Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Rambi who wrote (86285)	8/24/2000 6:48:46 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

It seems to me that distinctions are in order. First, there are the sort of third party posts where the individual is not currently present. These are distinguished as those where the person is not expected to see the post, and those where the person is expected to see the post. Further, there are the sort of references that are obscure, and likely only to be recognized by a couple of people, and those that are explicit. It seems to me that when one does not expect the person to see the post, and the reference is obscure, it is permissible, just as when we allude to others jokingly in ordinary conversation. When it is explicit, it is also permissible, but should be a bit more discrete in terms of severity of insult. In the case of expecting the person will read it, if it is obscure, it should be restrained, but is fair. In the case of being explicit, well, I would say that its fairness depends on the general tenor of the other persons remarks. If that person is commonly abusive, a slighting reference is no great matter. If the person is more restrained, more discretion should be exercised. Of course, in all cases the question of "fair comment" may arise. Then there is the case of indirect commentary right under their noses. I would say that if the commentary plays as an aside of the sort one might have in a group of people, it is fair enough, but if it is like being loudly insulting in a separate group, it is rude. Of course, how explicit it is weighs in, as does how abusive the person in question commonly is. Now, there is the question of ganging up. It seems to me that how many people comment, directly or indirectly, is not the question, but whether or not it is an aggressive attack. Criticism is not, by itself, aggression. Severity of tone, degree of insult, energy of attack, are all factors in assessing aggression. But, again, provocation cannot be wholly ignored in assessing blame, and opinions on that are often varied. Finally, there is the question of running it into the ground, which, frankly, I think is mainly an issue of tiresomeness for the other thread participants, and should be avoided. Generally, a brief exchange should suffice, and then one should move on to topics that are more generally interesting...........