In article , momkulio{at}yahoo.ca says...
>
> "Mark Borgerson"  wrote in message
> news:MPG.1c72b25eabf143579896ce{at}news.comcast.giganews.com...
> > In article ,
momkulio{at}yahoo.ca says...
>
> []
> > > I don' think that anything can be done to stop other people
from posting
> > > abusive personal attacks.  The only one I can control is
myself.  And I
> > > don't even succeed at that all the time.  
> >
> > I consider your reasonable approach to be a good example.  Soc.men can
> > use as many of those as possible.
>
> Thanks.  I think that venting one's emotions can be useful too.  Sometimes
> people need to express their anger and frustration with injustice.
>
I think you can express anger with injustice without name calling and
language you wouldn't use in front of your children.  You seem to do
pretty well at that.


> > I sometimes wonder how difficult it is for some posters to maintain
> > the dichotomy between their usenet personalities and their 'in-person'
> > personalities.   I suspect that much of the more abusive rhetoric
> > seen here seldom gets used in face-to-face meetings or in day-to-day
> > conversations.   I've seen real-life examples of that kind of dichotomy
> > with some petty officers in the Navy who were often VERY profane
> > and abusive in their working persona, but who were much calmer
> > and more reasonable outside working hours.
>
> I doubt it is difficult.  I would think that it is simply a matter of
> letting loose on Usenet the thoughts that one usually leaves unspoken.   I
> know that I think lots of abusive things.  
>
>  > I suspect that the
> > same dichotomy prevails with posters such as Grizzlie Antagonist,
> > who is a public defender, and probably very polite to
> > people outside usenet.
>
> In this particular thread, he started out perfectly reasonable and engaged
> in more extreme language when it became clear that reason was making no
> impression.

When reasoned arguments don't work,  I find that name calling isn't
effective either.  If you stoop to name calling and abuse,  you run
the risk of having an unbiased observer  reject the reasonable
arguments because the find the abuse objectionable.   The extreme
language then becomes only entertainment for the peanut gallery.
But I must admit I persist in reading some threads just for the
entertainment value long after the logical arguments have
fled the scene.

I find it helpful to remember that for every person posting in
a newsgroup,  10 to 100 may be reading the posts (lurking).   I try not
to use language that would discourage those people from participating.


>
> > I'm of the personal opinion that there is no such thing as
> > permanent anonymity on the internet,  so I generally behave
> > here pretty much as I do the rest of the time.  (That opinion
> > is based on 5 years as a communications intelligence specialist--
> > where I found out how difficult it can be to keep some things
> > secret.)
>
> For me, its more a matter of personal integrity than a concern about getting
> caught.


> Jayne
>
>
Mark Borgerson


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 2/8/05 6:38:11 PM ---