what do you hope to accomplish with your next post on DU?

[nashville_brook]

H2O Man has a great thread called Strange Days that asks us to take a moment in our outrage over the Saddam execution and acknowledge the fact this event has the potential to rip apart our community as well as shore up our resolve against Jr.'s War of Choice:

I think discussions on DU about the topic are very valuable. Even the heated debates can hold the potential for that same value. Likewise, I recognize that there is a very real potential for the negative force to divide people, at a time when we should be identifying the ways that the DU community can best coordinate efforts to unite Americans against the war in Iraq.

Discussions on DU are indeed "very valuable," but I wonder, what CAN we achieve here? What are the limits of discourse? In what ways can discussion impact the world? Do you want or expect your discussions here on DU to change things? At root: how do you view your role as a DU'er?

I'm asking these questions for the same reason H2O Man implored us to go easy with each other -- I believe that with the execution of Saddam and the swearing-in of the new congress and whole new year ahead of us, we have the opportunity to stop, drop and review.

Will you next post here on DU open up discussion or attempt to shut down someone you disagree with?

Lets say that you hope to shut down someone you heartily disagree with. Maybe they are gung-ho for hanging and you are against capital punishment. Maybe they are lifelong Christians and you believe that Christians are responsible for many bad things... Maybe you support Obama or Hillary and your opponent supports Edwards or no one yet... what is possible to achieve in your next post to this person who holds a different position?

Consider that you are unlikely to change the mind of someone with different beliefs. Consider that in toto, we are on the same side here at DU. And again, ask yourself: "what can be accomplished with my next post?"

I want to suggest that there's everything to be gained by keeping discourse "open" and everything to lose when attempts are made to "shut down" another poster. I want to suggest that we are just performers here. We read and respond. If we were to take the NEXT STEP and act, we'd be hanging out in the Activist's Forum where there's "action" to be taken.

As performers in the medium of discourse, are we opening up dialogue, or shutting it down?

[earlybelle]

1. I hope to always spark some critical thinking but most often I get criticized.

Especially if anything negative is said about Israel or Israeli foreign policies.

[nashville_brook]

11. oh boy -- that's a "damned if you do and damned if you don't"

topic. talk about the LIMITS of discourse!

when i was a young whipper-snapper, my ex-father in-law (now deceased) blew my mind by criticizing Israel. he said that regardless of the atrocities in WW2, Israel is doing bad things, now, and we needed deal with it somehow. the thought was insanely outside of my ability to deal with. i didn't dare engage the conversation b/c i was afraid of where it might go. that was 1985.

the difficulties with that debate are LONG-standing.

[Kerrytravelers]

2. It always saddens me to see the name-calling and snide remarks that aren't necessary.

I grow tired of that, as well.

[nashville_brook]

21. every insult tells a story...

i have no example of this... but i've found myself on the receiving end of criticism that couldn't possibly come from my words. rather, the responder was carrying on a conversation fromt heir history. so, part of me wants to know their story, but the other (larger) part of me want to move along... :)

[Kerrytravelers]

46. I have found this to be true for me, as well.

I am really quite a noncontroversial poster here at DU. Occasionally, I get hot under the collar when I see an obvious troll. I have no problem being open about how I feel. But to the general DU community, I always give the benefit of the doubt. unfortunately, that same courtesy isn't always extended to me. I do, however, remember these posters and usually never respond to them again, even if they post to me.

[LWolf]

3. Interesting question.

My brain flies off in several directions with this one.

I think we all post as a means of self-expression. I think some people post to influence the direction of the mainstream consciousness. Some posts are flat out propaganda, along with verbal bullying to turn loose on dissent. Some posts are intended to make sure dissenting viewpoints are heard and acknowledged, not "ignored" and crushed by the steamroller of group think and conventional wisdom. Some people just like to fight, and verbal bullying over the internet takes the place of reasoned discourse in person.

