be nice

paul wheaton wrote:
I just don't have time to delete as many posts as I have been deleting lately.  I'm going to have to start banning people just to free up more of my own time.

Seems to me the most logical route.

I'm not arguing against the "be nice" policy; it seems to have worked well here. You don't see the trite, derogatory back-and-forth that is so commonplace to Internet forums nowadays, and it makes for an environment much more conducive to productive dialogue.. BUT!

By ruling that no one participating in this forum may imply that any other individual here is less than perfect, you take away our powers to self-police the population. Polite, measured discourse is always the preferred route, but there are certain instances in which people simply need to be called on their bullshit; since doing so (particularly over the nameless, faceless Internet) can often produce undesirable results, namely the exact sort of bickering and digression from topic you're trying to avoid with the "be nice" policy, it makes sense that you, as the moderator, should end it simply and cleanly. Sorry for all the commas in that last sentence.

Bullshit is just as detrimental to the quality of dialogue as "being mean" is.

If somebody states "the sky is green", then one person can call that bullshit.  I would say that this statement does not leave room for other positions - especially mine.  So, therefore, that statement is not acceptable.

If somebody states "I think the sky is green" - that is perfectly acceptable.  It gives me room to state alternatives.  If a second somebody ....  somebody2 were to call that "bullshit" I would have a real problem with somebody2.

I think you should think the sky is green.    (kidding)

Any opinion carelessly stated as fact can close the door to others' positions.. doesn't have to be so outrageous as your example to warrant correction.

fiveandahalffarm wrote:
Any opinion carelessly stated as fact can close the door to others' positions.. doesn't have to be so outrageous as your example to warrant correction.

I think it takes a bit of practice to learn how to state opinions in terms of "I think" or "personally" or "in my opinion" when we've gotten used to stating our opinions as fact in other settings.  Trying to communicate on permies.com has been a huge learning experience for me coming from more, shall we say, "wild west" style messageboards    But one I appreciate a great deal.  I think it is making me a better, kinder person. 

I just feel the need to mention similar topics:

https://permies.com/permaculture-forums/1621_0/tinkering-with-this-site/please-use-first-name-a-space-and-last-name

https://permies.com/permaculture-forums/3885_0/tinkering-with-this-site/forum-directions-and-meaningless-drivel

https://permies.com/permaculture-forums/6016_0/tinkering-with-this-site/the-third-ethic

https://permies.com/permaculture-forums/6148_0/tinkering-with-this-site/but-but-but-but

"If somebody states "the sky is green", then one person can call that bullshit. "

1. Any reasonable person would and should of course point out that such a claim is simply false.

2. Pointing out such objectively verifiable falsehoods is what you jumped all over me for.. which makes this post confusing to say the least.

3. Very little is mere opinion (thankfully) and calling fact mere opinion harms and insults all of us of course.

Storm V Spooner wrote:
"If somebody states "the sky is green", then one person can call that bullshit. "

1. Any reasonable person would and should of course point out that such a claim is simply false.

Storm V Spooner wrote:
"If somebody states "the sky is green", then one person can call that bullshit. "

1. Any reasonable person would and should of course point out that such a claim is simply false.

2. Pointing out such objectively verifiable falsehoods is what you jumped all over me for.. which makes this post confusing to say the least.

3. Very little is mere opinion (thankfully) and calling fact mere opinion harms and insults all of us of course.

"To say that rainwater catchment isn't feasible on a large scale is patently false."

My incendiary, rude.. just-plain-mean remark that contributed in no small part to the conflagration we're still talking about (in code), as if it didn't just happen a few hours ago.. ostensibly to keep from referring to any one person directly at the risk of not "being nice" to them. It was deemed inappropriate at the time and deleted, though the guidelines outlined here do seem to contradict that judgement. Not trying to nit-pick - just a vote for consistency.

(edited for punctuation)

Virtually everything we talk about is opinion and should (in my opinion) be stated as such and not as "The Truth" (in capital letters). 

I don't believe humans are capable of observing the truth under most circumstances.  And those who claim to are to be distrusted, in my personal opinion.

fiveandahalffarm wrote:

"To say that rainwater catchment isn't feasible on a large scale is patently false."

My incendiary, rude.. just-plain-mean remark that contributed in no small part to the conflagration we're still talking about (in code), as if it didn't just happen a few hours ago.. ostensibly to keep from referring to any one person directly at the risk of not "being nice" to them. It too was deemed inappropriate at the time and deleted, though the guidelines outlined here do seem to contradict that judgement. Not trying to nit-pick - just a vote for consistency.

that is taken out of context greatly, I myself am doing it. I meant economically feasible for a farm to transition to. Its an opinion. even if im wrong it wasnt jaded or mean.

