Re: Personal Attacks, Power, and the PAB

[Infobahn Consulting <infobahn@squall.mgl.ca>]

On Mon, 11 Aug 1997, Dave Crocker wrote:
> This is great, folks.
> 	Good job!

Takes some of the responsibility off you for stirring the pot eh?

> 	How many different ways can we all find, to keep from dealing with
> substantive matters?  It is really soooooo much more fun to constantly get
> into personalities and abstractions?  

One more way than you knew about yesterday.

> 	I will bet that we can keep this up long enough to completely derail any
> efforts at getting serious work done.  Wouldn't that be wonderful?

If everyone pitches in and helps the way they have been so far, I'm sure
you'll be successful.

> 	For the portion of the community that is worried about this phenomenon,
> let me observe the following:  For any discussion which has factions, there
> is ALWAYS Someone who will Say Something Bad about the other side.

That someone has been YOU up until today.

I always thought the world was what we made it?

> 	Having Somebody Somewhere Say Something Bad doesn't represent a dominant
> view.  It doesn't represent an official view.  In fact, it does not mean
> anything at all.  It is quoted by reporters and those On The Other Side
> because it is inflammatory, not because it is meaningful.

Correct. It's just an idiosyncratic notion. A notion is something not good
enough to be called an idea. And an idea is an unrefined view.

> 	So before we all get excited at this or the next occurrence of Somebody
> Somewhere Saying Something Bad about Something, let me suggest that we all
> step back and ask whether there is any real content.

I've been asking myself this for weeks.

> 	The fact that I claim your mother wears combat boots or that you claim I
> am a greedy son of a gun is entirely irrelevant to that mainline of work.

Which is why you've relied on these tactics so heavily??

> Why don't we all get really radical and actually ignore such silliness,
> instead focussing on statements and content that ARE important?

Splendid idea. You first.

> 	I know that that's more work than getting inflamed and firing off
> judgmental missives, but no one said that responsible participation in open
> processes was easy.

No, not easy. We've all been suspecting for weeks that responsible
participation was quite beyond you. But maybe I am wrong??

> ps. As to the facts of this particular topic, yes, someone on the PAB list
> Said Something Bad about Jay.  Oh gosh.  Dear me.  A Very Bad Thing Indeed.
>  How could we allow such a thing?  Well, believe it or not, we let people
> say what is on their minds, just as is done on all lists which follow the
> spirit of Internet participation.  It shouldn't happen.  It isn't helpful.
> However, adult supervision for such contributions only takes place when the
> thread of exchange has significantly distracted the list discussion.  That
> didn't happen in this case.  In any event taking a single participant's
> message and declaring it to be a significant representation of PAB feeling
> or, worse, an official PAB position is not merely wrong.  It is silly.  So
> I suggest that those wishing to claim that such reactions are anything
> other than silly should watch their own statements and consider whether the
> Thought Police won't be knocking on THEIR door, next.

Well, I guess I've drilled home the "pot calling the kettle black"
hypocrisy point enough by now. If you really *are* willing to turn over a
new leaf and have a serious discussion on here, well then I'm all in
favour of it. But you must forgive my scepticism: a cannibal may eat a
head of cabbage every now and then, but that doesn't make him a
vegetarian!

On the "official vs unofficial" debate: Witness the case a few months back
of Texaco(?) executives deliberately conspiring to keep blacks out of the
Texaco workforce or from owning Texaco franchises. Was this an *official*
Texaco policy? No -- good luck finding "Thou shalt not be black" in the
franchise agreement contract!!! But the personal views of the guilty
executives had the effect of contaminating Texaco's official dealings with
the public and it sure as hell looked bad for the company when it all hit
the fan!!

Bryan Trussler
(bryan@i-bahn.com)

******************************************************
             Infobahn Consulting Services
Mail: bryan@i-bahn.com  ||  Web: http://www.i-bahn.com
******************************************************
"All good Web sites resemble one another; every bad
Web site is bad in its own fashion"
       -- Leo Tolstoi in "Anna Karenina" (sort of ...)