Re: letter to Tim

Mattis Fishman (mattis@argos.argoscomp.com)
Fri, 06 Aug 1999 12:43:32 -0400 (EDT) 

    Dear Sonny,

    I have to say that your post concerning list etiquette was very
    level headed and that you show the wonderful quality of being able
    to judge people in a favorable light. I think, though, that you fell
    into some pitfalls inadvertantly, some are inherent to mailing lists,
    and others to your own generous nature.

    Getting a little out of order, your own ebulence and self confidence
    lead me to believe that you are undaunted by the prospect of airing
    perceived slights on line. There are certainly many people who are
    capable of, and happy to do this, and have done so. Yet you might admit
    the possibility that other types of personalities might not be so
    ready to enter into such "dicussions" (Mom: I'm not arguing, I'm just
    discussing!" - some grist for the Freudian mill, by the way).

    Even when someone has the temerity to address a "ridiculor" on-list,
    you might agree that some of us would find this type of intercourse to be
    less than pleasant reading. By definition, this is contentiousness,
    often bickering, and who is to say that it doesn't lead to a full
    scale "peckin' party" as old R. P. McM. would have called the fracass of
    flying insults, excuses and explanations.

    Then again, there are people at the other end of the spectrum who seem
    to thrive on confrontation. There are reasonably few on the list,
    perhaps you recall our JDS imposter of a year or so ago, yet a charter
    which sets a mailing list as a forum for personal discussion which you
    advocate, is conceivably condoning and even inviting such behavior.

    I might even contend (if I were contentious) that as it is, we have
    enough of this type of behavior in the cynical, and personal (I can't
    spell ad hominem) postings which prompted this whole discussion.
    The fact that they are usually in relatively calm tones and with a sense
    of humor helps to let us keep it relaxed, but obviously the intent to rib
    is there, and who is to say whether the humor fails, or if the recipient
    is being touchy.

    These arguments are intended to address only the meta-issue of whether
    the list is helped or hindered by discussing these personal matters in
    public. As far as who insulted whom, and who is too touchy, please leave
    me out.

    I do believe that Tim, even as the list owner, is not the one to bother
    about agressive behavior, since his task to monitor software, not
    people's opinions. I admit to mentioning my own negative perception
    of the tone of the list (but quite a few weeks ago, Sonny) as part of
    a semi-regular private correspondence, and only to explain why I was
    more driven to write private email, in those weeks, than to post.
    I write this only so that you need not be intrigued by any conspiracy
    of the oversensitive to police our members.

    I can almost hear Scotty saying here "so what is your point?" and
    the truth is that he would be right, which is one of the things that
    has helped me overlook all of the nonsense. So to sum up, I would say my
    point is that a group of varying types of personalities is bound to
    get into personality clashes, yet I do not think that they should
    in general become a topic of discussion. I would prefer if people
    would try to air their greivances privately and believe that a large
    percentage of the time this will lead to better mutual understanding.

    all the best and have a nice weekend,
    Mattis