Le samedi 17 octobre 2020 à 19:03:17-0700, Weaver a écrit : > On 18-10-2020 11:42, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > > Le 17 octobre 2020 23:03:22 GMT+02:00, Weaver <weaver@riseup.net> a > > écrit : > > > >> On 18-10-2020 00:53, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 10:39:01PM -0700, Weaver wrote: > >> On 17-10-2020 15:05, Michael uplawski wrote: > >> Leslie Rhorer: > >> Until someone does earn respect, there is no reason anyone > >> should afford it them. It is utterly ridiculous to think everyone > >> deserves respect. > >> > >> This is where you are excluding yourself from the human community. > >> Face > >> it. Live with it. *We* will be fine, anyway. > > > > Rubbish! > > > > Tone not helpful here on either side. > > > > Rubbish is rubbish > > Some may see a point in dressing it up as otherwise. > > I don't. > > > >>> There are certain qualities which must be extended before you are > >>> worthy > >>> of receiving them, trust, loyalty, to mention a couple, but you > >>> can > >>> throw respect in there also, along with one or two others. > >>> I have to earn the respect of every child I meet, and maintain the > >>> standard every time I encounter that child in the future. > >>> Some, in their retarded viewpoint, believe respect is something > >>> engendered by social position. > >> > >> Retarded is not a helpful term here or, indeed, anywhere. > > > > Retarded is retarded. > > You seem to prefer to believe it is aimed at an individual, when it is > > clearly applied to a viewpoint. > > > >>> Wrong! > >>> Social position is engendered by earned level of respect. > >>> `excluding yourself from the human community', what a load of > >>> puerile > >>> ignorance! > >> > >> Puerile here is also not helpful. Considered, constructive language > >> which advances a thought through viewpoint is preferable. > >> Another way of putting it "never argue with an idiot on the > >> Internet. > >> After a couple of rounds, a dispassionate observer will not be able > >> to tell who's who" > > > > Puerile is puerile. > > `Immature, especially in being silly or trivial; childish'. > > The terminology applies: employ it. > > `Considered, constructive language' - is language which communicates > > effectively. > > `which advances a thought through viewpoint' - Pseudo-intellectual > > waffle! > > You know another method? > > Observation is dependent on conditioned viewpoint. > > Beginning, end, and entire middle of story. > > > >> If you were to treat your readers with a greater consideration for > >> their intellect, you might come across better. > > > > A discerning intellect would have not sent this to me directly, would > > have identified the aspects specified more accurately, and kept it on > > list. > > > > <snip> > > > >> See also Edward Gibbon - Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, > >> chapter 2 > > > > We live in exactly those times, a classic example being played out > > before our very eyes. > > > > You currently just are making yourself look both arrogant and > > ridiculous. > > In your perception. Looking at the number of people who replied to tell you your attitude is not welcome, I think it is a bit more than just my perception. > > I guess this is why Andrew sent his reply just to you, > > instead of giving you another shovel to dig with. > > > > I don't know what you are trying to achieve here, but I stand my point > > : your lack of respect for others is not welcome here. > > And I stand mine: respect is a quality that needs to be earned. Not here. Not in the biggest part of the society. Respect is presumed, and then is either confirmed or lost. Feel free to abide by the rules you like at your home, but here the rules are not yours. If you're not fine with these rules, it's the same as any private space: either remain silent or leave. > I see A plethora of others who grasp the opportunity to ascend their > lecterns and preach, you being one of them, and this I can ignore, but > if it continues, and then my inbox gets cluttered with direct > communications of an incident I have long left in the rear vision > mirror, you get what you earn. One poster delivered what _you_ earned, > but there has obviously been no effort to reflect and philosophies of > convenience hold sway. Many times people let rude and aggressive tones and behaviours go, because these very long threads where people remind to one that there are rules to interact on these lists and that one tries to show that he's smarter and rules don't apply to him are just boring for everyone. But from time to time, it's required to remind to everyone that just because we don't react all the time doesn't mean we think less. But to be honest, I have no problem with not letting it go when people react. Because there is a Code of Conduct in Debian and guidelines when you post on a list, and since you're trying to waive both, I think it's worth the trouble. > [snip] -- Pierre-Elliott Bécue GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528 F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2 It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature