[Reader-list] Dr. Prem's Eight fold path : Proposal for a reader-list protocol

[ARNAB CHATTERJEE]

I welcome this discussion on the health of the list
and 
Dr. Prem's eight fold path but a few queries


1.How is a person denied the right to speak ( write?)
on this list?

2.Ignoring an "offensive" post seems to be the best
remedy as per clause (2), but that is subsequent to
finding that the post is offensive, isn't it? But then
I've already read the post. And irrespective of such
proposals, it seems, all posts have been pursued and
read. If I be blind to offensive writing on the list,
then what is the use of ethical list protocol that
Prem is proposing? Do not read, do not see--if that is
the suggestion, then how does Dr. Prem's  'listening'
feature? It is a call to stop listening.

3. What is wrong if , for instance, Shuddha speaks to
me in order to  convince me, or be convinced? When one
is convinced, doesn't one learn? Is trying to convince
others , and not to coerce, an immoral principle?

4. "If your desire is to convince, then please think
> about whether a > discussion forum is a place you
should intrude upon." Who is this you, Dr. Prem? If
you've been talking only about "issues" and not
"people" [ yr clause (5),] then how come you are
urging people to opt out of the list? You should
attack, going by your principle, the issue and not the
people?

5. Can  negation be accomplished without engagement? I
think negation is the toughest job and new ideas in
the world have been thrown open by so called negator
and  not navigators-->( for instance by an  aggressive
thinker like Marx.)He was also the harbinger of the
most uncomfortable inventory of positive ideas.

6. Everybody should post an idea when s/he will able
to help himself/herself with that!!!! ( clause 7)Why?
What is the need of posting then? Does a dialogic
"interaction" ( clause 8) call for such self-help
project? I doubt Dr. Prem!

I think its clear by now that Dr. Prem's eight fold
path can boomerang! Anybody can construct
another--quite antagonistic one and so on!

Solution? Long ago Shuddha used a word 'list
etiquette'and that is the right one; an invisible call
for an unseen ethical demand is the only solution for
a list like this; not enumeration.
 
thanking you
yours in discourse and defeat
Arnab
 






--- Prem Chandavarkar <prem.cnt at gmail.com> wrote:

> 1.  If you see a post with which you disagree, your
> disagreement should be
> phrased so as to also imply an acknowledgement of
> the person's right to
> speak.
> 
> 2. If you see a post whose language or attitude you
> find offensive or
> unpalatable, just ignore it.  Over a period of time,
> that will be the best
> filter to sort who is likely to speak constructively
> on this list.
> 
> 3. The reader-list is a space for an exchange of
> ideas.  Therefore, speak in
> order to learn, not in order to convince.
> 
> 4. If your desire is to convince, then please think
> about whether a
> discussion forum is a place you should intrude upon.
> 
> 5. Attack issues, do not attack people.
> 
> 6. When you respond to a post, do not just negate
> it, but engage with it and
> build on it in order to throw up a new idea into the
> public commons that is
> the reader-list.
> 
> 7. When you post a new message on a fresh subject,
> do so only if you feel
> that critique or dissent will be helpful to you.
> 
> 8. And finally, remember that we interact on this
> list through language; and
> language always has two dimensions - speaking and
> listening.  Participation
> in this list requires a commitment to both
> dimensions.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
> the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to
> reader-list-request at sarai.net with subscribe in the
> subject header.
> To unsubscribe:
> https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list 
> List archive:
&lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>



      Bring your gang together - do your thing. Go to http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups