On Wed, 9 Oct 2013, Karen Coyle wrote:
> I believe it's called a "pissing contest"
That's a *possibly* manipulative interpretation. Try to stick to the
facts and cite the specific streams you find objectionable. We have the
guts to expose ourselves to criticism, but try to keep it constructive.
OTOH, a lot of folks have had a lot of fun holding "pissing contests"
about RDA. :)
> and the rest of us should just hit delete.
That's your individual right. Don't be followers.
> At this point, the information content of the posts is nearing zero.
Precisely the gist of the whole discussion: is that statement clearly
verifiable or clearly an opinion, and what is it's intent?
What makes my position problematic is that folks don't seem to want to
discuss communication itself when they get into arguments. It seems to be
an alien concept, but it is central to replacing confrontational
argumentation with constructive decision-making. In fact, "All we have to
fear is fear itself."
"Style" of communication is always (IMHO) more important to discuss (and
often more interesting) than "issues", especially when manipulative styles
in times of ubiquitous, uncontrolled media presence can destroy entire
societies (or, even worse :), defund education and public libraries).
Cheers!
jgm
John G. Marr
Cataloger
CDS, UL
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
jmarr_at_unm.edu
californiastop_at_hushmail.com
** Forget the "self"; forget the "other"; just
consider what goes on in between. **
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.
Received on Wed Oct 09 2013 - 15:39:20 EDT