[PLUG] PLUG vs. PLUG

Phil Tomson ptkwt at aracnet.com
Mon Jan 19 20:24:01 UTC 2004


OK, that's it, I'm unsubscribing.  I've been on 
the plug list (the original one) off and on for some years now, but I'm 
finding both sides of this un-civil war annoying. 

Time to get a Mac and join the local OSX LUG.

Phil 

"A house divided against itself cannot stand"

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Jeme A Brelin wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Cliff Wells wrote:
> > Jeme A Brelin wrote:
> > >One member's actions do not impact the whole of the organization... unlike
> > >PDXLUG.
> >
> > No, but the fact that he was instrumental in starting this entire
> > argument and the fact that his reasons for starting the argument were
> > entirely self-serving should be enough for you to reconsider your own
> > reasons for doing his dirty work.
> [snip]
> > As ridiculous as that seems in regards to a computer club (that's that
> > it is, don't fool yourself), he uses his status in the club to boost his
> > business.  He truly does see PLUG as a business.  An advertising and
> > promotional business.  And you are helping him.
> 
> I'm not doing someone else's dirty work.  I have my own reasons for
> defending my position and they've all (I think) been stated within this
> thread.
> 
> > >It's about open systems versus closed.  PDXLUG has chosen a route where
> > >exclusion is practiced and authority in the hands of the few.  That's
> > >ideological.
> > >
> > I still haven't seen this.  If I discover this is indeed the case, then
> > I will probably leave that group.  I certainly won't hang about
> > defending people who lack integrity.
> 
> What about Russell and Dan's particular comments about being kicked off
> the PDXLUG list and their mail questioning the situation going unanswered
> or bounced?
> 
> Russell, for one, has offered to show the bounces.
> 
> > You might consider your own stance here.
> 
> Which stance do you believe I haven't considered?
> 
> > >>The fact that there were some personality conflicts does not make it
> > >>grounds for the accusations that have been flung about today.
> > >
> > >Which personality conflicts?  The ones that caused the PDXLUG people to
> > >get in a huff because they couldn't kick people out of PLUG?  I don't
> > >quite know what you mean.
> > >
> > Whatever.  Rehashing history doesn't make your case any stronger.
> 
> Then don't bring it up.
> 
> > What is in the past is just that.  The people I've met in PDXLUG don't
> > appear to be that way at all.
> 
> Then you haven't met Matt King, poobah of the mailing list.  It's been
> demonstrated that he is "that way".
> 
> > Maybe you are doing just what you accused me of: labeling an entire
> > group based on the actions of one person.
> 
> I'm labelling the actions of the founder on the action of the founder.
> You'll find that I'm writing about the founding of the group and the
> intent when those founding actions were taken (creating the mailing list,
> choosing the name, setting up initial meetings, etc.).
> 
> I've made no blanket comment about all members of the mailing list or
> attendees of the meetings.
> 
> > >>Also, the fact that the palm branch has been slapped from Robby's hand
> > >>several times doesn't make PLUG look any better.
> > >
> > >I think you mean "olive branch".  And it was as much a peace offering as
> > >Bush's "peace plan" in the Middle East; i.e., "Can't we all just do it my
> > >way?"
> > >
> > Okay, I've told you that Robby is a decent person, probably a lot more
> > decent than you.  He is one of the few people I know who actually has
> > beliefs and stands by them.
> 
> I suggested earlier that your prejudice in favor of Robby might be
> tainting your view of the situation and I think the above comments
> re-enforce that suggestion.
> 
> > I seriously doubt you can make that same claim.  I'll bet I could make
> > you drop your dearest beliefs quicker than you dropped your dress on
> > prom night if I chose to do so.  So please refrain from insulting your
> > betters.
> 
> Well, this is all just personal invective and conjecture.
> 
> My first contact with Robby was, I believe, when he came to me to take
> over some of the administrative duties for the Independent Media Center
> here in Portland (that was you, wasn't it Robby?).  I've had very little
