Searching \ for '[OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway b' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=politics+shouldnt
Search entire site for: 'politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway b'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway b'
2008\07\29@103433 by Martin

face
flavicon
face
Politics is still not allowed on the PIC list. For all the normal
reasons, i.e.:
1. the list is global
2. politics usually end up being right v. left in the US
3. people end up personally attacking each other
4. godwin's law gets cited
5. someone usually gets kicked off the list or leaves
6. nothing is accomplished.

To no one person, but one small group, please stop talking about
governmental theory, politics, etc, on the PIC list. I find it offensive
to want to read about CFLs and see topics about guns, libertarians,
liberals, taxes, race, immigration, etc. If I wanted that I would watch
a 24 hour 'news' station.

AT THE VERY LEAST you could change the subject to:
"[OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway but I have no restraint"

-
Martin ("citizen's moderator")

2008\07\29@124353 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
I would also include belief in magic and other things similar.  

The thing about such topics as these is that they aren't normal discussions.  Nobody wins and no one convinces the other they are right.  If I say I believe in leprechauns how can you argue with that? Like red vs. blue, you are either with me or against me.

These fights aren't fun and they get bloody quick.


{Original Message removed}

2008\07\29@130735 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:33:56 -0400, "Martin" <spam_OUTmartinTakeThisOuTspamnnytech.net> said:
> Politics is still not allowed on the PIC list. For all the normal
> reasons...

Hi Martin,

I am certainly guilty of both hating to see political discourse and also
contributing to its escalation. It's hard to be a perfect person even
when one is an official moderator :)

Cheerful regards,

Bob

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - A no graphics, no pop-ups email service

2008\07\29@132020 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
Sorry, that was another list where people were behaving badly on this topic.  PicList currently just has the politics thing going.

-----Original Message-----
From: .....piclist-bouncesKILLspamspam@spam@mit.edu [piclist-bouncesspamKILLspammit.edu] On Behalf Of Lindy Mayfield
Sent: 29. heinäkuuta 2008 19:42
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
Subject: RE: [OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway but I havenorestraint

I would also include belief in magic and other things similar.  

2008\07\29@150604 by Tony Smith

flavicon
face
Were spells being cast?

Tony


{Quote hidden}

2008\07\29@151325 by Martin

face
flavicon
face
Bob Blick wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:33:56 -0400, "Martin" <martinspamspam_OUTnnytech.net> said:
>  
>> Politics is still not allowed on the PIC list. For all the normal
>> reasons...
>>    
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> I am certainly guilty of both hating to see political discourse and also
> contributing to its escalation. It's hard to be a perfect person even
> when one is an official moderator :)
>
> Cheerful regards,
>
> Bob
>
>  

I didn't say "Bob, stop!" because we all get drawn into it, I'm
certainly guilty on more than one count.
No hard feelings.
-
Martin

2008\07\30@200034 by Rich

picon face
I like the expression "a man convinced against his will is of the same
opinion still."  I agree that people are rarely persuaded to believe any
political idea that may be contrary to what they learned in school, or in
church, or in their family, or where they trusted the authority from which
the opinion was formed.  People are more likely to believe a fantastic lie
or absurdity than some political opinion they do not hold.  The opinion that
man never went to the moon is an example of what you say, Lindy.  There are
people who are convinced that it was a staged performance on earth (a lie)
and others are convinced that such a position is absurd.  I personally do
not believe that George Bush had the Twin Towers strategically rigged with
explosives.  I believe that the idea is one of those huge lies that some
people seize upon and propagate.  But someone will argue that their
interpretation of the physics is proof enough.  I often debate with some in
our club but no one is offended at someone else's ideas.  That is not
universally true, however.  Another saying I like is "don't confuse me with
the facts, my mind is made up."  There is a certain posture that gives
credence to these sayings.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Lindy Mayfield" <@spam@lindy.mayfieldKILLspamspamssf.sas.com>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <KILLspampiclistKILLspamspammit.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 12:42 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway but I
havenorestraint


I would also include belief in magic and other things similar.

The thing about such topics as these is that they aren't normal discussions.
Nobody wins and no one convinces the other they are right.  If I say I
believe in leprechauns how can you argue with that? Like red vs. blue, you
are either with me or against me.

These fights aren't fun and they get bloody quick.


{Original Message removed}

2008\07\31@080419 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Rich wrote:

> Lindy Mayfield wrote:
>> The thing about such topics as these is that they aren't normal
>> discussions. Nobody wins and no one convinces the other they are right.
>>  If I say I believe in leprechauns how can you argue with that? Like
>> red vs. blue, you are either with me or against me.

> I like the expression "a man convinced against his will is of the same
> opinion still."  I agree that people are rarely persuaded to believe any
> political idea that may be contrary to what they learned in school, or
> in church, or in their family, or where they trusted the authority from
> which the opinion was formed.  

