob:

You once likened EM to a bar-room, complete with bar-room brawls, that 
doesn't need moderation.  Do you still think that the policy of an 
unmoderated bar-room brawl room with no enforced rules is a good one?

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/