kfl%mx.lcs.mit.edu@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU (09/23/86)
From: Willie Lim <WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU>
... I sincerely doubt your objectivity in this case, given your
libertarian leaning.
Only those who reject libertarianism and objectivism can be
objective? Who is your objective man? Someone with no opinions?
A blank mind?
Messages are stored in all sites that are on the mailing list.
Only until people read and delete them. I have several YEARS of
messages stored on my PC. Over 30 megabytes, which is more than the
total volume of POLI-SCI since day one.
... I won't even bother to discuss your precious time wasted on
all this flaming, as you (like everybody else) do this on your
time and on your own accord.
I think you are losing track of what we are debating. My contention
is that people on this list including me have an incentive to keep
messages short.
It is interesting that you now contest the LENGTH of my
messages, rather than their CONTENT! I assume you wouldn't
bother to do the former if you wee able to do the latter.
A rather presumptuous statement! I find the content of most of
your messages not worth their lengths. Some of them make sense
but a lot of them don't.
Once again, you criticize length rather than content.
When you can't argue against a point, instead of sounding a
graceful retreat, you tend to wimp out by making some silly
assumptions to make the problems go away or by digressing.
Examples please?
... There are some shorter messages by libertarians that make more
sense than yours.
Good. I would hate to think I am the only, or the best, voice for
freedom.
If someone who is politically neutral were to use these arguments
in parties and other social functions, he/she would sound more
like a reasonable and intelligent individual ...
If he were to use these arguments he would not be politically
neutral. Why do you assume neutrality is a virtue?
...Keith
-------WLIM@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU (10/01/86)
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL%MX.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU> Only those who reject libertarianism and objectivism can be objective? Who is your objective man? Someone with no opinions? A blank mind? You are way off track on this one. You have, perhaps by design, left out the context in which the question of objectivity was raised. I said: "I sincerely doubt your objectivity in this case, given your libertarian leaning." By "this case" I was referring to your judgement that the verbose replies of a moderator make sense. It is important to note that you and that moderator are rather vocal advocates of libertarianism. What may be sense to you may actually be nonsense to others. To accept your judgement in this case (I repeat, in this case) as being objective would be the same as that of accepting the judgement of a zealous commie as being objective when he/she is expounding the sensibilities of communism. Given this then, to answer your questions would be to fall into your rather common lapses of digression. Only until people read and delete them. I have several YEARS of messages stored on my PC. Over 30 megabytes, which is more than the total volume of POLI-SCI since day one. Not every body deletes them. If one person in every site keeps a copy you still have the same problem. Furthermore many sites have BBOARD directories for temporarily holding messages for the various mailing lists. On one MIT site, that directory has an allocation of 10 Mbytes with 5 Mbytes being actually used. Many legitimate users on that site have directory space of less than 2 Mbytes. So the mailing lists are hogging the space of the equivalent of 5 users. Frequent reaping (usually weekly or monthly) of the directory does not change the allocation. This must be reflected in the price of the service. So must the cost of archiving. One would also want the rate to reflect market conditions e.g. the presence of alternative mailing services like overnight express, telegrams, telex, etc. I think you are losing track of what we are debating. My contention is that people on this list including me have an incentive to keep messages short. No, I have not but you have. The incentive would be more realistic if there is a charge for using the service. Furthermore the threshold used in determining when the message is long enough varies from individual to individual. In the case of a "free" service that threshold does not reflect the cost of using the service at all. Once again, you criticize length rather than content. No, I am saying that there is very little content in some of them despite their verbosity. Examples please? See the first (and last) paragraph for starters. Others: 1) Duels. You assumed that it is not a problem. You said nothing about why it can't be a problem in *ANY* libertarian society. 2) Nations in transitions (Haiti, the Philippines, South Africa, Grenada). You gave reasons for why they can't become libertarian. You did not mention what the prerequisites are for a libertarian society. Neither did you discuss whether the government has a role in transforming a pre-libertarian society to a libertarian society. It it does, how? If not, how? 3) Society of nations. You wimped out. I was expecting you to use nations for discussing issues like the polluting neighbor, coercion between supposedly friendly nations, settling of issues without explicit laws and regulations, agreements for mutual benefit (e.g. trade partnerships), etc. 4) Presidential Plan. Again you wimped out. You did not say how the government is made accountable in a libertarian society, i.e. how and why it works. I would hate to think I am the only, or the best, voice for freedom. I sense a tinge of evangelical arrogance here. Libertarians don't own the voice for freedom. If he were to use these arguments he would not be politically neutral. No he/she could be trying to understand the good and bad points of the political doctrine being espoused by a sensible libertarian. Or he/she could be trying to have a bona fide discussion on the doctrine and is genuinely interested in listening to all rational points of view before making up his/her own mind. Why do you assume neutrality is a virtue? Digression. Willie ------- -------