Re: Flame Wars

Davey, re:

>>>>lets see you now make a more cogent argument by citing examples, starting
with this one... (hMMM... I'm still waiting...)
 
 >>If you insist. Unlike you, I don't have all day and night to post to the
list, but with today being the Saturday before I take a week of vacation,
what the heck. >>

Yes, "what the heck". Give it your best shot! :) Oh and BTW, this "day and
night" thing... I must be hiring (another use of the wallet, huh?) people to
write for me as I seem to get around a lot AND write to the list. How exactly
do you think that works? :)

>>your many posts that reflect your need to make publicly known the size of
your wallet. 

Really? Can you cite just one example where I've mentioned the "size" of my
wallet? Money is a relative thing. To you I may be very wealthy, but to
another lister, I may be very "middle class". If I were to give you a full
accounting of my net worth, then you'd know the "size of my wallet", yes?
Please choose your words a bit more carefully. 

>>You don't seem to understand, do you?

I understand fine. By my observations, you seem to be losing it. Why is that?
This is only a simple conversation, is it not?

>> A communication medium's PRICE has nothing to do whatsoever with the fact
that it is PRIVATELY operated and hence can be moderated.

hMMM... I don't believe I ever argued that point. 

>> Neither does whether or not the medium's contributors get PAID to
contribute have anything to do with whether it can or should be moderated.

Sure it does. If I'm giving you my information for free, I'm not going to
allow you or anyone else to tell me how I should convey it. If I were being
paid for my services, the payor has a right to stipulate conditions. My point
(which you don't seem to understand) is that people here are giving of
themselves for free and in that process, giving others something of value. If
those same contributors were told that they now had to conform to some sort
of rule or policy that conflicts with their style, they would reduce their
contributions and/or find another media to express and share that
information. 

Here's a scenario that I'll make simple enough for you to understand
(hopefully):

I have a conversation with Roger Daltrey, regarding an upcoming solo project
and this is a "moderated" list. I then post that conversation here and in it
quote Roger, verbatim. In this post, contains certain elements that the
"moderator" finds objectionable and then e-mails me a warning and removes the
post from the list. Perhaps 5% of the list member may have found the contents
objectionable, the other 95% would have enjoyed it. This "call" is a
subjective thing, based on the moderators personal tastes, understanding of
the material, etc. 

a) go find someone to do this unenviable job
b) make it work
c) admit the real reason you want a moderator is to "protect" you from having
to defend yours positions, which you happen to do a lousy job at. 

I don't need anyone to help me think. Why do you seem to?

>> (Ever pick up a free newspaper at, say, a music store 

hMMM... yeah... lot's of advertising and usually weak on content. Is this
what you advocate?

>>or listen to any radio station?). 

Today's radio is worthless. The only value to me are news stations and the
occasional concert broadcast. However, having the same top 40 (or classic 40)
songs played over and over and over again doesn't appeal to me. I can do that
myself and chose what I want to hear...

>>Correct. And that's all the person is doing, ASKING you to stay on topic or
to cut down the flames. So, why, when these individuals ASK you to be more
courteous, do you respond with a "see-they're-trying-to-censor-me" messiah
complex? This is the type of paranoid mindset that I referred to in my last
post. 

Funny, but I see your silly reply as a "paranoid mindset". If you really
believed in what you were saying, you wouldn't feel the need to post all this
crap. It's kinda obvious that you're trying to "outargue" me and just doing a
poor job of it. To me, this is one of MANY conversations. After I finish this
reply, I'll simply continue reading and responding to the rest of my mail.
You on the other hand, will try to come up with something "clever" and fail
again.

>>The problem with many libertarians (which I would guess you are, correct?)
is that they don't work their philosophical positions out fully and
logically. ...blah, blah, blah...

Like the rest of your assumptions, you've "guessed" wrong. I'm a VEGETARIAN,
but I can see with your overwhelming mental abilities getting the two
confused. I know very little if anything about "libertarians". I guess this
was your way of attempting a personal attack on my beliefs, but it's too bad
that you got me confused with some other listers.  You claim to be a
"philosopher"? (Maybe you can start a comic book series with: "The Philospher
and the Millionaires"???) Your "position" is extremely flawed and I don't see
anything worked out "fully and logically". What you really want is a "big
brother" to hide behind because you have such a poor go at stating your
point. When someone like me comes along and points that out, you want that
element "censored". 

Just for the record, I HAVE stated many times that I'm a Ross Perot
supporter. It seems your trying too hard to get into my wallet, than pay
attention to what I've said. 

Enjoy your vacation and... hope this helps...

- -wf