R: continued inflammatory and off-topic responses toconstructiveemails[wasRe: [Campaigns-l] blog efficiency inpolitics: the Finland case]

[Jonathan Trenn]

Steven
   
  You're missing the point.
   
  The reason we have this discussion forum is related to the creation of a campaign wiki.  It is not to end up getting in debates on specific issues - abortion, Iraq, etc.  Many of these issues create a tremendous amount of passion and can often result in attacks against individuals, nations, faiths.  
   
  That, in the end, completely takes us away from the mission.  Some, as a result, choose to leave.  They may be either insulted at the discussion at hand or they may have seen they way this may be going and end up not wanting any part of if.  Because the mssion is being hijacked.
   
  Meanwhile there are plenty of fourms online to debate these issues.
   
  Jonathan Trenn

Steve Hunter <elcazador68 at hotmail.com> wrote:
        I rarely contribute to forums,wikis, or blogs as I'm not too comfortable commenting on others opinions. However, I feel strongly enough about the most recent entries, that I am compelled to respond.
  The only way anyone can hurt your feelings is if you give them permission to do so.
  I empathize with individuals who are sensitive to percieved insults. However, I believe the intended idea is to allow the free flow of ideas. Filtering of statements or ideas, in my humble opinion would be counter productive. Obviously a direct personal flame should not be allowed.
  As far as asking to be removed from participation as a result of being insulted, wouldn't that cater to the individual that insulted you? Wouldn't everyone be better served by your continued participation?
  I also believe it is possible to agree to disagree and still contribute meaningful dialog.
  Regards and Respect
  Steve
  

 




Steve Hunter   
  
  
  
    
---------------------------------
    
From:  "Janet Hawtin" <lucychili at gmail.com>
Reply-To:  campaigns-l at wikia.com
To:  campaigns-l at wikia.com, celot at latimer.net
Subject:  Re: R: continued inflammatory and off-topic responses toconstructiveemails[wasRe: [Campaigns-l] blog efficiency inpolitics: the Finland case]
Date:  Tue, 24 Oct 2006 10:36:36 +0930
  

On 10/24/06, Paolo Celot <celot at latimer.net> wrote:     
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Please take me off.
  
  
  
  
  Which to me seems to be the probable intended goal of the provocateur.

Campaigns wiki is an exciting opportunity.
  
Some groups see distributed models of working with ideas as a threat.
  
I feel that CH Rob J King seems to me no more than a troll intending to disrupt the function of the Campaigns wiki as a whole.   

  
There is a difference between posting contextually about ideas and threads, and aiming to offend and damage as a core purpose.
  
One is dialogue, the other is trolling. It is basically a kind of targeted spam.
  
Distinguishing between them, as a group and as individuals is a part of making something worthwhile in a distributed context.
  
I appreciate that filtering this kind of 'spam' is a difficult issue in an open context.
  
I am happy to filter this person to trash for my own purposes.
  
If the group is considering filtering or moderating the person as a group act then I am +1 for that to happen.
  

  
Janet
  

  

  

  

  
  

  

  
  

  >_______________________________________________
>Campaigns-l mailing list
>Campaigns-l at wikia.com
>http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/campaigns-l
    

  
---------------------------------
  Try the new Live Search today! _______________________________________________
Campaigns-l mailing list
Campaigns-l at wikia.com
http://lists.wikia.com/mailman/listinfo/campaigns-l


 		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1¢/min.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikia.com/pipermail/campaigns-l/attachments/20061024/3d0b529a/attachment.html