Id love some examples on how to make it economically more feasible. Because im about to invest a lot of money. One person suggested reusing materials, but what ones? how to i build a half acre catchment out of scrap from a tiny town, when I guess Id have to raid garbage cans on the sides of the street?

trust me id LOVE my opinion to be proven wrong...

Ludi, if that were it true, then it would be false.. The fact is that while  many may utter opinions on objective facts, exceedingly little that is uttered refers to mere opinion. Reality is what it is, regardless of anyone's utterances or opinions. Truth is correspondence with reality, and though yes truth is quite important, no  capitalizing is necessary. The importance of the truth is greater than any opinion, as unlike all opinion, truth is necessary for knowledge and progress.. Truth is necessary for every achievement we can ever hope  to have, from making the bed to saving the  life of another.

Please stay on topic and avoid personal pronouns.

Storm V Spooner wrote:
"If somebody states "the sky is green", then one person can call that bullshit. "

1. Any reasonable person would and should of course point out that such a claim is simply false.

2. Pointing out such objectively verifiable falsehoods is what you jumped all over me for.. which makes this post confusing to say the least.

3. Very little is mere opinion (thankfully) and calling fact mere opinion harms and insults all of us of course.

In which case, I wish to ammend "one person can call that bullshit" with "on a site other than this one."

The most important parts: 

1) I'm going to delete stuff that is outside of my comfort zone. 

2) If I delete a lot of stuff from one person, it is just going to save me time to ban that person.

3) If a person appears to be trying to tell me that my comfort zone is wrong, rather than trying to understand my comfort zone, then it is far easier for me to just ban that person.

[(X, t1) <-> X & -(-X) ] . [-X -> X, t1]

-X (t2) -> X & -(-X)

(-(-X) -> Y) -> -Y & (X&-(-X))

(n, tm (n>1)) -> X & -(-X)
---------

(X,t1)

fiveandahalffarm wrote:
Storm didn't use the modifier "we talk about" in stating that "very little is a matter of opinion".

I was not quoting Spooner, I was making a remark about people who claim to know The Truth.

We ought not toss out all knowledge, all truth, simply to avoid similarity of terms with religious zealots who claim to know "The Truth." Don't you agree? In fact by relying upon reason and evidence, we can avoid such proclamations and pretenses of omniscience. If instead we rely merely upon opinion and faith, while ignoring or worse yet suppressing reason, evidence and knowledge, we will be left only with these baseless assumptions of omniscience, that is to say with folks yelling at one another proclaiming to know "The Truth" without any objective ruler against which we can compare these claims to determine what is in fact true.

permaculture to me is about a personal relationship with ones enviroment and seems ,thus very subjective.While I enjoy stating things as fact,it is to get people worked up enough to respond.Speaking in English-prime is a great way to remind the listener of the subjectivity of the speakers experience.Ive encountered too much magic in this world to trust those who speak in absolute truths.

Storm V Spooner wrote:
We ought not toss out all knowledge, all truth, simply to avoid similarity of terms with religious zealots who claim to know "The Truth."

I don't think anyone here is even remotely suggesting we toss out all knowledge or attempts to understand reality to the best of our ability.  At least, I have not seen anyone suggesting that here.   

In my own life I have found the more I question my supposed objective knowledge of reality, the more likely I am to find that I was mistaken in assuming my experience was objective. 

Mt.goat wrote:
permaculture to me is about a personal relationship with ones enviroment and seems ,thus very subjective.While I enjoy stating things as fact,it is to get people worked up enough to respond.Speaking in English-prime is a great way to remind the listener of the subjectivity of the speakers experience.Ive encountered too much magic in this world to trust those who speak in absolute truths.

Use of E-Prime should be mandated. If nothing else it'd force people to proofread a bit more, sparing my eyes untold horrors.

Storm V Spooner wrote:We ought not ....

See ... that sounds a bit like these decisions will be made collectively.  And that you are part of the collection that makes these decisions. 

Your logic is seriously fucked up.  And yet you speak as if you utter "the truth".  It can be confusing to people. 

So I wish to make this VERY clear. 

You are attempting to build a proof that my comfort zone needs adjustment.  And as part of your proof, you are making a lot of assumptions that are wrong. 

WRONG!

WRONG!

"Wrong" is the opposite of "the truth".  So when we talk about "the truth" that would not include most of the things you say.  Even though you tend to present them as "the truth."


More clarity:

My comfort zone is accurate.  Your perception that it could use adjustment is wrong. 

You need to learn to function within my comfort zone, or be utterly silent. 

I have a vision.  And this vision does not fit for most people.  Therefore, most people must either learn to comply with my vision or go elsewhere. 

Frankly, I have a lot to do and really cannot afford to take the time to persuade a handful of people that are working so hard to NOT understand my vision why they should embrace my vision.  We have so much traffic here already, and so many people that enjoy my path, I really think the whole site will thrive if I simply ban two or three people that don't seem to get it. 

