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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (9733)	3/26/2001 11:10:52 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

. Your normal carefully reasoned approach to issues disappears when this topic area comes up. You and I have historically argued on the same side of issues. The best I can tell, that's because we have not chosen to engage each other in those areas where we disagree. We just stumbled into this debate due to a fluky set of conditions. A nexus between public disclosure of meetings and seat belt laws is unlikely. But here we are. When seat belt laws came on the horizon, there were only lap belts. Lab belts worked fine for me and I always used them. Yet from the beginning I thought that it was inappropriate for the government to force adults to use them. I recall that brief period when they attempted to require that the seat belt be buckled for the car to start. I was very opposed to that. And since I've run into the problem with shoulder harnesses, I discover that there's an equal protection issue on top of my original concern about the government overstepping. The emotional reaction I had to being dismissed by fellow posters was, I think, a distraction that confused the issue because I got me concurrently arguing on several different fronts under the umbrella of the seat belt issue. My personal interest in this may have affected the tone of my arguments, as did my hurt feelings, but neither affects my bottom line. What you're seeing as a departure from my "normal carefully reasoned approach" is merely the rightie in me, which is not apparent in most of the issues we discuss, coupled with the unusual display of emotion. I'm sure that my display of both emotion and rightie at the same time was startling, but they're different things. I also recognize that that wouldn't be readily apparent to anyone but me. Karen

To: epicure who wrote (9733)	3/26/2001 12:48:44 PM
From: cosmicforce	Respond to of 82486

This is a lot like the decision to terminate life support. As a matter of personal policy, I say "spend whatever you have to in order to save my child's life." I can see why the greater society, with limited resources and time, would be unwilling to categorically be will to let me make the decision about when "enough is enough". That doesn't mean I do or will like it, even if I understand it. I went through a school system that was designed for an "average student". The problem is that there is no such thing as an average student: it is an artifact of a modelling process and you can't go out and locate a physical "average student". Medians always exist (or can be closely approximated in even numbered populations). My personal experience with public schools (I'm quite critical of them for my personal experience) doesn't mean that they aren't performing their mission reasonably well for the vast majority. I do think that for students on the lower and upper end of the distribution curves, they are not as good as they are for the middle. Kids at either end of the distribution curve frequently have other liabilities (such as social ones) that may limit their performance and academic success. These kinds of disruptive attributes (from the physical condition that puts them in the "tails") don't necessarily get the positive attention they should. I don't see how institutions can ever achieve 100% satisfaction using a uniform set of rules and approaches. This is an area that best falls into optimal design theory. As an engineer, I'm intimately involved in the issues that cause such trade-offs. Perhaps this makes me more tolerant of them in theory and practice (until I'm affected!)