[Chapter-delegates] And article on internet conversation

[Michael Snell]

Thanks for sharing this, Ted.

Unfortunately the rhetoric of confrontation is often chosen because it
tends to work. More polite individuals are caught at a disadvantage. Timid
individuals are silenced. Much effort on the part of your perceived
opponents can be driven by a shotgun approach to argumentation.

Indeed, in the midst of confrontation, it is easy to forget that the
original goal of argumentation (as conceived by the Greeks almost 2500
years ago) was actually to arrive at the closest approximation of truth
available to humans. While the person you were arguing with was in some
essential sense, an opponent-- they were also a collaborator with you in
the pursuit of truth.

Although your author's recommendation is attractive (create a better world
peopled by better behaving humans), it's not very realistic. We will
probably have to continue with various strategies to contain the savage
beast within our brethren. Moderated discussion forums are probably here to
stay.

Mike Snell
San Francisco Bay Area Chapter

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:13 PM, Ted Mooney <mooney at isoc.org> wrote:

> Perhaps this is a bit US centric but I thought it offered some
> perspective.  ****
>
> ** **
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/iso-civility-in-online-comments/2012/05/09/gIQA7r8AEU_story.html
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Ted****
>
> ** **
>
> Ted Mooney****
>
> Sr. Director, Membership & Services****
>
> The Internet Society****
>
> www.isoc.org****
>
>  ****
>
> Direct Line: 703.439.2774****
>
> Cell:           301.980.6446****
>
>  ****
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20120510/e281e5d3/attachment.htm>