On Saturday 04 November 2006 12:45, Tony Alfrey wrote:
Randall R Schulz wrote:
can behave as though we were part of a civilized society,
understand that we cannot all be experts on all subjects, and we
respond to others in the way we would wish a response were we
asking a question.
The point is that there are intelligent, coherent and respectful
ways to ask, answer and follow up on questions. Then there are all
the other ways. The other ways must be repudiated.
The best way to repudiate a disrespectful question or response is to
ignore it. This will stop it immediately.
It is the equivalent of sending it to /dev/null.
For one thing, I do not believe this is true. Without negative feedback,
people will typically persist in their behaviors.
Secondly, my personal practice is to chastise only when I'm already
writing to supply an answer, never just to chastise. (I'll admit my
record on following that policy is not perfect, but I stick to it for
the most part.)
The intelligence or coherence of a Q/A depends on the
judgment of the
reader and is inappropriate and irrelevant. ...
Not true. These things may some some measure of relativity to them, but
they're really is such a thing as following the list's conventions,
asking questions in an intelligent fashion and researching the matter
first before asking. It very much _is_ appropriate and relevant to
impose standards on people's actions in a public forum.
Besides, except for teeth, ignoring things usually does _not_ make them