Emerson appears to work very hard to try to understand where I am coming from.  I would have banned him a long time ago if not for the fact that I get the impression that he is REALLY struggling and really trying to get me and comply.  It has been a long road.  And while he still annoys me and I have days where I am still considering banning him, the fact that he tries SO hard to be a member of my community seems to buy him one more day.  It's a bit like the princess bride where the pirate captain tells wesley "I will surely kill you tomorrow." 

Mt.Goat came close to getting banned a couple of years ago.  And then it's a like a switch clicked for him.  He understood where I was coming from and suddenly got to play his way and fully within my comfort zone. 

I think the key is that some people want to understand, and some people are convinced I am wrong.  The latter group will either get with the program or go away.

storm is banned.

  I know some things Ive said ruffled feathers, though i didnt mean it to. im trying to find ways to word things without offending anyone elses opinions. If Im causing you issues, let me know directly if possible.

I don't think anyone was trying to foment insurrection, Paul. Speaking from my own perspective, I feel what started as a focused discussion about the substance of the rules here evolved in scope to a more generalized waxing on how facts and opinions are/should be presented for the betterment of communication. Obviously Storm pressed the wrong button with his last post, but I can't speak to that since you've removed it.

In starting the discussion, I said something to the effect that "I'm not questioning your 'be nice' policy", and I'd like to expand a bit further on that. This is your show, as you've made quite clear. You put your name next to the copyright, and I don't think anyone is trying to tell you how to do your job. Drawing into question the basis for your rules is different than discussion of their substance. The latter is obviously beneficial, if only for the sake of clarifying areas that may be foggy to some; the former implies a false sense of entitlement, and I wouldn't blame you in the slightest for telling such an individual to get fucked.

(edited for punctuation)

The key is that I need everybody to get along.  We're bringing a lot of personalities together.  I have a good track record for a recipe I like.

Of course, there are lots of ways to get this sort of thing to work.  And for every way to get it to work, there are a thousand ways that seem like they would work, but they don't work. 

I like to think I'm pretty open to talking about this sort of thing, as long as the discussion is people making suggestions.  But too often the discussion seems to be in the space that the other party knows more than me and that I am do as I am told.  Not only am I not okay with that, but I have yet to encounter somebody talking to me this way that has a web site that gets more traffic than mine.

And that success (traffic) is an indication that your system works.

Robert Ray wrote:
And that success (traffic) is an indication that your system works.

Exactly.

Lots of people that are cock-sure that they are right and I am wrong, and their own attempts leave them with diddly.   For the first couple hundred people, I had a nice long chat with them and convinced half of them that I knew what i was doing, and the other half still think I'm a fool.  For the last 300 or so I just tell them to piss off or ban them.  I just don't want to get into it any more.

Robert Ray wrote:
And that success (traffic) is an indication that your system works.

I would caution against this logic. Obviously it is working, so obviously it works; however I think that humans have a tendency to take the conclusions further than the data will support, the fact that a system is working to a given degree does not mean that nothing can be changed to make it go further, or to make it go with less input. It's when we stop being curious that we stop growing.

Sometimes logic takes a back seat to any household "If mama ain't happy ain't nobody happy".
  Paul's house Paul's rules. I accept Paul's rules. 

Well that's a separate logic, and doesn't really impact the independent logic of finding a best answer.

Good, healthy growth is important.  And we are growing.  I am doing all sorts of stuff every day to nurture growth.

While it is true that there is always room for improvement, and I would like to think I am keeping an open mind, I am regularly bombarded by ideas.  Usually from people that demand that I implement their idea (you know, for the good of the greater community) and if I don't they want to be convinced of why I did not do as they said.  I just don't have time for that.

A few people seem to be able to make a suggestion with respect for what has been created.  That more often catches my attention.

paul wheaton wrote:
Good, healthy growth is important.  And we are growing.  I am doing all sorts of stuff every day to nurture growth.

While it is true that there is always room for improvement, and I would like to think I am keeping an open mind, I am regularly bombarded by ideas.  Usually from people that demand that I implement their idea (you know, for the good of the greater community) and if I don't they want to be convinced of why I did not do as they said.  I just don't have time for that.

A few people seem to be able to make a suggestion with respect for what has been created.  That more often catches my attention.

I demand that there be icecream!

Emerson White wrote:
I demand that there be icecream!

I, on the other hand, respectfully suggest that ice cream be made available.

Emerson White wrote:
I demand that there be icecream!

I suggest that rather than demand there be ice cream you take proactive measures to ensure the presence of ice cream



and I do mean bring enough for all of us

When and if the ice cream becomes available I think I'd prefer mine to be made of cows milk rather than breast milk as suggested in another thread.

Speak for yourself.

You guys want me to post my ice-cream recipe so you can make your own?  You can use any kind of milk you want then...