[GPSCC-chat] discussion vs. contention

[Caroline Yacoub]

Now we're having a contention about the best way to solve the contention. That was not my intention :-)

--- On Thu, 5/16/13, John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com> wrote:


From: John Thielking <pagesincolor at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] discussion vs. contention
To: "Drew" <rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com>, "Spencer Graves" <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
Cc: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
Date: Thursday, May 16, 2013, 2:43 PM







Since both Drew and I are friends on Facebook, Drew could simply post rebuttals on my page Small Businesses Are People Too. Then we can get back to you with the results.  How about that instead?
 
John Thielking

--- On Thu, 5/16/13, Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com> wrote:


From: Spencer Graves <spencer.graves at prodsyse.com>
Subject: Re: [GPSCC-chat] discussion vs. contention
To: "Drew" <rainbeaufriend at yahoo.com>
Cc: "sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
Date: Thursday, May 16, 2013, 2:06 PM




Hi, Drew, John, et al.:  


On 5/16/2013 1:22 PM, Drew wrote:



If it is only about personalities (which this is not) I agree with this sentiment, however just as any false or harmful statement made in public against others it needs to be challenged also in public.

      I see two problems here:   


            1.  One persons "facts" are another's potentially "false or harmful statements".  


            2.  Sometimes the more I say, the less I communicate.  This is particularly true with a long string of emails in the same thread in a list like this.  I haven't paid a lot of attention to this thread other than to see that Drew and John each have strong positions about something -- and the issues are easily misunderstood, because an email thread like this is a very poor tool for promoting understanding and reconciliation.  


      Would Drew and John mind moving this discussion to Wikiversity under the "Broad political discourse" initiative I'm trying to start there (http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Broad_political_discourse)?  In this forum, I would ask the discussion to be organized like a table with three columns with titles something like "heterodox" and "orthodox" with "research needed" between the two.  This would allow each side to present their case with the supporting evidence and the other to raise questions about the evidence.  With a little luck, after some formal analysis and organization of evidence, you can develop a consensus statement that could then be reposted back to the group.  


      I can provide technical assistance in creating a Wikiversity page for this and helping answer questions about the Wikimedia markup language so the discussion is actually productive, and it is easier to understand the different positions, the evidence behind same, and how a consensus might be reached.  


      Spencer 




 
Green is GO!


Drew


~*~*~*~
Dr. Jill Stein and Cheri Honkala leading the 100 member Green Shadow Cabinet to A Green New Deal for America
http://greenshadowcabinet.us

Dr. Stein's Campaign website:  http://www.jillstein.org/
Climate Voter Power Pledge: http://www.jillstein.org/dc_climate_protests
    First TV Ad http://tinyurl.com/JillStein1stAd








From: Caroline Yacoub <carolineyacoub at att.net>
To: sosfbay-discuss <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org> 
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2013 1:08 PM
Subject: [GPSCC-chat] discussion vs. contention








When something on our discussion list devolves into a personal contention, I think those involved should address their postings to each other rather than to the entire list.
Caroline
_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss



 
_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss

-- 
Spencer Graves, PE, PhD
President and Chief Technology Officer
Structure Inspection and Monitoring, Inc.
751 Emerson Ct.
San José, CA 95126
ph:  408-655-4567
web:  www.structuremonitoring.com

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----


_______________________________________________
sosfbay-discuss mailing list
sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
http://lists.cagreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20130516/669e94d6/attachment.html>