Some people like to share their thoughts with a larger audience. Some are here as trolls, some here with agendas from different groups, some paid operatives.

Perhaps we all have done some of most of the above?

You make an interesting point, though. Hanging out in GD, you'd think that all Democrats care about is who said what on tv and who will be the nominee in '08. Posts about real current issues seem to sink like rocks.

I'll head over to "activists" and check it out. Do you think I'll find any posts organizing opposition to the renewal of NCLB in '07 over there?

[nashville_brook]

36. if posting is performance, then we reflect our "character" in our posts...

i'm using "character" in the cinematic sense. i know i put on different hats in different threads.

i think this thread is partly inspired by a bad experience i had recently in a forum i usually avoid, because of the tendency toward close-ended discussions. despite my best intentions i found myself in one of those pissing contests that can only be described as "swine wrestling" where everyone gets dirty, you end up frustrated and the pig ends up happy. i was blindsided by the experience. the whole thing was disproportionate, and i was unhappy with how i was drawn into the mud. but it made me wonder what might have gone astray to cause such a ruckus.

thinking about it some more, the best i can figure is the poster was fighting a battle that had nothing to do with me... s/he used my post as a staging area for the WAR they fight in that forum.

so i was left wondering, what is won, if that "war" is ever "won." what i imagine is that most people will eventually stop posting in that forum because apparently no one can have opinion that differs from the bullies.

posting as means of self-expression leaves the door open for people to participate. as does posting as a means of sharing ideas and raising consciousness. i think it's when people become flacksters or evangelists that discussion gets shut down... and it's no wonder that people put on this hat, b/c our culture is full of role models for this and there's few examples of sharing and open participation.

btw -- if there's nothing posted on opposition to the No Child Left Behind act, then maybe post a request for information... maybe someone knows something and hasn't posted it yet. if nothing else, it would be nice to know when this is coming up for discussion in the new congress so The Activist Corps can be ready with letters to the editor to our local papers.

[Torn_Scorned_Ignored]

4. A common feeling today

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3006051

[LoZoccolo]

5. This is what I think happens here.

People start to view participating in DU as activism, and their control of what other people say as some sort of power over things in the world. It's hilarious, really, to think that some people feel if they can scratch at some people in a message board with manipulative tactics that they've accomplished anything.

Anyways, what I seek to accomplish at DU is pretty much this:

1. Get people involved in real-life politics.
2. Help people achieve the kind of wisdom that real-life politics requires.

I get accused of being a DLC shill (I've never been a member of the DLC nor am I paid by them, nor would they even likely waste their time here) or a Republican disruptor (one that encourages people to vote Democratic and volunteer for Democratic campaigns, apparently), but I would say my most controversial position is that of responsibility (whether it's regarding actually doing something, thinking practically, being compelling, or even just being intellectually honest), and that people are more likely to hear me talk about cause and effect rather than progressivism vs. centrism.

Case in point: people complain about the Democratic Party not giving them a candidate to vote for, when they are the ones who vote for the candidate that gets nominated. Could there be a better example of how disconnected people on the Internet are from real-life politics? (Actually, there are probably lots.)

[nashville_brook]

19. the nominating process is getting lost in "personality politics"

it's going to be interesting run-up to 2008. i believe we are going to hear less about potential candidates once the new congress gets rolling with investigations. this could allow for a lot of "movement" in the candidates' field with a reduction of interest. will it be a good thing or bad thing? will a candidate emerge from the investigation -- a stand-out star? or will we want someone untainted by beltway politics? a southern governor?

[twilight_sailing]

6. "but I wonder, what CAN we achieve here?"

Not much, really. Talk is cheap.

[EFerrari]

10. We did 20 thousand dollars worth of something these last days.

:)

[twilight_sailing]

14. OK

you are right about the money. I chipped in a little myself. ;)

[nashville_brook]

16. damn! talk about taking the next step!

there's a lot of energy here. it's so good to see when it's being used. wow. 20 thousand dollars.

