rws@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (r.w.stubblefield) (01/23/90)
Thanks
This is to thank people for giving me feedback about what is
appropriate material for SPT and how to establish SPO. The
responses have (by and large) lived up to what they should be if
Aristotle was right when he gave "man is the rational animal" as
the best definition for distinguishing man from beast. My "faith in
mankind" has been restored; I am now convinced that a patient campaign
by a few rational people will allow creation of newsgroup where a much
larger group of rational people can discuss philosophic principles
and their applications from the perspective of Objectivism.
Patience, Please
Until sci.philosophy.objectivism is established I request patience from
the rational people who still disagree with me as to the appropriateness
of my postings for SPT. I hope you can hit your "n" key twice a
week for a few more weeks if you have not already automatically
killed my articles.
By the way, although I don't doubt that complainers
would have been the majority when this group was founded, my mail
indicates they don't represent the current constituency. An
interesting fact is that even among the minority who told me my
postings were inappropriate, the reasons vary and many even conflict.
The most common complaint was that my stuff doesn't fit in the original
charter. One person even told me that another who had made this same
complaint to me frequently posted inappropriate material. I suspect
that the intersection of postings considered appropriate by the people
who complained about me would be the null set.
Support, Please
I am not yet ready to call for discussion of SPO. I believe that
the fundamental reason we are in the awkward position now of having
sizable groups of rational people bothered by each others' actions
is the lack of a method for establishing and maintaining a group of
people who share an interest in a specifically defined topic. I
think a major problem is to have that interest defined in terms of
essentials. I am trying to do that now for SPO by drawing up a
short form and a long form of a charter. The intent would be to
have the short form in Gene Spafford's list and to publish both the
short and the long form monthly. I also have some other ideas that
I will discuss in news.groups about how to get moderated-like quality
in a non-moderated group. If these ideas work at all for a group
that draws as many kooks to its banner as Objectivism does, some
other groups may want to try them.
Finally, for those of you who have not already pledged your support
of SPO, I ask for you to make life pleasanter for all of us by
voting for SPO in a few weeks.
[I have tried to direct followup to news.groups.]
--
Bob Stubblefield att!houxa!bobs 201-949-2846
r.w.stubblefield@ATT.COMpeter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) (01/23/90)
What is this. More competing votes?
Stubblefield for sci.philosophy.objectivism
Wells for talk.philosophy.objectivism
Couldn't you guys at least compromise on "soc" (which is perhaps more
appropriate than either)?
--
_--_|\ Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. <peter@ficc.uu.net>.
/ \
\_.--._/ Xenix Support -- it's not just a job, it's an adventure!
v "Have you hugged your wolf today?" `-_-'