I don't know how you guys form your opinion, but in my opinion process the
input from others (in many forms) has a big part. I also tend to change
opinions as I gather more input (which I haven't yet stopped to do).
Opinions about "politics" are no different. I find it rather sad that this
is often seen as such a "no no" area, and probably this is both a
reflection and a cause of some parts of the sad state our political affairs
are in.

> > These fights aren't fun and they get bloody quick.

I also tend to associate with "politics" less the dirty games most people
seem to associate, and more something like meaning 1 from the Wiktionary:
"The practice of responding to conflict with dialogue", maybe more in the
sense of not only responding to it but resolving it with dialog. You may be
right that talking about conflicting issues where few hard facts can be had
is difficult, but I think it's necessary, and just because this is not
always easy is no reason for me to avoid them.

(FWIW, this is not a plug to open the piclist for political discussions,
just some comments to the issue in general :)

Gerhard

2008\07\31@084831 by Lindy Mayfield

flavicon
face
I kind of disagree with you a bit, Gerhard.  Of course, I don't disagree with you personally, because you are stating that you are able to have conversations and discussions with an open mind.

But I can say for myself that there are certain topics about which I can be quite certain I won't change opinions.

_This_ conversation about conversations is IMO interesting and informative.  I certainly can say, oh yeah, didn't think of that point that way.  For me also political discussions can be discussions which help to shape my opinions.  Frankly, I like to listen to both extreme sides of the debates.  I tend to find myself somewhere slightly to the right or left of the middle.

Maybe it is when politics are part of a belief system that the discussions get nasty?

And I admit that I don't have a very open mind about some topics.  Things like magic spells, astrology, talking plants and flying horses I don't have much use for.  I would be willing to discuss such things if they are exposed to the scientific method and written up in scholarly scientific journals subject to peer review.  Now that, my friend, would yield some great discussions that I could learn a lot from.

Lindy  

{Original Message removed}

2008\07\31@214417 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Lindy Mayfield wrote:

> I kind of disagree with you a bit, Gerhard.  

That's ok, that's even good -- or else the conversation would probably not
happen :)

> But I can say for myself that there are certain topics about which I can
> be quite certain I won't change opinions.

I have some kind of religion of my own. It's a patchwork of "stuff" that I
picked up along the way, and one patch says: "you (that is, me) never
know." So while there are things I have a pretty strong opinion about, and
I can be downright nasty defending it, I'm never quite certain whether I
won't change this opinion at some point. There's just so much around that I
haven't even heard about. (The patchwork loses patches and gets new ones
all the time -- that's the fun part about having your own DIY religion :)

> Maybe it is when politics are part of a belief system that the
> discussions get nasty?

Probably. Another cause seems to be when both sides think they can't learn
from the other :)

> And I admit that I don't have a very open mind about some topics. Things
> like magic spells, astrology, talking plants and flying horses I don't
> have much use for.  I would be willing to discuss such things if they
> are exposed to the scientific method and written up in scholarly
> scientific journals subject to peer review.  Now that, my friend, would
> yield some great discussions that I could learn a lot from.

As Russell already wrote, science is fine for many things, but it's fine
for those things because it limits itself in a very defined way. Science is
about averages, about large numbers and commonalities. We live /one/ life,
not an average of many lives, so the scientific method has clear limits of
applicability for many of the decisions we have to make. And that's not a
limit as, say, with quantum physics, where we can be reasonably sure that
some point down the line somebody will know more -- this is a systemic
limit.

Another limit is about measurability. You can't measure it, you can't make
science about it. Science is limited to the measurable part of reality. But
there is so much that's really important to me that is not measurable;
actually, the most important things are not measurable. Stuff like
happiness (is "how to be happy" a scientifically answerable question?),
health (there is some science to it, but most of the science spent on
health issues is spent on how to make money with lack of health of other
people, not how to be healthy, and in the end, each body is different for
the other, so there will always be issues not answered by science),
"success" (whatever that is for everybody) -- that's all just plain outside
science.

So what's the problem if for example talking to a tree helps some people
make better decisions? And what's the problem if that is "only" that they
have a better feeling about their decisions? Who could tell the difference
anyway? This is not scientific, and exposing this to the scientific method
would not yield any results; it is outside of the (self-imposed, systemic)
limits of science. It's about one life, about singular decisions that have
no precedent and no repetition. No science even possible.

(I agree with you in that there are many cases where people try to give
scientific explanations for things that seem very obviously bogus. I mostly
try to just ignore that, and try to get the information behind the bogus.
Not always possible, not always easy where possible, and possibly sometimes
there isn't very much behind the bogus -- but the "try to ignore" part
helps here, too :)

Gerhard


'[OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway b'
2008\08\01@122607 by Rich
picon face
I always enjoy your perspectives, Gerhard :-)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerhard Fiedler" <RemoveMElistsTakeThisOuTspamconnectionbrazil.com>
To: <spamBeGonepiclistspamBeGonespammit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [OT] politics - I shouldn't be posting it anyway but
Ihavenorestraint


{Quote hidden}

> --

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2008 , 2009 only
- Today
- New search...