[seabeyond]

7. dependent of the poster. i have learned here on du

there are posters that work at posting extreme simply to get rise or play some game or whatever. no... i do not play with that person to work towards dialogue. it wont happen. is a waste of my time. there are also those posters that are intent on dialogue and respectful discourse. that i appreciate and value and really like to be a part of. what i am looking for on du. i think i use to get it more in the past than what we have today. but there are many many posters with differing ideas and opinions that i value listening to, though i may not ultimately agree with them, it allows me to see the gray and differing opinion to come to an understanding of why a person feels as they should

though at this time, i am spending more time in the area of accepting and allowing of people. i am finding we as a nation, both sides are running short in that area. so generally the threads i go into.

[nashville_brook]

15. one of the wonderful things about "the internets" is that we don't see the other person...

screen names are ageless, genderless, and raceless. oh, and also not informed by economic class.

if were standing in a room talking to people rather than seeing their words on a screen, we'd be informed by who we imagine they are according to their appearance. we'd make assumptions based on what sort of clothes they wear and who they associate with.

on screen, we only have the words themselves. sometimes i'm able to avoid threads where things are degenerating. sometimes i feel the need to participate regardless of how unproductive i think it might be. i usually regret that.

[H2O Man]

8. Wow!

In this -- my "next post" -- I want to thank you. I surely do appreciate that you got something from my last essay.

Thank you.

[mdmc]

9. thanks for being a leftie

in a wrong world. Peace and low stress...

[nashville_brook]

13. i'm sure i'm not the only person you inspire!

i look forward to your posts... as I dragged myself to read today's news, your Strange Days thread was exactly the tonic i needed. what a day. thank you for the perspective.

[Skidmore]

12. My next post will be to boot one of my last posts to the top

for reconsideration. It is not about posting so much as what we do with the information and thought posted. The hatred in this world right now has almost a physical mass of it own. It's taking on a life of its own. The events of this holiday season have only added to it. I was feeling pretty down yesterday when thinking about where we have come to and what we, as a nation, have wrought on the world. Today I know I need to work for something new.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3004824&mesg_id=3004824

[rosesaylavee]

17. Discussions here can't always be

pleasant. People come here to voice emotions and ideas what they can't voice elsewhere in their lives - fear, rage, disgust, optimism and thankfully humor that can temper and make manageable all of those!

I come here for information on what the media is saying and what other Democrats are saying. I look for the occasional kernels of wisdom, POVs I haven't yet considered and ideas for actions I can personally take in my day to day. I stay for the community of people in general who agree with me that, as a country, we can do better.

My next post will hopefully be some part wise and some part humorous. We need both to get through this!

edit to add 'optimism'!

[nashville_brook]

22. right you are! i neglected to talk about venting...

i think venting is necessary and important. it's not performance as much as it THERAPY. damn, we ALL need therapy every now and then.

so, hopefully the next time someone vents in my direction i'll have the ability to meet it with humor.

thanks for the reminder. :)

[Warren Stupidity]

18. There is discourse and then there is bullshit.

In general I agree with you, however there are those who post without regard for the truth, that is they are engaged in bullshit, not discourse. There is no need to treat bullshit with respect, in fact doing so elevates bullshit to the level of discourse, which is the intention of the bullshitter, and which demeans discourse.

[nashville_brook]

20. this is interesting, b/c it suggests that bullshitters have more to gain in discourse

and think there's a kernal truth there.

[Warren Stupidity]

23. I think bullshitters, at least many of them,

know exactly what they are doing. The excellent essay 'On Bullshit' covers what I am trying to say here far better than I can.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Here is a good description.

