[debate] debate guidelines -- first batch

[Peter Jukes]

I think I disengaged a bit when I saw that 'guidelines' were being
promulgated, because I thought this was an informal debate, and so any
unexamined error could be brought to the table, and disposed of in real
time. That said, the reference to coherentism was fascinating, even if the
word itself sounds synthetic (and not in the good way).

That said, I think the other topics mooted are slightly more personally
engaging than the technical (*how *to legalise or tax spam) or the
completely speculative (*why *not burn witches again). Call me melodramatic
- and I am a fiction and drama writer - but something which engages the
passions a bit more might elicit more response.

Of course, you may get more heat than light as a response... but come to
think of it, they're both forms of radiation, so what the hell.

Best

Peter Jukes

On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Gadi Evron <ge at linuxbox.org> wrote:

> Alan Light wrote:
>
>> Well, it has been kind of quiet since the suggested guidelines were
>> published.
>>
>
> I based them on my mistakes.
>
>        Gadi.
>
>
>   I feel like I have been largely responsible for these suggested
>> guidelines, as I know I can get off-focus and a bit pedantic at times.  I
>> also tend to forget that not everyone is a native English speaker - though
>> in fairness, everyone posting here is writing well enough that it is not
>> obvious.
>>  I should note that the way my brain works and processes information is
>> based more on a coherentist model than foundationalist.  I know most of
>> y'all haven't studied epistemology (the study of how we know what we know),
>> so here's a link:
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherentism
>>  This is not exactly the norm, and while it does have some advantages, the
>> chief disadvantage is that it can seem quite perplexing to someone who
>> thinks in a more linear manner.
>>  So, even when I stay in focus it often seems out of focus to others.
>>  This is also one reason why I prefer informal debates to formal ones -
>> formal debates seem far too restrictive to me.  They often preclude the
>> introduction of points and data that seem important to me.
>>  That said, I will try to keep my mind from wandering so much in future
>> debates.  I hope I haven't killed this group.
>>    Alan Light
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> debate mailing list
>> debate at whitestar.linuxbox.org
>> http://whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>>
>
>
> --
> Gadi Evron,
> ge at linuxbox.org.
>
> Blog: http://gevron.livejournal.com/
> Security blog: http://gadievron.blogspot.com/
> _______________________________________________
> debate mailing list
> debate at whitestar.linuxbox.org
> http://whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/debate
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://whitestar.linuxbox.org/pipermail/debate/attachments/20090508/5a23668b/attachment-0001.htm>