I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
with this post.

As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).

Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
or two or three. All participating parties
contribute
by adding information on the subject or asking
questions motivated by a desire to gain some
knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
know each other. Everyone participates with
an open mind.

This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
parties in that everyone comes away with some-
thing they didn't know before or a better under-
standing of the subject.

This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
It can be a Win-Win proposition.

Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
"sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
premise. The process is structured, each side giving
their initial statement of position, a period of
exchanges of challenges and responses to each
other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
use facts to support their position, citing sources
for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
times do play a role in the decision making process.

The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
side" to change their position based on the
"points" one makes during the debate. The
participants make no attempt to keep and open
mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
- sort of.

In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
able enough on the subject to be able to take either
side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
away from the exchange with new information
about the subject.

Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
with an open mind nor the expectation of
persuading other participants, or anyone in
"the audience", to accept their position as
"right".

Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
may have an entertainment value, and
sometimes provide some useful information,
but that's fairly rare

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"

charlie b

Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll **** off the pig
and waste your time.

In article ,
charlie b wrote:

Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll **** off the pig
and waste your time.

nit-pick -- the correct quote is:

"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time,
and annoys the pig."

The source is "Time Enough for Love", by Robert A. Heinlein, in the excerpts
from "The Notebooks of Lazarus Long".


(it's been a favorit quote of mine for 30+ years

Oh yeah? Well your mother wears combat boots!

charlie b wrote in message ...
I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
with this post.

As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).

Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
or two or three. All participating parties
contribute
by adding information on the subject or asking
questions motivated by a desire to gain some
knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
know each other. Everyone participates with
an open mind.

This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
parties in that everyone comes away with some-
thing they didn't know before or a better under-
standing of the subject.

This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
It can be a Win-Win proposition.

Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
"sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
premise. The process is structured, each side giving
their initial statement of position, a period of
exchanges of challenges and responses to each
other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
use facts to support their position, citing sources
for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
times do play a role in the decision making process.

The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
side" to change their position based on the
"points" one makes during the debate. The
participants make no attempt to keep and open
mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
- sort of.

In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
able enough on the subject to be able to take either
side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
away from the exchange with new information
about the subject.

Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
with an open mind nor the expectation of
persuading other participants, or anyone in
"the audience", to accept their position as
"right".

Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
may have an entertainment value, and
sometimes provide some useful information,
but that's fairly rare

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"

charlie b

Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll **** off the pig
and waste your time.

Robert, what happened to all the "*_-'"'s?? I can't
understand your posts without them!

dave

Robert Bonomi wrote:

In article ,
charlie b wrote:

Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll **** off the pig
and waste your time.


nit-pick -- the correct quote is:

"Never attempt to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time,
and annoys the pig."

The source is "Time Enough for Love", by Robert A. Heinlein, in the excerpts
from "The Notebooks of Lazarus Long".


(it's been a favorit quote of mine for 30+ years

charlie b wrote in
:

snippage
So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"

charlie b

Well, charlie b, that could SERIOUSLY limit my wReck time! ;-)

Patriarch,
who must have SOMETHING better to do....

In article ,
David Hall wrote:
Oh yeah? Well your mother wears combat boots!

"All the better to kick your *ss with", she says, sweetly.


charlie b wrote in message
...
I normally avoid commenting on the "diversion" threads
that ebb and flow here but here goes an exception. I
hope this doesn't turn into a thread but rather stops
with this post.

As noted in the Subject line, there seem to be four types
of OT threads that have legs (I'm excluding the bomb
hurling trolls that pop up once in a while).

Discussion - An exchange of ideas and opinions on a subject,
or two or three. All participating parties
contribute
by adding information on the subject or asking
questions motivated by a desire to gain some
knowledge about, or insight on, the subject. The
exchange remains friendly, or at least what use
to be understood as civil, though friendly banter
and jibes are thrown in amongst participants who
know each other. Everyone participates with
an open mind.

This type of thread is typically beneficial to all
parties in that everyone comes away with some-
thing they didn't know before or a better under-
standing of the subject.

This is not a Zero Sum Game where someone
wants to "win" and for someone else to "lose"
It can be a Win-Win proposition.

Debate - A structured contest between two individuals or
"sides" to determine "who is right" about a given
premise. The process is structured, each side giving
their initial statement of position, a period of
exchanges of challenges and responses to each
other's positions and finally concluding remarks by
each side, typically summarizing why "I'm/we're right
and "he/they are wrong". The debaters typically
use facts to support their position, citing sources
for these facts. An ostensibly neutral judge or
panel will determine "the winner" based on a set of
rules and guidelines - though personal biases some-
times do play a role in the decision making process.

The goal is to "win", not to persuade "the other
side" to change their position based on the
"points" one makes during the debate. The
participants make no attempt to keep and open
mind, that's for the judge and the audience to do
- sort of.

In a good debate, civility is normally maintained
by a moderator and the participants are knowledge-
able enough on the subject to be able to take either
side of the debate and "win". The audience comes
away from the exchange with new information
about the subject.

Arguement - None of the participants come to the process
with an open mind nor the expectation of
persuading other participants, or anyone in
"the audience", to accept their position as
"right".

Arguements are a Lose-Lose Game. They
may have an entertainment value, and
sometimes provide some useful information,
but that's fairly rare

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"

charlie b

Never try to teach a pig to whistle. It'll **** off the pig
and waste your time.

charlie b wrote:

So, before you reply to an OT post, think- "Is there
a better use of my time?"


MYFB

--
Bill

charlie b wrote in message ...

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misplet "your", would it?

Mike

--
Al Reid

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain

"mycroftt" wrote in message om...
charlie b wrote in message ...

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misplet "your", would it?

Mike

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misspelled "misspelled", would it?

Al

In article ,
Al Reid wrote:


--
Al Reid

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain

"mycroftt" wrote in message
. com...
charlie b wrote in message
...

Flame Wars - A seemingly never ending exchange of "Oh
yeah? Well you're mother wears combat
boots!"

There is NOTHING to be gained by anyone from
a Flame War.

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misplet "your", would it?

Mike

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misspelled "misspelled", would it?


Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.

grin

In article s.com, (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
In article ,
Al Reid wrote:
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misspelled "misspelled", would it?


Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.

grin

And you, in turn, failed to spot Al's misattribution to Mark Twain of
something that was actually said by Josh Billings. :-)

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

For a copy of my TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter,
send email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

In article m,
Doug Miller wrote:
In article s.com,
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:
In article ,
Al Reid wrote:
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know
for sure that just ain't so." --- Mark Twain

Then I guess this wouldn't be a good time to point out that you
misspelled "misspelled", would it?


Bzzzzt! You just flunked USENET 101. It is a universal law that every
spelling flame MUST contain at least one spelling error, itself.

grin

And you, in turn, failed to spot Al's misattribution to Mark Twain of
something that was actually said by Josh Billings. :-)

Not surprisingly, I've been told I have not a drop of Clemens-y in my soul. :P