The essence of bullshit, Frankfurt decides, is that it is produced without any concern for the truth. Bullshit needn't be false: “The bullshitter is faking things. But this does not mean that he necessarily gets them wrong.” The bullshitter's fakery consists not in misrepresenting a state of affairs but in concealing his own indifference to the truth of what he says. The liar, by contrast, is concerned with the truth, in a perverse sort of fashion: he wants to lead us away from it. As Frankfurt sees it, the liar and the truthteller are playing on opposite sides of the same game, a game defined by the authority of truth. The bullshitter opts out of this game altogether. Unlike the liar and the truthteller, he is not guided in what he says by his beliefs about the way things are. And that, Frankfurt says, is what makes bullshit so dangerous: it unfits a person for telling the truth.
http://www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/050822crat_atlarge

[nashville_brook]

30. arg -- this 'description' paints a hyper-realistic picture...

i knew "who" we were talking about in the first place -- but this description puts me (PTSD-like) back in the frame of mind of being in one of those "discussions."

yeah, i think internet forums favor this kind of poster b/c "in person" people would recognize them and RUN.

i was a philosophy student way back in ancient history, and that department seems to attract The Bullshitter for a semester or two. they'll take a colloquium on Philosophy of Religion or Political Philosophy and eventually return to history or english. But every time you run into them at the local bar or Rathskellar they will want to engage you in a giant Bullshit Session. sometimes you have the time for it, but it never ends to their satisfaction, i think because, they had no idea what "their satisfaction" would feel like.

[ecstatic]

51. Is a "bullshitter" pretty much equal to a lazy but interested participant?

Where is the line drawn?

[Warren Stupidity]

52. Frankfurt covers that.

There are different types of bullshit. Some of it is innocuous: we're just shooting the bull. But it is understood in that context that nothing of substance is being discussed.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

27. Hear Hear To That!

Very, very true indeed.

[ScreamingMeemie]

28. Who decides?

You? Me?

[Warren Stupidity]

29. There is a difference.

Bullshit is not simply opinion I disagree with. In my view it is opinion expressed without any regard for the truth. It is also distinct from lying, which is opinion expressed knowing that it is false, which is a somewhat different problem.

[nashville_brook]

31. while "bullshitting" isn't always "playing devil's advocate"...

when someone proclaims to be satan's attorney, you can bet, you will soon find yourself in a Bullshit Session.

"no regard for the truth..." isn't to suggest that every dicussion can or will result in a "truth" -- the Bullshitter's craft involves moving truth from place to place.

[tomp]

33. there are some who are just plain wrong.

it is clear, by the nature of their posts, that they have no conception of truth and rightness. when a post crosses my bottom line right out of the gate, i have few options. sometimes there is nothing to do but oppose wrongness, as in the threads promoting mandatory "service", e.g.. i don't like it but i don't apologize for it.

[nashville_brook]

39. disagreement and opposition are essential

an example of keeping the discussion open-ended when you completely disagree, is to point to other thinkers who represent your POV. or to ask questions of those on the other side of the debate. sometimes i like to focus on where a person is coming from instead of the issue itself because that helps me empathsize with the person rather than seeing them just as a screen-name.

in the case of mandatory service, you've got a great example of a debate that attracts a LOT of "bullshitters" because it's a hypothetical at this point. it's easy for people to support a "mandatory service" that doesn't exist. many of the "arguments" are valid in theory -- lets involve rich kids along with the poor who already enlisted... lets spread around the human COST of the war... but to those who remember the last draft in the form of lost loved ones, theorizing with humans is an awful thing.

[Warren Stupidity]

49. I'm ok with wrongness.

And the draft wars here actually had a lot of good discourse between folks, some heated of course. It also had a lot of what I am calling bullshit: people just making stuff up to make their case with no regard for truth at all. It is that part that drives me nuts. I don't mind wrongness, and I can deal with liars, but it is the folks who aren't even trying to have an exchange of ideas that have me reaching for the ignore button.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

25. I aim to enlighten, rather than to be enlightened.

Teaching is easiest when you have no idea what youre talking about,
as long as you do it with a smile, a good heart, and get an animal
in there somewhere. :hi:

[nashville_brook]

38. i'll have my enlightenment with a side of squirrel...

