-- [ From: Kepler * EMC.Ver #2.5.02 ] --
 
> I question whether
> quality can exist when the discussion is circumscribed by by many posters,
who
> exemplify a resistance to certain discussions and or people, whether that
be
> new people or new topics.
 
Discussion should not be officially,  methodically circumscribed.  However,
we will reserve forever the personal right to *ask* sophomores to refrain
from discussing, each autumn, whose pep band is better.
 
 
>An example of this resistance is the post of late
> that typifies list intolerance by use of a delete button.
 
Hmm, well, that'd be my post, and -- no surprise -- I do not agree with this
reasoning or characterization (though of course I would defend the poster's
right to voice it, yadda, yadda...).  I'd like to demonstrate what I think
is a plausible analogy.  It's fun, but I don't mind if people want to delete
this post now.  No college hockey content until the p.s.
 
If you go to a restaurant a few times and everything they serve is poor fare
, you stop going there.  Is this being intolerant of the restaurant?  Can
anyone blame you?
 
Intolerance would be demanding that the restaurant be shut down, thus
denying others their opportunity to make their own choices.  BUT --
recognizing that it has a right to be open, yet giving up on it and
preferring instead the fare at good restaurants, is anyone's valid choice.
Probably sensible as well: dining is supposed to be fun; it is just not that
big a deal.
 
Now, *discussion* is a case in which there is no punitive consequence -- i.e
., the speaker's restaurant can never go out of business, no matter how
awful it is.   The feedback mechanism ordinarily associated with discussion
is that people eventually ignore the speaker, in embarassment for them,
disgust, boredom...
 
That is entirely appropriate behavior, and in many cases quite effective.  A
few speakers still do not get it, but that's a great punchline of human
relations: fools do not often see their own foolishness.
 
-- Greg
 
OK, now for real hockey stuff.
 
p.s.: Good luck Joe, in Must Win, Part 2 of 2.  You don't have to make us
proud -- we're already prouder than heck of the NHL playoff goal scoring co-
leader and GWG leader.  But please give us meaningful hockey for two more
weeks!
 
 
 
 
 
--
 
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
*  Greg Berge
*  Portland, Oregon
*  [log in to unmask]
*  www.spiritone.com/~kepler
*
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.