Reply #110: Please [View All]

[omega minimo]

let me respond to the first comment. (You're right, you've made the rest intentionally absurd and also seem to want to challenge something that isn't at all presented in this thread, so maybe later.......)

"If scorn is off the table, bad ideas get elevated to a position in the marketplace of ideas where they're treated as equal to ideas that at least have much more possibility of real merit."

IMHO, that's what DU Rules "based on respect" are for. If this is a "marketplace of ideas" and if the aforementioned confidence exists, it might just be possible to see what people have to say -- at least a couple of replies worth -- rather than immediate dismissal and disregard.

However, we've now seen it clearly stated that some people find the disruption "entertaining" -- they didn't go to market for ideas, they went to mug people.

Also, some folks come all wound up with their preconceptions about ideas having "position" "merit" and don't listen to what's being said, but just pile on with preconceived notions.

I know, duh :eyes: it's the Internet. So why do we have rules "based on respect" at all? So the people who all agree can "scorn" those ideas they are afraid might be "elevated to a position in the marketplace of ideas where they're treated as equal"? :scared:

Here's a scary thought: WHAT IF THEY ARE EQUAL or at least deserving of an airing, a DUer deserving of the basic respect of having a voice, a contribution.