A short foray into the nature of public forums

From: htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)

Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000

David desJardins:

>It seems to me that the essence of a public forum is that one's comments
>are directed to a whole public audience, not to a single private
>individual.  I think a debate is a good analogy.
...
>Of course, some people might not like debates, and may prefer a less
>adversarial discussion aimed at finding shared points of agreement.

And if a certain speaker in a public forum expresses, from the outset,
that the purpose of a specific discussion is to find shared points of
agreement - a consensus - then how can you defend adopting an
intransigent, adversarial posture?

By doing so, not only do you show a lack of respect for the speaker, but
you undermine the value of the forum itself - people become *scared* to
raise their voices, lest they be swooped apon by a predatory debater who's
sole purpose, it seems, is to make them look bad by discrediting
everything they say?  These people don't come back.  Their voices are
heard in more "civilised" forums, like mailing lists, criticising news for
it's "high noise ratio".  And you think this is a good thing???

Your opinion seems to be that this is a debating forum.  In the absence of
official documentation (ie. a charter) supporting this view, it is obvious
that you have made an assumption.  That assumption may or may not be
correct.  In the interests of this newsgroup, and UseNet as a whole, may I
politely request that since this particular forum may or may not be a
debating forum, that if a speaker specifically requests that a certain
issue be discussed *with a view towards reaching a consensus* that you
either refrain from participating, or participate without adopting an
intransigent, adversarial posture?

Henry.

References

Re: The nature of the beast
Andrei Jirnyi <jonn@i-connect.ru>
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Andrei Jirnyi <jonn@i-connect.ru>
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000

Referenced By

Re: The nature of the beast
Andrei Jirnyi <jonn@i-connect.ru>
Wed, 17 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Andrei Jirnyi <jonn@i-connect.ru>
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Thu, 18 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
htp@dove.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
David desJardins <desj@math.berkeley.edu>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000
Re: The nature of the beast
Carol Mulholland <Carol@flagship-uk.demon.co.uk>
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 00:00:00 +0000