[ScreamingMeemie]

26. Disagreement is a good thing.

I will never stand and respect "with us or against us" or "shut up for the good of the party" attitudes. I will not respectfully disagree on everything. I will disagree vehemently on that which I stand most firm. I care nothing for presenting a "united front" for it will only cause my true thoughts, values and beliefs to fester...eventually causing a blowup that would have been far worse than disagreeing in the first place.

Where others see shutting down I see disagreement.

DU is, was and always will be this way. People will leave in anger, post in anger, walk away, scream, shout, gnash teeth... but still DU will remain. There is no fault line threatening to pull the reason for its existance apart.

[calzone]

34. Agreed, and I would add....

....that there are times when people hold beliefs that are untrue and counter-productive. I don't believe that we can't change someone's beliefs, as nashville said. His motive is positive but I think his conclusion is flawed.
People are entitled to their opinions, but not the facts. There've been many times where I've always believed something to be true and then found that I was wrong or misled, and lots of times it was because of being challenged on a forum. 'Challenged and informed' does not equal 'shut down.'
We live in a society where accuracy and the truth are savaged by a compromised media and government.
It's been this way for a long time. It creates a manipulated public conciousness, and diverts the Everglades into man-made canals. Facts are stubborn things, like people.
Sometimes it's not manipulated facts that do the damage and serve selfish interests, it's the lack of exposure to the facts.
I participated in the anti-war march in DC last year, there were well over 100,000 Americans from all walks of life and every demographic taking part, we took over the city. But the media virtually ignored it, while other public figures in the media downplayed the turnout and obscured the message.
If someone is arguing a position which is based on a misconception, there's nothing wrong with setting the record straight...in fact, I think it's a responsibilty.
And sometimes the misconception is more of a deliberate misdirection, emerging more from enlightened self-interest than enlightenment. Sometimes it's just cognitive dissonance. But whatever the cause, arguing in support of fact-based conclusions, social justice and compassion is never a negative endeavor.

[nashville_brook]

43. where you disagree most, you'll benefit least from a close-ended discussion

if your hope is to change the hearts and minds of fellow posters.

sometimes we don't want to do that. sometimes we just really need to "throw down." that's always going to be a part of this kind of community.

we have the opportunity to strengthen our community with criticism, and that's an opportunity not to be taken lightly. party leaders use DU. ideas raised here are often linked around the web and talked about outside "our walls." that's pretty powerful.

what H2O Man said, that resonated so intensely with me, was that can't let our disagreements rip us apart. we don't want freeperville linking to us to revel in disintegration.

my hope is that we can disagree with the force of good intentions and shine a light in the dark instead of stoking the fire that is naturally be generated in the heat of critical events.

[ElboRuum]

32. It is very difficult to say.

I've already noted quite a few heated discussions, as well as bald-faced divisiveness on this board already, and it's barely two months since we took back the Congress.

DU is at a crossroads. I'm wondering how many people realize precisely how we are currently in a territory never before explored here.

This is the first time, since DU's inception, where Democrats can feel vindicated by actual substantive political victories.

Let that seep in a moment. Right now, we are seeing what happens when people here are finally starting to get what they want out of their political environment. I don't believe it is a coincidence that, prior to the November elections, we were solidly united. Now that we've struck the first blow (hopefully the first of many blows) to achieving our collective goals, I am somewhat disapproving of the disunity and quite angered genuine hostility that is being laid down in its wake.

For example, right now, there is no one on my ignore list. I don't believe in ignoring people, even if they are rude, crass, or disruptive. Believe it or not, these sorts of people are amenable to another point of view, even if you have to chip away at them for a while. I believe this exercise is worthwhile and ultimately beneficial.

