On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 1:40:42 PM UTC+11, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 3/31/2022 9:00 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> > On Friday, April 1, 2022 at 3:20:43 AM UTC+11, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On 3/30/2022 11:26 PM, Andrew Clarke wrote:
> >>> On Thursday, March 31, 2022 at 1:56:18 PM UTC+11, Bob Harper wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> But Andrew, courtesy so so old-fashioned, innit? No, not really; more
> >>>> courtesy would make this a better world, as I think you and I both
> >>>> understand.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> The most effortlessly courteous people I've ever met were members of a male voice choir from Chattanooga.
> >>>
> >>> Andrew Clarke
> >>> Canberra
> >> Among the set of all character traits, I'm not sure courtesy ranks very high. Besides, courtesy can be faked and it can be shallow.
> >
> > I'd much rather have a fake courteous conversation than a sincere flame war.
> I think there would be no point to such a conversation.
I think there is a whole lot of point in a courteous conversation in a group like this one, especially where we have representatives of two nations divided by a common language. The recent example of the use of 'fine' as in 'a fine performance' is very much a case in point. There would have been no point in my losing my temper about 'typical bloody Yanks who don't understand that the rest of the world doesn't necessarily use the English language the same way that they do' ;-) for example. You have to step back, analyse the situation and attempt a reasonably considerate response.
> > Isn't courtesy more a question of accepted social convention rather than a character trait?
> Not necessarily.
I am beginning to think that people use the word "courteous" in more than one way. I mean good manners and restraint, and the use of certain conventions which have evolved over centuries to prevent unnecessary conflict when, very often, none is justified.
> >
> > Incidentally, I suspect that future historians of the late twentieth century might well consider how Usenet, a golden opportunity for courteous cooperation, rapidly turned into a conduit for personal abuse between strangers.
> >
> Simple. You can't get punched in the nose over the internet. The threat of being banned is less of a deterrent.
But why on earth would any reasonably well brought-up or reasonably educated person want to start a flame war in the first place? People who can appreciate opera who turned their own newsgroup into a sewer? It's behaviour more appropriate to a schoolyard in a crime-ridden neighbourhood where nobody's graduated from high school in fifty years. All this wonderful technology being used as verbal toilet paper. What a waste.
Andrew Clarke
Canberra