I strenuously object to this proposal as offered. I do not see the need for religious/political/philosophical topics at all as we can all find forums devoted to these subjects if we feel the need. However, picking on one subset of ideas for some special banishment is not called for or desirable IMHO. We should instead call for general restraint and keep to the topics for which this list exists. Of course this is Friday so a loosening of the normal rules has already been decreed. VANAGONS RULE!! Mark David Beierl wrote: > > At 11:37 5/19/2000, BRENT CHRISTENSEN wrote: > > >Do you all remember the thread last year about this time that started out > >innocently enough about the > > I do. Sigh. > > >PS: I am withholding my opinion on the whole gun subject, since I think it > >is silly to even discuss it on this forum. It is pretty easy to figure > >out that there are about two or three subjects that ANY group of humans > >WILL NEVER AGREE ON, and gun ownership is certainly one of them. > > Guns tend to be a "religious" issue, i.e. one where the various viewpoints > are not generally susceptible to reasoned argument and therefore one where > it is unlikely that person A will bring even one of persons B, C, D, E to > change his opinion one iota (and since I've mentioned the R word, I'll > indulge myself by mentioning that the expression arises because the > difference in belief between the parties in the most famous Christian > heresy -- a profound difference if you care about such things -- was > expressed by spelling a single word with or without the letter > "iota." Thus doth the language grow...). > > A prime aspect of "religious" issues is that, since the energy in the > discussion is unavailable for light or motion, it has noplace to go except > heat. Because of this, and because of the resulting embarrassment and > discomfort of innocent bystanders, and since the history of the list bears > this out... > > ...therefore I Propose a special amendment to the list rules, specifically > forbidding discussion of the philosophy of guns on the list. > > I also think that it would be wise to avoid discussing the various > enthusiastic details of personal armament, since it tempts non-enthusiasts > to begin discussing philosophy, but I'm not asking that this be banned. > > david > David Beierl - Providence, RI > http://pws.prserv.net/synergy/Vanagon/ > '84 Westy "Dutiful Passage" > '85 GL "Poor Relation" |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.