 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Matt Giwe wrote:
> Emotion has no place in reason. So an emotional response is prima facia
> evidence of the response not befitting a member of a rational species.
So if the response is neither, what does that mean?
--
David Fontaine <dav### [at] faricy net> ICQ 55354965
My raytracing gallery: http://davidf.faricy.net/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Matt Giwe" <jul### [at] ijnet> wrote in message
news:3A4ADC1D.4CCC6083@ij.net...
<snip>
> It is also a path of enlightenment should they ever ask why they view
> something emotionally rather than intellectually.
>
> Emotion has no place in reason. So an emotional response is prima facia
> evidence of the response not befitting a member of a rational species.
blah blah blah blah blah.
Hey, you're out of off topic now!
Just behave like ~everyone~ else does in here for goodness sake :( (well,
~did~ before you turned up).
I really don't think you're getting much support here like this, and I'm
sure I'm not the only one who's getting kinda fed up of it and/or you!
Matt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Matthew Bennett" <the### [at] ntlworldcom> wrote in message
news:3a4deb90$1@news.povray.org...
> "Matt Giwe" <jul### [at] ijnet> wrote in message
> news:3A4ADC1D.4CCC6083@ij.net...
> <snip>
> > It is also a path of enlightenment should they ever ask why they view
> > something emotionally rather than intellectually.
> >
> > Emotion has no place in reason. So an emotional response is prima facia
> > evidence of the response not befitting a member of a rational species.
>
> blah blah blah blah blah.
> Hey, you're out of off topic now!
> Just behave like ~everyone~ else does in here for goodness sake :(
(well,
> ~did~ before you turned up).
> I really don't think you're getting much support here like this, and I'm
> sure I'm not the only one who's getting kinda fed up of it and/or you!
Well said!!
Andy Cocker
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Now that there is no off-topic, I must post my new email address in the
general group. I never read off-topic anyway.
______
David McCabe
mcc### [at] yahoocom
http://homepage.mac.com/davidmccabe/
Jesus loves you!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Andy Cocker" <big### [at] mariner9fsnetcouk> wrote :
>
> Well said!!
I swear you guys cannot live without him, you keep trying to get in the
last word when you know that it won't work.
I was ordered to "drop it" when I had an honest question about the
legitimacy of the process, where now are the marching orders for people who
gleefully encourage Matt to post off topic and offensive posts in p.g.?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Andy Cocker wrote:
> "Matthew Bennett" <the### [at] ntlworldcom> wrote in message
> news:3a4deb90$1@news.povray.org...
> > "Matt Giwe" <jul### [at] ijnet> wrote in message
> > news:3A4ADC1D.4CCC6083@ij.net...
> > I really don't think you're getting much support here like this, and I'm
> > sure I'm not the only one who's getting kinda fed up of it and/or you!
>
> Well said!!
No, angrily said.
Emotions are a vital part of the human character. While I disagree with the
statement that emotion has no place in an "enlightened" society, at the same
time we are to control our emotions. When someone attempts to give someone
else "a piece of their mind", it is a sign that the emotions are controlling
the person, and not the other way around.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 14:05:33 -0000 Matthew Bennett wrote:
>Hey, you're out of off topic now!
...as is anyone who replies to this thread. The povray.general group
is not a replacement for p.off-topic so we ask that *all* visitors who
participate on this news server evaluate the relevance of their posts to
this group before posting. Guidelines may be found in the
p.announce.frequently-asked-questions group. Thanks in advance.
--
Alan - ako### [at] povrayorg - a k o n g <at> p o v r a y <dot> o r g
http://www.povray.org - Home of the Persistence of Vision Ray Tracer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Matthew Bennett" <the### [at] ntlworldcom> wrote in message
news:3a4deb90$1@news.povray.org...
> Hey, you're out of off topic now!
Apologies for my previous post, it was indeed hypocritical. Sorry in
particular to Alan Kong - in any other situation I'd have been very pleased
to have a reply to a posting from him :(
Matt
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Chris C" <newsadmin[despam] at povray.org> wrote in message
news:3a49c73c@news.povray.org...
>
> "Tom Melly" <tom### [at] tomandlucouk> wrote in message
news:3a49b723@news.povray.org...
> > Well?
> >
> > (It's not showing up and has been removed from the avail. newsgroups on
this
> > server).