However, a couple of days ago, I got in a heated exchange with a few posters which, for the first time since my arrival here, made me reconsider that doctrine. For a moment. I still have not applied them to the ignore list. What they were proposing didn't offend me so much, but went very much against the grain of my policy of useful discourse, coarse though it could possibly be. For the first time in the entire time I've been here, I felt unwelcomed by certain people, and for the simple reason that I disagreed with their point of view.

As a liberal who believes in the value of disagreement as a positive force, this is unconscionable. Probably the only one true foul you can commit in my book.

For once, it seems, our divisions are coming to the fore, and personal agenda is replacing collective will.

We are teetering on the edge of a precipice where we can lose focus on the future if we step one way and reap genuine rewards if we step another.

Not too long ago, I did a post where I stated the reasons I believed that Kerry would be an improper choice for '08. Predictably, and acceptably, most respondents either agreed or responded cordially with their own views. Then one poster decided that he/she didn't like my view, and started accusing me of rule violations. Everything was fine until that moment. Anger, fear, and aggression. Welcome to the Dark Side of DU.

With my next post, I hope to do nothing more than express an honestly held view. I am neither interested in opening up dialogue, nor shutting it down. Dialogue, by its definition, requires at least two participants, and I suspect that the answer to your question may be revealed by how the other person or persons behave when they are confronted with a view that they don't necessarily like. Will we be Jedi, or will we be Sith?

[NoPasaran]

35. I try for a cheap laugh

Maybe that sounds crass, but I think that if someone's opinions are so flexible that I can change them with something I post on the internet, the next person posting can probably change them back. On the other hand, a joke is a joke.

[nashville_brook]

37. never underestimate the power of a well-turned phrase

:)

[Karenina]

41. Thoughts are THINGS.

Well-expressed thought are timeless.

I was a highwayman
Across the coach roads I did ride
With sword and pistol by my side
And many a young maid lost her baubles to my trade
And many a soldier shed his life's blood on my blade
The bastards hung me in the spring of twenty-five
But I am still alive...

Jimmy Webb
Copyright 1977 White Oak Songs

[Quantess]

47. I often go for cheap laughs too, but then

there's always someone who thinks levity is trollish. Thanks for doing your part to keep up the good humor.

[RiverStone]

40. Great question.

Appreciate you asking it nashville_brook. Keeping the "discourse open" is always a good thing. In my short time on DU, I have been both thrilled at the depth of ideas and also a little surprised at how heated some of these threads get when yes, we ARE on the same side! Agree or not, I give credit to all DUers for wishing to stay involved and informed. Kudo's to you for making a positive point about what we can achieve on DU. And regarding what do I want to accomplish with my next post?

Funny thing, with all the heavy news recently - I simply wanted to share a smile :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x3007091

oops, that was my last post!

Cheers~

[progressivebydesign]

42. 49% I post to support someone else's ideas (a kudo post).

the other 49% is just to give my opinion on the matter... then that 2% is sometimes used to ask for clarification or perhaps, rarely, give someone a bit of shit if they're being mean to someone else. Of course, I've been here since January 2001, so I'm not into the flame baiting, attacks on newbies, and running arguments. I"m just here to see what others think, express my opinions, and lend support. I know I"m doing okay by the number of "thank you" messages in my DU inbox from DUers for whom I've gone to bat.

[nashville_brook]

44. i really love DU threads where people pile on links to issues...

someone brings up a subject and others share resource links... my bookmarks are full of these.

[The Straight Story]

45. I just try to express myself usually

And illustrate what and how I am feeling. And then examining replies to see if maybe I was wrong via the intelligent input offered back.

Post and learn. Post and teach.

[shadowknows69]

48. To get you to read it

HA it worked!!!

[leftofthedial]

50. to persuade one DUer that capitalism is the yoke

of our slavery.