> contact with him since and I am not going to attempt to judge which of us
> is the "better".
> 
> But your comments that I, personally, do not stand by my beliefs are not
> only false, but written in pure ignorance of my beliefs and conviction by
> them.
> 
> > >>>>The fact that Robby offered to loan books to people in PLUG and this
> > >>>>thread is the response should say a lot about your group.
> > >>>>
> > >>>OUR group, Cliff.  You're here, too.  You can't distance yourself from
> > >>>PLUG and be a member at the same time.
> > >>>
> > >>Well, that is certainly a breath of fresh air.
> > >>
> > >It's the same breath I've been breathing for years.  Thanks for smelling.
> > >
> > Frankly, it's starting to smell like shit.
> 
> It's the same breath.
> 
> > You offer a handshake with one hand and a slap (however feeble) with the
> > other.
> 
> What form did this "slap" take?
> 
> > But, I should have known, after all, I was warned by some members of
> > PDXLUG that PLUG members were mostly cowards.
> 
> That's 2 blind insults.
> 
> > >The beauty of PLUG is that it embraces things that important to some
> > >even if they're "completely beneath the radar of things that are even
> > >remotely important" to others.
> > >
> > >But your whole point today seems to be to put down any attempt by
> > >people who disagree with you to redress their grievances.
> > >
> > No, as I've stated before, I find the whining and bad-mouthing of people
> > I like in a public forum to be repulsive.
> 
> You've done most of the bad-mouthing yourself.  The statement of
> grievances could be called "whining", but that is their right and if you
> feel their grievance is unwarranted, you should strike it down on merit
> rather than insulting the person making the grievance.
> 
> > You obviously have a clever, if cowardly, way of trying to turn the
> > bitch-fest I've witnessed on this list sound like some free-speech
> > lovefest, but frankly it was gossip and of the worst kind as well.
> 
> What was gossip?  Your "it" is ambiguous.
> 
> > You rename it to whatever you like, but it doesn't change what it is.
> 
> Again, which "it"?
> 
> > I appreciate freedom of speech as much as the next person, but that
> > doesn't mean I have to respect the person utilizing that freedom.
> 
> You don't HAVE to respect people, but I believe it's the decent and
> honorable thing to do.
> 
> > Try to answer honestly for once:  why is it that when someone (okay, me)
> > engages in a discussion about the merits of PostgreSQL vs Access (this
> > was several months ago)  a bunch of people scream "OT" and that's *them*
> > exercising their freedom of speech, but when *I*, by myself, decide to
> > protest their actions, I'm not exercising mine?  Why aren't you
> > defending me?
> 
> I don't recall the discussion, actually.  But it sounds like you were
> really scorned and are quite bitter about it.  If it means anything, I'm
> sorry you were treated in a way that made you feel so bad.
> 
> Exactly how did you protest the actions of those that screamed "OT"?
> 
> The nice thing about PLUG is that everyone and their mother can scream
> "OT" and you can go right on discussing it.
> 
> > Oh wait:  because it isn't in your best interest.  Duh.
> 
> If you think you know the answer, don't ask.  If you don't know the
> answer, wait until you get an answer before you dismiss the question.
> 
> > >>If I didn't personally know several PDXLUG members and *know* for a
> > >>*fact* what their intentions are, then I might not be so defensive about
> > >>the mudslinging that several members on this list seem so fond of.
> > >
> > >Do share.  But you're 0-1 on your guesses up to this point.  It's not
> > >about having a list where OT discussion is safe, that's been proven.
> > >
> > Actually, if you knew anything at all, you would know that most PDXLUG
> > conversation doesn't take place on the mailing list.  The mailing list
> > is mostly for technical advice and announcements.  That is why going OT
> > is discouraged there.
> 
> So what does it mean to be a "member" of PDXLUG if subscription to the
> mailing list is not a requirement?  Is anyone participating in ANY PDXLUG
> condoned event a "member"?  The word "membership" has no meaning if there
> isn't some discrete method for telling what is and is not a member.  What
> defines the set?
> 
