Subject: Re: OT Re: GNU CLISP 2.32 released From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 14 Jan 2004 21:11:01 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <3283103461920369KL2065E@naggum.no> * Fred Gilham | The way this came out, it sounds like Mario Mommer is saying that | only people who agree with his views should have a forum here. If I may... It is his opinion. It has no bearing on you unless you let it. If he /appears/ to want other views to be banished, what are you saying outright about his views? | Mario's posting seems even more problematic, since he implicitly | claims to retain the right to express his own views while wanting to | suppress those of people he disagrees with. This is not problematic. Ignore the "implicit claim" and consider what he says. If you think he wants to suppress the opinions of those he disagrees with, what of it? Why does it affect you? What can he /do/? Pointing it out, however, strongly communicates that you want to suppress /his/ opinion, and that is the only message he will receive -- that your reaction to something you do not want to hear is to suppress it, while at the same time denying his right to same. Chances are, he never had a desire to suppress your opinion, so now he only observes that /you/ come out strongly in favor of denying him his right to express an opinion just because you think it is suppressive, and unless he is very mature, he will consider this a much worse threat than you considered his "implicit claim". Just let other people have their desires and needs. Do not let them affect yours. Wanting to control other people's desires and needs is the core problem. If it has been "learned" from observing others who want to control your own desires and needs, you can do nothing better than to unlearn it and realize that /nobody/ wants to control your desires and needs, even if they appear to do so, and even if they are explicit: the only person who controls them is /you/, and the only way anybody can succeed in controlling them is by making /you/ change your own desires and needs. Take charge of yourself, instead, and expect others to do the same. But let's try to avoid the meta-discussions about how other people try to manipulate your rights to express yourself. Look around you. There is nobody /here/ who could possibly affect what you write or which opinions or views you express -- you have to invent them to be present with you. No matter what anybody says, the only person who can make you feel any way at all from what you /read/ is yourself, after you have interpreted what you have read. This is not fiction, however, and you have no obligation to enter the world of any author to take part in a discussion with them. With nearly a year's worth of distance, I can confidently say this: The /incredibly/ bad people who frequent so many newsgroups have /zero/ effect on anyone unless they let them. | This reminds me of the way this thread got started, which was when | someone told the CLISP developers to lose the Menorah. Just as anyone is free to say they should, they are free to ignore it. Unless someone can demonstrate actual damage from an action and that they were hurt despite taking reasonable precautions, their complaints /must/ be dismissed as frivolous. Just because someone says he suffers, does not mean he does, and even if he does, that does not mean it is anyone's business. Quite the contrary, a lot of really bad people successfully manipulate others by lying about how they suffer and exploit the natural tendency of better humans to feel compassion for sufferers, but in real life, we quickly withdraw our sympathy from people who hurt themselves in order to gain the sympathy of others, even more so after learning that they tried to blame someone. On the Net, you have to take someone's word for it, and if they can accuse someone else who has been accused by others, as well, really bad people can make it appear as though they are hurt so they can manipulate other people into doing their bidding. Just because someone points out that something is not the way it ought to be, does not mean that they blame someone else for it or demand that they change it. I'd like to believe that people have managed to calm down and grow up in my absence -- I know that some people completely failed to do either as long as they saw my name and had an excuse not to -- and the first order of business for a mature, calm person is to accept full responsibility for his own emotions, reactions, /and/ actions. This is hard. It is a lot harder than blaming someone for any or all of them. But in the long run, it is much, much easier. -- Erik Naggum | Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.