On fighting fire with fire...

[mustafa]

Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 15:23:46 -0500, Rocco Moretti wrote:
> 
> 
>>Professionals (and even decent hobbyists) don't 
>>escalate flame wars, even unintentionally.
> 
> 
> You don't get out much, do you? *wink*
> 
> If your comment is meant to be _prescriptive_ rather than _descriptive_, I
> don't entirely agree.
> 
> Flame wars, like all wars, are unproductive beyond a certain point, but to
> push the combat analogy, punitive raids can be productive at changing
> behaviour.
> 
> It is never pleasant to be on the receiving end of a flaming, but if it is
> deserved, then people should accept it and learn from it, rather than just
> dismiss it as a flaming and therefore meaningless.
> 
> The problem on the Internet is that there is little or no status: the most
> ignorant newbie and the stupidest AOLer think that they are equal in
> status to somebody who has proven their knowledge for ten years. (This
> lack of status on the Internet is not *always* a bad thing, but it can be.)
> 
> If your boss or professor or a judge gave you a tongue-lashing for stupid
> behaviour, sensible people accept it. "I've been bad, I got caught, thank
> goodness I'm suffering nothing worse than being told I'm an idiot." At
> worst they might complain to their friends afterwards. 
> 
> But on the Internet, people who deserve that tongue-lashing think that
> because they can retaliate, they should retaliate -- and that's where the
> risk of escalation from punitive raid to unproductive flame war lies.
> 
> 
> 
your wierd.
i dont mean that in a bad sense but your the first
the person to i have seen who think in internet does not
have a status quo.
i newbie is classified as one from his first post in any mailing list or 
forum.(in fact most forums siply give you that status according to you 
post count.