Proper Use of Subject Lines

------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 23:59:16 -0400 From: John Watkins <john.watkins04 at gmail.com> To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net> Subject: Re: (urth) Gene Wolfe Message-ID: <AANLkTilkTddQlipvBGMfMJrRjPDbECtV2-DHU0z6gdb- at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have to agree. On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 11:49 PM, Craig Brewer <cnbrewer at yahoo.com> wrote: Talk about whatever you want. I don't even care if it ends up in my mailbox. I just want to know if I can delete it without having to read it first. I like to think that emails from a Gene Wolfe mailing list with "Wolfe" in the subject line might actually be about Wolfe rather than someone's own personal theology and other peoples' arguments about it.

On 5/21/2010 7:19 AM, David Stockhoff wrote: Yes. Is it too much to ask that the subject line be used as intended to promote efficiency of communication and discussion?

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote: n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote: On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________ Urth Mailing List To post, write urth at urth.net Subscription/information: http://www.urth.net

Or courtesy. ----- Original Message ---- From: "brunians at brunians.org" <brunians at brunians.org> To: The Urth Mailing List <urth at lists.urth.net> Sent: Mon, May 24, 2010 4:22:49 AM Subject: Re: (urth) Improper Use of Subject Lines Ve must haff DISCIPLINE! .

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:22 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote: Ve must haff DISCIPLINE! .

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote: Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:22 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

Ve must haff DISCIPLINE! .

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote: Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote: But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 10:17 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote: You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn<crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

Agreed. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes <danldo at gmail.com> wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:22 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

Ve must haff DISCIPLINE! .

On 5/21/2010 9:59 AM, James Wynn wrote:

On 5/21/2010 9:01 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote:

n my experience, it is unless you have a moderator with the ability and the will to enforce pertinent subject I have, in the past, attempted to change the subject lines of threads as they moved OT. Maybe half or less of the participants followed. If the particular email that prompted them to responded did not have a changed subject, they didn't change it. Probably, because they didn't care about it as much as me or Mr. Brewer. Or, in the respondents opinion, their response did have to do with the original subject line. Hopeless cause.

it's not a hopeless cause, it just requires enforcement. I do it on playtest discussion lists all the time: I lay out the rules for subject lines, ask people nicely to follow them, warn them when they go astray, and if they persist in going astray, I send them to the land of postings-held-until-released-by-a-moderator to wander in the wilderness until they see the light. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

Well, it is true that a righteous society is a free society, but I guess I understood the issue to be what happens When Subject Lines Go Bad. On 5/24/2010 10:17 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn<crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:17 PM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote: I think we should have regular self-criticism sessions. .

Well, it is true that a righteous society is a free society, but I guess I understood the issue to be what happens When Subject Lines Go Bad. On 5/24/2010 10:17 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn<crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote: L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

I think you should stop spamming the list. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:17 PM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

I think we should have regular self-criticism sessions. .

Well, it is true that a righteous society is a free society, but I guess I understood the issue to be what happens When Subject Lines Go Bad. On 5/24/2010 10:17 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn<crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior." Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:29 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote: It's not, though. It is a contradiction in terms. It verges on newspeak. Something that is voluntary is done of one's free will. Something that is enforced is done will ye or nil ye. So what is something that is voluntarily enforced? You either want something to be done voluntarily, or you want it to be enforced. You can't have it both ways. .

Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior." Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:29 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote: It's not, though. It is a contradiction in terms. It verges on newspeak. Something that is voluntary is done of one's free will. Something that is enforced is done will ye or nil ye. So what is something that is voluntarily enforced? You either want something to be done voluntarily, or you want it to be enforced. You can't have it both ways. .

Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior." Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Lane Haygood <lhaygood at gmail.com> wrote: Something is enforced if there is a penalty for failure to comply. You are still free (in terms of will and capacity) to not comply; you must merely suffer the consequences. Let me put it another way: you are free to disobey the law, id est, to commit a crime. You must, however, "do the time" if you have "done the crime," as the cliche goes. You may voluntarily comport yourself with dignity and class. You may of course also fail to do so and be a boor. That is your prerogative, and none shall gainsay you your boorishness, for while it may be against the mores of good taste, one may not enforce good manners. One voluntarily enforces, therefore, a sense of good character in how one comports onesself if one self-legislates a moraltiy consistent with civility, pace Kant. You must act at all times as if the maxim of your actions could be willed as universal law. Therefore, though you may not be subject to compulsion to play nicely, it is eminently rational and proper for you to compel yourself to do so, should some base nature suggest otherwise. yvt, Lane On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:29 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

It's not, though. It is a contradiction in terms. It verges on newspeak. Something that is voluntary is done of one's free will. Something that is enforced is done will ye or nil ye. So what is something that is voluntarily enforced? You either want something to be done voluntarily, or you want it to be enforced. You can't have it both ways. .

> Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior."

Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

I'm sorry you're so trapped in semantics. Meditation might help. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:29 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

It's not, though. It is a contradiction in terms. It verges on newspeak. Something that is voluntary is done of one's free will. Something that is enforced is done will ye or nil ye. So what is something that is voluntarily enforced? You either want something to be done voluntarily, or you want it to be enforced. You can't have it both ways. .

Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior." Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

Something is enforced if there is a penalty for failure to comply. You are still free (in terms of will and capacity) to not comply; you must merely suffer the consequences. Let me put it another way: you are free to disobey the law, id est, to commit a crime. You must, however, "do the time" if you have "done the crime," as the cliche goes. You may voluntarily comport yourself with dignity and class. You may of course also fail to do so and be a boor. That is your prerogative, and none shall gainsay you your boorishness, for while it may be against the mores of good taste, one may not enforce good manners. One voluntarily enforces, therefore, a sense of good character in how one comports onesself if one self-legislates a moraltiy consistent with civility, pace Kant. You must act at all times as if the maxim of your actions could be willed as universal law. Therefore, though you may not be subject to compulsion to play nicely, it is eminently rational and proper for you to compel yourself to do so, should some base nature suggest otherwise. yvt, Lane On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:29 AM, <brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

It's not, though. It is a contradiction in terms. It verges on newspeak. Something that is voluntary is done of one's free will. Something that is enforced is done will ye or nil ye. So what is something that is voluntarily enforced? You either want something to be done voluntarily, or you want it to be enforced. You can't have it both ways. .

Perhaps it would help if I explained that "voluntary enforcement" is a fancy way of saying "civilized behavior." Probably not, though. --Dan'l On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 9:15 AM, ?<brunians at brunians.org> wrote:

L'audace! Encore l'audace! Toujours l'audace! -- Danton .

You misunderstood what I mean by "voluntarily enforced." I do not mean universal citizen policing (which is a Bad Thing). Rather, I mean a situation in which people voluntarily act in a disciplined manner. On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 8:15 AM, James Wynn <crushtv at gmail.com> wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops. Ever live in a neighborhood with extensive homeowner codes and have to live next to the lady who memorized them? Ever had someone yell at you because your Yorkshire Terrier, walking at your feet, is not on a leash? ("It's the LAW!") On 5/24/2010 10:04 AM, Dan'l Danehy-Oakes wrote:

Discipline, voluntarily enforced, is a Good Thing.

_______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 10:15 AM, James Wynn wrote: But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops.

On 5/24/2010 10:15 AM, James Wynn wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops.

Ranjit-appointed cops would be ideal, avoiding numerous of the pathologies you mention. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 11:26 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote: If you don't want a thread to continue, don't follow it up. It is the only way.

On 5/24/2010 11:29 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote: It is a contradiction in terms.

You can't have it both ways.

On 5/24/2010 11:39 AM, Jeff Wilson wrote: On 5/24/2010 10:15 AM, James Wynn wrote:

But then we have to endure threads on the rules of good subject lines. I think it is better to keep the list in line by modeling good behavior rather having self-appointed cops.

Ranjit-appointed cops would be ideal, avoiding numerous of the pathologies you mention.

On 5/24/2010 11:29 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote:

It is a contradiction in terms.

..

You can't have it both ways.

Apparently you think you can, condemning voluntary enforcement while maintaining actual existence of the supernatural. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 11:39 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote: Oh cool! Now we're going to have cops!

On 5/24/2010 11:39 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote:

Oh cool! Now we're going to have cops!

Not the state force monopoly kind, more like the proprietory syndicalist kind. -- Jeff Wilson - jwilson at io.com IEEE Student Chapter Blog at < http://ieeetamut.org > _______________________________________________

On 5/24/2010 11:49 AM, brunians at brunians.org wrote: I can't make sense of this remark either. As I have stated, I don't believe in anything supernatural. Everything that is is natural. Some bits of nature are not well known or poorly documented, or people don't believe the documentation anymore. Also, I fail to see how condemning or approving of the mind-crackling concept of voluntary enforcement has anything to do with maintaining actual existence of the supernatural, and wish you would explain exactly what you mean by that. It seems to me that there is something missing from your second sentence. Perhaps 'belief in' after 'maintaining'? If not, I really don't know what to make of it.