R. Michael Litchfield litch at
Mon Jul 24 16:18:44 PDT 1995

><litch at (R. Michael Litchfield)>
>>I hardly consider the discussion here to be "lambasting" (have none of you
>>people ever been on the net at large?, it is a much less friendly world out
>>there than some of you seem to expect).
>Surprisingly enough, yes I *have* been on the net at large.  In my 
>experience, granted it's not likely to have been as *extensive* as yours, 
>if you present yourself as a rational human being interested in legitimate
>discussion, then you will generally be treated as such and discussion will 
>ensue.  OTOH, if you present youself as an excrement spewing, ego-serving
>cretin, you are more likely to be treated as the vermin you are, and little
>more than flaming will follow.
>>What I have seen is calm discussion of some of the problems concerning the 
>>blackstar. Problems cannot be corrected until they are identified, public 
>>discussion cannot in anyway hinder identifying a problem or determining a 
>>solution, on the contrary they can only help.
>I can not agree more that public discussion is the only way to solve a
>problem.  OTOH, I hadn't noticed anything more interesting than a bitch
>session with your name in the header, indicating I needn't waste my time
>reading it.  Since I know I can't be the only person who weeds your messages
>depending on which Litch is posting today (the sane and rational one, or the
>obnoxious toad) I can't see how that helps to serve "discussion" since
>what ever ideas of merit you might have had are lost in the void.
>> How is one to know if a problem you have percieved is an isolated...
>>People here are so damn afraid of allowing any public dissentsion to be
>>expressed, they want everyone to wander around with a glazed stepford wives
>>smile chanting "Everything is wonderful"...
>Excuse me?
>I have, just this morning, noticed an interesting discussion on the fact
>that Regional Kingdom Offices may have a problem with how they are handled.
>Over the past few weeks, there's been a clear current that the way we handle
>events needs to seriously be re-examined.  And while I won't ask for a show
>of hands regarding who's noticed it, I have not been as *kind* regarding the
>"heavy weapons" backbone of the SCA as I'm sure people think I should be.
>Those are just off the top of my head.
>*Clearly* not everything is "wonderful" here in the Magic Kingdom of
>Ansteorra, but just because we aren't swearing does not mean that we're
>locked into some "Stepford Wife" glaze.
>It seems obvious to me that you've spent far too much time lcoked into the
>Predator/Prey mentality of the Uselessnet and have forgotten how actual
>*adults* communicate.

Well, I've been crawling around on the 'net almost as long as it has existed
(I started in 1977) and my observations are that, in the Usenet at least,
the groups where hardcore flaming is most prevalent are those in which the
least actual communication takes place.  Besides, biological organisms are
supposed to evolve, so let's make a decision to hold up the Ansteorran List
as an example of what educated, responsible, intelligent people can do with
an electronic discussion milieu.  I certainly agree that the 'net as a whole
can be downright brutal and greatly offensive.  I believe just as strongly
that we don't have to sink to that level.

IMHO only; I'm obviously not Kibo....

                                 ] Tamquam Refert [


More information about the Ansteorra mailing list