[nashville_brook]

59. doesn't it make sense, in a capitalist culture, to thoroughly critque that system?

i took big heapin' helpings of marxism in college and grad school, and i think no one is less understood than marx. people fight over his legacy like blind men groping and elephant -- "it's snakelike... no, it's like a wall... i think it's more like a rope..."

the one simple thought that turned me on was "alienated labor" and his premise that our nature was as beings in action -- beings who work and produce. in college i vowed to avoid alienated labor at all costs... directly after college i found myself doing marketing -- the very DEFINITION of alienated labor (for me, at least). to make things worse, i soon took a job in economic development. so, alienated labor in the belly of the beast.

sure, it's nice to get paid -- but at what cost?

there's so many discussions under the banner of "captialism = slavery," but for me, right now, it's a personal thing. i FEEL it.

[leftofthedial]

61. capitalism is a lie,

a poisonous drink, sweetened with the honey of our own greed

[hunter]

53. I post here looking for other points of view, mostly.

It's too damned easy to agree with myself, and hard to argue with myself!

I don't have anyone on ignore, and I think the only way of shutting me down would be to tombstone me, but generally I think I'm pretty well mannered, especially here in a place that's not so rife with homophobia, racism, creationism, etc., as many other forums are.

What do I hope to accomplish? I hope that I can pick up arguments on DU that are useful in the world outside of DU. And I often do.

If DU was an entirely civilized place, one where people were overly careful not to offend the sensibilities of others, than it wouldn't be as attractive to me. Sometimes I'm in a mood to brawl, sometimes I'm in a mood to talk. If I'm not in a mood to brawl I simply stay out of threads where brawls are taking place.

To me there is no difference between opening up a dialog, or "shutting it down." When somebody attacks me, tries to shut me down, it's just an invitation for dialog.

[DarkTirade]

54. If I help one person it's worth the effort.

Whether I make them stop and think, or have a good discussion, or even just make them smile or laugh.

[omega minimo]

55. Nothing

[Donald Ian Rankin]

56. The goal of discussion is to reach correct conclusions.

There's a world of difference between "shutting someone down" - which only the moderators can do - and demonstrating that they're wrong.

"Opening discourse up" is at best a necessary evil; what we ought to be aiming to do is to be right about as many thngs as possible. Obviously we can always be certain what the right answer is, and in those circumstances we need to remain somewhat open-minded, but doing so is only a necessary evil.

[nashville_brook]

60. i guess, my thought here is that a thread that reaches "correct conclusions"

would be a very short thread, with little or no participation. 50 or 60 "greatest votes" and 300 or so "right-on" responses mean that people see, acknowledge and move on. so there's less opportunity for growth or for the idea to really sink in.

one of my favorite posters started a thread a couple of days ago on Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth and offered the critique that Al should have spent more time on providing solutions to the crisis in order to tie the ideas up in a way that couldn't be faulted by corporate interests. i think that if he had offered "solutions" and thereby *closed the argument* then, we might not still be talking about the ideas b/c there would be little reason to if it's all finished.

people need to participate in order to identify with an idea. lets say i'm a feminist, which i am. and everytime someone displayed some sort of sexist leaning i hit them with the "correct conclusion" that they have unexamined sexist leanings. from experience i know that this shuts down discussion and turns people away. a better strategy is to turn the discussion around somehow and help the person recognize unexamined sexism indirectly -- perhaps by doing a comparison with unexamined racism. so, maybe there's a way to engage the other person without attempting to make them do something no one wants to do -- which is swallow hard and admit they're wrong. maybe they aren't wrong. maybe i'm wrong. at any rate, i'd rather have people checking in on womens' issues threads, rather than passing them up for fear of being corrected.

[midnight]

57. I'm looking for information about the Active Govt. poster.

He was a whistle blower for Hallibutrton. I know a post was placed a couple of days ago about David but I haven't heard anything. Anyone know or hear anything?

[nashville_brook]

62. check the greatest page -- he checked in today

mentioned that he had an unexpected health concern, but is fine now. :)

[skip fox]

58. to be able to get through.

nt