SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Lane3 who wrote (22223)8/15/2001 11:07:39 PM
From: The Philosopher  Read Replies (1) of 82486
 
Is anything here necessary? I doubt you could point to a single post in the last 10,000 that is truly necessary.

But your point is fair in the context in which I think you meant it.

I'm not sure what would constitute necessary in the context of discussions here. I saw people attacked in ways I thought unfair, and came to their defense. Was that necessary? On one level, no. But I have an instinctive, almost visceral, response to come to the defense of people under attack. And equally, I have a gut level negative response to hypocrisy. So when I feel I see the two coming together, I suppose I act like a shark smelling blood in the water. Time to go on the attack.

Necessary? Well, I could sign off SI and seethe in private (except that inevitably I would take some of my frustrated resentment out on my wife and kids and dog.) But that wasn't the choice I made.

And, of course, the same question should be asked of Poet, and E, and X, and all the others involved in this little contretemps (or, in E's case, in the aftermath). Were all their posts necessary? I wonder what their responses will be. Poet and E will probably read this and can decide whether to answer or not. You'll have to pose the question to X yourself if you think it's a reasonable question, since she has me on ignore, so won't read this.

Which raises an interesting point: if you have somebody on ignore, and therefore your only understanding of what they have said is based on what other people have said to other people about what they have said, is it necessary or even appropriate to respond to that obliquely but plainly in your posts to other people you know the ignored person will read? Or do you have an obligation, if you're going to address yourself to what other people say, at least to read what they actually say, not what other people say about what they say? Is there a question of intellectual honesty or integrity here? For myself, of the two people I have on ignore, I am quite careful not to refer in any way to what people say about what they post. That's my comfort level. Others feel differently, apparently.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext