Civility in the Marketplace of Ideas [was: Public Domain Python]

[Christopher Browne]

In our last episode (Wed, 20 Sep 2000 16:14:12 -0400),
the artist formerly known as Steve Holden said:
>Pat McCann, using bogus email addresses, wrote:
>> 
>[bemoaning the frequent lack of civility in celebrities]
>> 
>> Of course, this shouldn't be taken as a defense of everything said in
>> public forums which allow a measure of anonymity where behavior is free
>> to sink far below even Stallman's low level of civility.
>
>I clearly don't know Stallman, but he seems from his public pronouncements
>quite a thoughtful type, and there usually seems to be logical justification
>for whatever positions he may publicly profess.  Perhaps you've suffered at
>his hands (or rather, vocal chords) and I haven't?
>
>Or is the above just the kind of personal vilification that "celebrities"
>learn to expect and ignore, not having the time to defend themselves?

I think it's more likely to be a combination of the latter with the
fact that there are some that frankly jump all the way off the deep
end when Stallman either opens his mouth or places hands on keyboard.

RMS doesn't always say particularly agreeable things; he's pretty
honest when he _doesn't agree_.

The other property of his comments that is a bit more arguable is that
he often does not so much participate in dialogue as much as
"pronouncements ex cathedra," which sort of leaves anyone else out of
the conversation.  The problem being that too often it's _not_ a
conversation.

I'm sure that the semblance to the papacy also raises some hackles;
the parallels to organized religion are remarkably many, and people of
all sorts of religious persuasions have ample opportunity to get
irritated...

>It's not that I feel your comments *have* to be justified, particularly
>since bandwidth on a group like this is precious, but I'm not aware that
>Stallman, while possibly lacking in interpersonal skills (and he's not
>alone in that one, matey, as most of my friends could affirm) is uncivil.
>
>You, of course, may know better.
>
>Stallman does, at least, publish his email address so those who take issue
>with him can do so in person!

... And he actually _does_ answer email.  He may treat Usenet as a
"write-only" medium, likewise the web; I rather think that many of
those that consider him uncivil have more than a little bit of a chip
on their shoulders themselves.

"Easy to get along with"?  Perhaps not.  

I've heard a remarkable combination of comments concerning the notion
of "RMS" and "marriage" that seem to add up to him being pretty
strongwilled, and not terribly open to the change that would be
necessary for such a relationship, despite having the quite natural
human desire for relationship and intimacy.

But "uncivil" does not seem to be a civil comment.
-- 
(concatenate 'string "aa454" "@" "freenet.carleton.ca")
<http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
"Now, if someone proposed using people who spam comp.sys.* groups with
political  screeds  in  place  of  lab  rats  for  drug  testing,  I'd
wholeheartedly concur".  -- John C. Randolph