> With PLUG, we say that anybody who subscribes to the mailing list is a
> member.  It's pretty cut and dry that way.  That, combined with the
> unmoderated nature of the list, what makes the organization totally open.
> 
> > But then, speaking from ignorance appears to be the one skill you've
> > developed to it's fullest potential.
> 
> That's 3.
> 
> > >>Frankly, knowing Robby quite well (and having a fairly high opinion of
> > >>him as a person) and having seen how he has tried to quell this
> > >>argument and appease people I've become quite aggravated with the
> > >>unreasonableness of many people here.
> > >
> > >I think perhaps you're letting your prejudices get in the way.  Robby may
> > >well be a nice guy, but he has done very little to appease anybody.  He's
> > >rigidly stood his ground while others were in distress.
> > >
> > Distress?   _Distress_???? Are you serious?   One day,  I hope to laugh
> > directly in your face for that remark.   You must really have no idea
> > what that word means.
> 
> I know what the word means.  Some folks felt that they and their work is
> suffering from the confusion of the groups and are attempting to take that
> grievance up wherever they can to get it resolved and remove the strain.
> 
> > >>Robby made an upfront offer to share resources from PDXLUG.
> > >
> > >Um, no.  Robby pointed out that a resource existed.  It was already open
> > >to anybody's participation.  He didn't make any offer.
> > >
> > Whatever.
> 
> Why are you so negative about this?  We are adults here.  You can concede
> the point without being dismissive.
> 
> > If PDXLUG were really the exclusive group you claim, then those
> > resources certainly wouldn't be open to anybody's participation.
> > Please be consistent.
> 
> There's nothing inconsistent here.
> 
> A totalitarian regime can run public services.  Look at the Catholic
> Church.
> 
> > >>I'm sorry that people who aren't involved had to endure this thread,
> > >>but frankly, if public proclamations are going to be made then the
> > >>responses should be public as well.
> > >
> > >I'm perfectly content to see the public responses.  It's shown at least
> > >one person that PDXLUG is supports a dictatorship and is non-responsive
> > >to public concerns.  (See plug-talk for details.)
> > >
> > >Discourse is good.  Flinging insults is not.
> > >
> > If you try to use unsupported claims to support your argument, I'm going
> > to call you on it.
> 
> By all means.  Which claim needs more support?
> 
> > It's easy to fling barbs at others and then retreat behind the "ad
> > hominem attack!" shield, but frankly, the harshest words have come
> > directly from users in this group, mostly towards people who aren't here
> > defending themselves.
> 
> It's not a shield.  It's a reason to dismiss your comments.  You don't
> really take up the substance of the argument, but, rather, say nasty
> things about the people with whom you disagree.  Respond to the substance
> with measured, intelligent rebuttal and real steps can be made toward
> understanding.
> 
> And by the way, ALL of the words in this thread, not just the "harshest",
> came directly from users in this group.  We're ALL users in this group.
> Every single participant in this discussion is a user in this group.  You
> write as though you are somehow not one of those people, but that's
> absurd.
> 
> > I find it pathetic when people start a fight they're afraid to finish.
> 
> Forgive me for the assumption, but this appears to be some kind of defense
> mechanism that allows you to feel victorious when, in fact, people just
> got sick of going around in circles with your insults and dodges.  When a
> point is made to which you have no response, you fling out an insult.
> When a response is made to one of your arguments to which you have no
> reasonable rebuttal, you dismiss it with "whatever" or the like.
> 
> Listen to the arguments and respond to the arguments (and not the people
> making the arguments) and see if we don't all find a more pleasant
> discussion that might actually improve the state of things.
> 
> J.
> -- 
>    -----------------
>      Jeme A Brelin
>     jeme at brelin.net
>    -----------------
>  [cc] counter-copyright
>  http://www.openlaw.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug
> 





More information about the PLUG mailing list