[p2p-research] Again on mailing lists, was: Post-Depression first: Americans get more money from government than they give back | csmonitor.com
mfioretti at nexaima.net
Fri Nov 27 19:55:16 CET 2009
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 12:33:15 PM -0600, Kevin Carson wrote:
> I LIKE the posts by Paul, Ryan, Michel, Eric and others that include
> thoroughly developed and supported arguments. And I LIKE going
> through threaded emails on lines of argument that interest me, seeing
> point-by-point responses.
So do I, otherwise I'd have unsubscribed for good long ago. Kevin, I
suspect that (even if you're one of the very few people here who does
know how to use email in mailing lists) you are missing my point
First of all:
> If only those who are interested respond, and the rest lurk, that's fine.
what I've tried to explained several times is that, on this list, I
and others very often AVOID period, to respond and participate, even
WHEN the topic IS very interesting or we could give a useful
contribution... because threads become very quickly unreadable and
very time consuming to decipher, thanks to some posting habits.
Secondly, and this is where I suspect you miss my point:
> I'm not interested in seeing stuff "lightened" and dumbed down to the
> point that people are ready to "follow" it, when that means making it
> not worth following anyway.
Nobody ever talked of "lightening" and dumbing down anything. If I
wanted dumbed down discussions I'd watch reality shows on TV. I (and
A. Leitl, and in the past several other people!!!) am only complaining
about READABILITY. I *want* to read what Ryan, Michel, etc... say
here, and I want it as is, not dumbed down. I don't need dumbing down
of CONTENT, thank you very much.
I just get really frustrated when email is so messed up by bad
quoting, top posting and what not that it takes much more than
necessary to read it.
How would you feel if somebody, instead of giving you a printout of a
very interesting research paper, put his hands in the marmalade, then
used them to make a ball of those sheets of paper, then opened and
flattened them again (more marmalade), then handed you not the smeared
original sheets but a photocopy made with a copy machine running out
of toner? Because that's how I feel when I open most threads here. It
has NOTHING to do with the depth of the content.
Sorry to rehash this again. I really wanted this to end with my
earlier message, because it's obvious that it is useless to present
certain requests, but risking to also look like some retarded kid that
would like to participate in a discussion above his capabilities
really stirred me up.
More information about the p2presearch