jeffrey@algor2.algorists.com (Jeffrey Kegler) (09/06/89)
As a point of netiquette, everyone should bear in mind that given some sort of personal attack, or an attack on a business, the attacked party will almost inevitably reply, and the result will not be good for the sound to noise ratio. Also, we do want to encourage "movers and shakers" to participate on the net, and if they get the idea they are subjecting themselves to broadly and loosely worded attacks on their business (or personal) reputation in front of an influential audience, they will decide silence is the best policy. There are two ways of joining a debate. Method A: "When you published X in your magazine, it raised great questions in my mind about its policies and general quality." Method B: "Article X is typical of why your magazine is a rag." I do not question the right of someone to start this debate, but using Method A makes life easier for all of us. As a second point of netiquette, if you want to raise a point in a newsgroup with someone influential you have seen posting to an group inappropriate to the point, do the following. First, Email him the posting, letting him know to what group(s) you will be posting. Second, post to the promised and appropriate groups, noting in the posting that a copy has been Emailed to that party. You might also consider using Email and awaiting that person's reply, in case he has a ready, satisfactory answer, or your point might not be of that great general interest. This will almost always be the right thing to do first. -- Jeffrey Kegler, Independent UNIX Consultant, Algorists, Inc. jeffrey@algor2.ALGORISTS.COM or uunet!algor2!jeffrey 1762 Wainwright DR, Reston VA 22090
tneff@bfmny0.UUCP (Tom Neff) (09/06/89)
Any editor who reads Usenet and gets offended ought to switch jobs.
Remember these guys have to read SUBSCRIBER MAIL next to which this
is a ladies' tea party.
There are indeed rules of netiquette, but none of them are of the
form "Phrase your posting like so: ..."
--
Annex Canada now! We need the room, \) Tom Neff
and who's going to stop us. (\ tneff@bfmny0.UU.NETjeffrey@algor2.algorists.com (Jeffrey Kegler) (09/07/89)
In article <14632@bfmny0.UUCP> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: >Any editor who reads Usenet and gets offended ought to switch jobs. >Remember these guys have to read SUBSCRIBER MAIL next to which this >is a ladies' tea party. The difference is Usenet is a broadcast medium. An editor can control, with subscriber mail, what sees the light of day and what does not. I can write the nastiest letter (or send the nastiest Email) to an editor and he can throw it away (or delete it), respectively. A mild attack made publicly is much stronger than a full-bore flame made privately. -- Jeffrey Kegler, Independent UNIX Consultant, Algorists, Inc. jeffrey@algor2.ALGORISTS.COM or uunet!algor2!jeffrey 1762 Wainwright DR, Reston VA 22090
dan@oresoft.uu.net (Daniel Elbaum) (09/07/89)
In article <1989Sep6.015314.16485@algor2.algorists.com> jeffrey@algor2.algorists.com (Jeffrey Kegler) writes:
:As a point of netiquette, everyone should bear in mind that given some
:sort of personal attack, or an attack on a business, the attacked
:party will almost inevitably reply, and the result will not be good
:for the sound to noise ratio...
:
:There are two ways of joining a debate.
:
:Method A: "When you published X in your magazine, it raised great
:questions in my mind about its policies and general quality."
:
:Method B: "Article X is typical of why your magazine is a rag."
:
:I do not question the right of someone to start this debate, but using
:Method A makes life easier for all of us.
These two methods differ only in that B uses metaphor and A uses
lots of extra syllables. They are both attacks which characterize
the target according to the author's impressions. Such attacks provoke
responses in kind, initiating heated exchanges of opinion without
bringing light to bear on the subject matter.
If you have a beef with a statement contained in article X, or
with the style in which X was written, or with a percieved bias
behind statements in X, address those points directly without
bringing in such noisy and noise-generating waste as your opinion
of the magazine.
If you have a beef with the magazine, then talk about that,
keeping your scope limited to those aspects of the magazine which
strike you as wrong. Criticize the magazine if you want to improve
it; otherwise, express yourself in alt.flame.
:You might also consider using Email and awaiting that person's reply,
:in case he has a ready, satisfactory answer, or your point might not
:be of that great general interest. This will almost always be the
:right thing to do first.
Hear, hear.
:--
:Jeffrey Kegler, Independent UNIX Consultant, Algorists, Inc.
:jeffrey@algor2.ALGORISTS.COM or uunet!algor2!jeffrey
:1762 Wainwright DR, Reston VA 22090
--
Spa link snot the temper tent, a few cannery doubt lowed.
({uunet,tektronix,reed,sun!nosun,osu-cis,psu-cs}!oresoft!(dan)@oresoft.uu.net)sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (09/08/89)
In article <14632@bfmny0.UUCP> tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff) writes: >There are indeed rules of netiquette, but none of them are of the >form "Phrase your posting like so: ..." I think he was just trying to say to "keep it civil". If you yell at somone, you will get yelled back at. You can phrase your postings anyway you like, but if it's a flame, expect a flame in return. We all get carried away at times, but I think his suggestion is a good one. Follow the Golden Rule. What goes around comes around. And all those other old but true cliches. -- John Sparks | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks | D.I.S.K. 24hrs 1200bps ||||||||||||||| sparks@corpane.UUCP | 502/968-5401 thru -5406 You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.