>
> off-topic was removed due to consistent abuse.
>
Don't worry I'm not going to drag this on unnecessarily - I've only just
got round to visiting the news server after a couple of weeks break and, as
a regular poster in p.o-t (and after reading the rest of the thread), I just
wanted air a few thoughts.
1, I'd pretty much been ignoring the whole M.G. thing, did things in
really escalate _so far_ in p.o-t that it called for such draconian
measures?
2, Why such a draconian approach ? Warn anyone the abuses the groups and
then ban them if necessary, but penalising everyone for one or two peoples
bad behaviour just pisses everyone off and merely shifts the problem.
3, I'm glad to see that p.o-t is returning, a forum as popular and as
eclectic as ours needs somewhere like p.o-t for exactly the reasons that,
IIRC, the news admins stated when p.o-t was first set up - Threads going
'off-topic' is inevitable within this type of 'community forum', and they're
an important part of keeping such a forum alive, without p.o-t all the other
groups (particularly p.general) get clogged up with this banter.
4, How, on earth did it come to this ? It seems to me that the majority
of the users here are intelligent, mature, people (many of the younger
members of our community often appear far more mature than some of us older
ones) and we all seem to agree that out and out flame wars have no place on
this server. Flame wars cannot and do not turn in infernos without someone
feeding or fanning the flames. The big problem, and a trap I find myself too
easily falling into, is that one persons 'constructive criticism' can be
another's 'bigoted abuse' - but, as intelligent, mature, people shouldn't we
be able to self police this problem ?
5, This marks a very disappointing moment in news.povray.org's history,
unfortunately, deeds cannot be undone and we have no way of knowing the
future, but I hope we can learn for this experience and 'grow' as a
community. Shit, I'm starting to sound like a hippie now, so, to kind of sum
up, I'll say one final thing...
Reply directly, email the poster or just ignore the lot - it's your
choice and that's the only way a community like this can operate - only you,
yourself, can effectively police what you read here and no-one is forcing
you to reply, however when you do decide to reply to a post, remember,
always, that this is a community and not your own personal forum - respect
that community and it will respect you (I personally have forced myself (too
late some might think in some cases (but I'm getting better at it)), on
several occasions, to pull out of a thread that I'd have liked to have
continued when it was clear that it was going absolutely nowhere and was
rapidly devolving).
Oh, and now that there's nowhere else to do it... Happy New Year one and
all! I hope everyone had a suitably festive holiday period and I wish you
all luck, prosperity and good health in 2K+1.
--
Scott Hill.
Software Engineer.
E-Mail : sco### [at] innocentcom
PGP Key : http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371
Pandora's Box : http://www.pandora-software.com
*Everything in this message/post is purely IMHO and no-one-else's*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Scott Hill" <sco### [at] innocentcom> wrote :
>
> 1, I'd pretty much been ignoring the whole M.G. thing, did things in
> really escalate _so far_ in p.o-t that it called for such draconian
> measures?
No. His use of the word "Dimocrat" seems to be the triggering event, but
the purported offence was his sigs which had been pretty much ignored for
months before. Who knows what happened?
> 2, Why such a draconian approach ? Warn anyone the abuses the groups
and
> then ban them if necessary, but penalising everyone for one or two peoples
> bad behaviour just pisses everyone off and merely shifts the problem.
Agreed. If the policy says something then the policy should be
followed -first-, then if more drastic measures are required go there.
> 3, I'm glad to see that p.o-t is returning, a forum as popular and as
> eclectic as ours needs somewhere like p.o-t for exactly the reasons that,
> IIRC, the news admins stated when p.o-t was first set up - Threads going
> 'off-topic' is inevitable within this type of 'community forum', and
they're
> an important part of keeping such a forum alive, without p.o-t all the
other
> groups (particularly p.general) get clogged up with this banter.
Again, agreed. The "community of POV happens in OT more than otherwise.
Sometimes communities get stressfull, but that is what a community is like.
Learn to live with it here or you can't live with it anywhere.
> Flame wars cannot and do not turn in infernos without someone
> feeding or fanning the flames.
POT has -never- had a flame war. Nothing even close. The closest we have
had was Mosl claiming that everyone but he was a "moron hypocrits" (sic).
> only you,
> yourself, can effectively police what you read here and no-one is forcing
> you to reply,
Nothing could be more relevant to the issue.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
