OT -- Re: random cover of a range

[John Reimer]

Hello Bill,

> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:51 AM, John Reimer
> <terminal.node at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hello Bill,
>> 
>>> Reject and refute all you want, but these newsgroups are not the
>>> forum
>>> for doing it.
>>> A blog post of your own or an offline message to the person in
>>> question would be a more appropriate response, I think.
>>> --bb
>> Yes, this effectively moderates me, but does not moderate the other
>> individual for his contribution.  This is typical response, Bill.
>> 
> Did I miss some post here from the other party trying to force his
> views on you?
> 


*sigh* views are not always expressed or forced by a post, Bill.  That's 
a very one-dimensional view of things.  Maybe if you had read some of my 
posts you might have discovered that.


>> If I publicly denounce something, it may be rejected, refuted,
>> ignored or even detested.  But I believe there is sometimes very good
>> reason to confront things publicly, just as there is equal right for
>> you to reject what I'm saying publicly.
>> 
> I'm not rejecting or refuting your opinions -- I didn't actually read
> them. You have a right to your opinions like everyone.  I just don't
> care to see this NG become a dumping ground for debates about personal
> lifestyle choices, because such things get emotional and typically
> have no resolution, like debating religion or abortion or
> homosexuality.   Such debates leave no one satisfied and everyone
> agitated.  So let's focus on what we have in common here, which is a
> believe that D is a really useful programming language.
> 
> --bb
> 


That's fair.  The debates don't necessarily have the results of changing 
minds, Bill, as you say.  That isn't always the intent even if some of us 
would desire that.  What they do actually do is still significant, however. 
 By expressing them, they can make changes happen that can actually save 
others from being subjected to something that is hurtful or dangerous.  We 
see this all the time, to mention once more, in the D design process.


The emotional response are a side-effect, not an object of such a discussion 
 (which happens even in non-ethically oriented issues of D design, go figure). 
 You argument claims that such discussions are always useless which is fatalism 
at its finest.   There is sometimes resolution, Bill, and to say otherwise 
forces your opinion on others ever so much as mine does.


That said, focus can continue on with D whenever anywone wants.


-JJR