[governance] Rudeness tectics (was Re: Reinstate the Vote)

[Kieren McCarthy]

> i think defining rudeness will be as difficult as defining morality.

 

 

I think you're spreading too far afield with this approach, Avri.

 

I would define rudeness in the context that I was complaining about as:

 

"The deliberate use of provocative language intended to irritate or annoy an
individual; ascribing negative connotations to an individual without
evidence or reasoned analysis; mockery or dismissal of someone's else's
honestly held viewpoint."

 

 

I think it is fine to refer to individuals' comments and suggestions, and it
is also fine to disagree with them - in fact, that is exactly what works
best with these sorts of discussions. As an example of what I think is fair
comment, I will refer to a comment inserted by Milton this morning as a
perfect example of the sort of rudeness that this list could well do
without.

 

In response to a Jacqueline comment, Milton responded:

 

"Well, all I can say is that the reason most American business people are
terrified of such voting is that they conclude (more accurately than you, I
am afraid) that such a mechanism would empower the "new Internet world" of
tens of millions of Chinese and Indians and, in relative terms, erode their
current power. "

 

 

The "more accurately than you, I am afraid" was deliberately provocative,
added nothing to the discussion, came with no evidence or reasoned analysis,
and both mocked Jacqueline and dismissed her honestly held viewpoint.

 

It has no place in reasonable discussions. Which is a shame because Milton
then went on to raise some interesting ideas about ALSes which I personally
would be happy to discuss but which I won't respond to because of the
unpleasantness earlier in the email.

 

 

 

Kieren

 

 

  _____  

From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 8:57 AM
To: Internet Governance Caucus
Subject: Re: [governance] Rudeness tectics (was Re: Reinstate the Vote)

 

 

On 23 nov 2007, at 08.09, Norbert Bollow wrote:





Given that the use of rudeness tectics against specific people with

the goal of reducing their ability to effectively communicate their

viewpoints is a significant problem in internet-based group

dosucssions, I would suggest that it should be considered part of the

substance of internet governance discussions to figure out how this

problem should be addressed.

 

 

i think defining rudeness will be as difficult as defining morality.

 

we would also need to study the use of accusations of rudeness

in their tactical role in internet discussion.

 

while i do think it would make for a interesting academic exercise and if

i can find a student who also thinks it a cool subject would try to

support that research, i am not sure that it is quite ready to be considered

a substantive part of the Internet Governance debate.

 

a.

 

ps, was this rude?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20071123/44739d02/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20071123/44739d02/attachment.txt>