[RANT] Fist versus Nose
khromat
just have to vent someplace safe...
There's an old adage regaring rights: The right for you to throw a punch
ends where my nose begins. What this translates as, is that rights are
for individuals and you cannot excercise yours by impinging others'
rights.
Locations like social mudds and newsgroups further muddy the waters
because they are private systems with public access. "Rights" don't
exist there, only "privledges" given by the administration of the
system. Some of those privledges look familiar (open speech, right to
counsel, etc) and so people believe they have their 'inalienable rights'
handed down on a silver Bill Of Rights intact... often to the point of
being abusive and antisocial for the sake of their personal
entertainment.
The rabble-rousers use the 'they can't touch me, I have a right to be
here' argument to snarl up the machinery of administration. And there
are wizards/admin who are so politically liberal that they let them get
away with that 'right' at the risk of a more general disruption of the
social environment. Between the two, a lot of people suffer for the
entertainment of a few sociopathic misanthropes -- and this is why
flames tend to kill conversation on newsgroups, and mucks go through
periods of strife and declines in attendance, as the average person
wants to have fun and will go elsewhere to avoid abuse.
People should stop playing into the rabble-rouser's game.. ignore trolls
entirely, keep logs and complain to wizards when one is 'exercising his
right' in a public area of a social mudd... get them removed in ways
they can't weasel out of, working within the system.
-- ermine
==================================
home email: KhromatAtInOrbitDotCom
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
ka...@my-deja.com
That is precisely the reason why I support a moderated newsgroup for
AFF. I am sick of the flames and nastiness that have driven many away,
and have witnessed newbies avoiding cons because they think cons are as
unfriendly as the newsgroup. I have found many friends in furrydom, and
I grieve for those who may never find such friends because of a few who
delight in making others miserable.
>
>
> -- ermine
> ==================================
> home email: KhromatAtInOrbitDotCom
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
Kagur
Andrija Popovic
ka...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <8fp3c2$ach$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> khromat <khr...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > Something that cropped up yet again on the muck I'm a wizard on,
> which I
> > just have to vent someplace safe...
> >
> > There's an old adage regaring rights: The right for you to throw a
> punch
> > ends where my nose begins. What this translates as, is that rights
> are
> > for individuals and you cannot excercise yours by impinging others'
> > rights.
> > The rabble-rousers use the 'they can't touch me, I have a right to
be
> > here' argument to snarl up the machinery of administration. And
there
> > are wizards/admin who are so politically liberal that they let them
> get
> > away with that 'right' at the risk of a more general disruption of
the
> > social environment. Between the two, a lot of people suffer for the
> > entertainment of a few sociopathic misanthropes -- and this is why
> > flames tend to kill conversation on newsgroups, and mucks go through
> > periods of strife and declines in attendance, as the average person
> > wants to have fun and will go elsewhere to avoid abuse.
>
> That is precisely the reason why I support a moderated newsgroup for
> AFF. I am sick of the flames and nastiness that have driven many away,
> and have witnessed newbies avoiding cons because they think cons are
as
> unfriendly as the newsgroup. I have found many friends in furrydom,
and
> I grieve for those who may never find such friends because of a few
who
> delight in making others miserable.
It's unfortunate that the 'net as it is right now has contributed to
this sort of behavior. Because there is no direct, physical interaction
between people, trolls and their ilk feel free to act in ways that would
get them in serious trouble face to face. Some of the things I've seen
and heard would be grounds for legal action in the real world.
Unfortunately, most people tolerate these miscreants simply because
dealing with them would take too much effort. I was on a role-playing
MU* for a while that demonstrated the worst the net had to offer.
One player committed acts, in character, that would have had her
executed three times over according to the game. Out of character, she
slandered people, flamed and insulted others on the mailing list, and
even called wizards she knew in real life to harangue them every time
her character was punished for what happened ICly.
Meanwhile another player, one of the sweetest and most concientious
persons I've ever had the joy of role playing with, found her character
summarily executed for a relatively minor offense especially when
compared to the actions of the first player I mentioned. Then why did
her character die? Because she wouldn't be so obnoxious about it
afterwards.
In essence, player one was rewarded for being abusive. People let her do
what she wanted, because taking her to task for her actions would be to
troublesome.
I think, in the end, some action has to be taken against people who are
wantonly distruptive. Because by doing nothing, you're just telling them
it's ok to continue.
Andrija
--
Andrija Popovic
vu...@erols.com