R. I. Nelson wrote:
> How much better off would
> you and the world  be if, instead of  trying to publicly  embarass
> or put down someone on the list you would just give them a kind
> remark correcting them or take it offlist to instruct them of the
> proper thing.

This depends on the situation.  An honest mistake with no ill intention
shouldn't be put down.  However, dealing kindly and privately with someone
trying to "get away with" something is not useful for two reasons.  First,
it's rather painless for that person so there is little incentive to not do
it again.  Second, since nobody else saw the admonition it gives the
impression that the behavior is condoned.

This is an area where I have a strong disagreement with James.  Many of the
bigger problems on this list were because the standards have been and are
more ambiguous than they need to be.  If James sees a post he doesn't like
and sends a message to the offender, only the offender learns from that.  In
fact, everyone else learns exactly the opposite.  They see a marginal post
with no apparent reaction from James and therefore can only assume that it
was acceptable.

Another advantage of reacting publicly is that the response is likely to be
more reasoned and less knee jerk emotional.  You will probably say things
differently if you think 1500 people will read it than if you think only one
person will read it that you've already decided is a bozo.  James has a
tendency to assume hostile intent when someone strays over the line a bit.
This results in him getting emotional and overreacting.  I think in the vast
majority of cases there is no hostile intent, only the inevitable
differences in judgement between two people especially when the rules are a
bit vague in the first place.  Sometimes there are also outright errors
which may be a little harder to differentiate from hostile intent.  However
honest error should be given the benefit of doubt without further evidence.
Using a sledge hammer when a fly swatter would do is just going to piss off
people towards the admins needlessly.  This is not a good thing in general,
and certainly counter productive if you are asking for volunteer support for
the list.

The world has gotten way to PC, and we seem to have forgotten that it takes
two to be offended.  We immediately jump to the conclusion that the offender
was at fault when it is just as likely that the offendee was at fault.  In
other words, if you can't take someone telling you that you've been an
idiot, you don't belong on a mail list, the internet, or much anywhere else
in life.  Someone telling you that they have perceived you as acting like an
idiot is actually useful information, whether you agree with the assesment
or not.  Take it as a single point of information and not personally.  In
other words, get over it.

(Disclaimer: I am not an admin and these are only my personal opinions.)


******************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, (978) 742-9014.  #1 PIC
consultant in 2004 program year.  http://www.embedinc.com/products
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist