[Vision2020] Too Much Nonsense

[Ted Moffett]

Roger et. al.

I agree for the most part with your post.

And before I hear about the delete key, or other e-mail management tactics,
this is not the point.  The point is to comment on topics or threads that
perhaps should not dominate the list, while other important topics or
threads are ignored.  When important topics are ignored, and irrelevant
nonsense promoted, it does degrade the list, and can lower substantive
participation.

I recently posted information on the Climate Protection Agreement that was
recently signed by members of the US Conference of Mayors.  I asked if
Moscow mayor Nancy Cheney signed.  There was one response on the list
discussing ways Moscow can address climate change, but no answer about
Cheney.  Cheney may not read Vision2020, or she may have decided she does
not want to post, given the abusive conduct on this list.

Regarding your request for less religious discussion, though I agree with
many of the critics of certain religious institutions, the critics conduct
is sometimes redundant and tiresome.  I have read countless times on
Vision2020 that Greg Dickison once advocated death for gays, etc.  I suppose
there is a point in posting this fact over and over for emphasis, or for
those who do not know this fact, but most of us already know this well
publicized information.  Most of us also already know that New Saint Andrews
is not the center of academic excellence on the planet, that their faculty
lacks sufficient academic credentials.  This has been posted over and over
and over.  It seems the individuals posting this information over and over
and over have a serious axe to grind against NSA, etc.  Well, perhaps I
agree with this axe grinding, but perhaps a new approach to grinding this
axe would be productive?

Religious discussion does have a place on Vision2020, in my opinion, but the
repetitious posting of the same criticisms of NSA and Christ Church by the
same subscribers wears thin.

Also, while certain Vision2020 subscribers who post often seem to annoy the
hell out of many other subscribers, who then post very personalized attacks,
why do those who are so annoyed keep egging on those who annoy them with
frequent replies?  Is this to provide a provocative and colorful content to
keep the list engaging?  I suppose there is a point to this approach, but
personally I find it boring as hell, especially when a simple question about
whether Moscow's mayor signed an agreement that was signed by numerous
mayors across the US on a climate protection agreement is ignored.

Donovan Arnold's posts seem to generate analysis on the list that would
boggle the mind of Sigmund Freud, while other worthwhile topics are
bypassed.

http://www.seattle.gov/mayor/climate/PDF/USCM_SignatureOnly_02.27.06.pdf

Ted Moffett



On 8/11/06, roger hayes <rhayes at turbonet.com > wrote:

> Visionaries:
>
> This past weekend I posted a brief note on 2020 that under Jim Risch's
> tax plan my taxes would actually go up. Now, only one person responded
> to this note, and that was a public official. I am certain that
> official had to wade through volumes of personal attacks, name calling,
> religious tirades, simple forwards of patriotic tripe, right wing
> bating, repetitious arguments that lead no where to find my small
> protest of tax reform.
> People, and I know you know who your are, you are ruining a valuable
> community resource by diluting the content of this list to the point
> that no one except those who love this sort of nonsense will want to
> read anything posted on vision2020.
> Let's demonstrate some responsibility to this community resource. You
> don't knock books down on the public library floor; you don't spit on
> the floor on the rec center; you don't destroy the plants in the
> planters downtown. We need to see vision2020 as one of those sorts of
> public resources.
> Limit your posts. Consider if your posts will generate valuable, and
> hopefully local/regional discourse before sending them. Do not attack
> others. Find a different avenue for religious arguments. Do not forward
> entire articles, or lists, but rather supply the links that people can
> go to if they choose. Do not intentionally take arbitrary stands that
> are meant to bait others. Be constructive.
>
> Hope for a change,
> Roger Hayes
> Moscow
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto: Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060811/19bfe065/attachment.htm