1 |
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Mon, 12 May 2014 10:22:56 -0400 |
3 |
> Rich Freeman <rich@××××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> |
6 |
>> wrote: |
7 |
>> > |
8 |
>> > I don't know what to say now. |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> Not picking on you in particular, I think this thread jumped the shark |
11 |
>> and is now stomping on it. It makes my eyes bleed. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> How is it that on mailing lists, discussions always take too long? |
14 |
> Maybe the Council should decide on a proper cutoff depth or length. |
15 |
|
16 |
Well, there is no such thing as a discussion which is too long. |
17 |
However, there does come a point where everybody is just treading over |
18 |
the same points over and over. |
19 |
|
20 |
People can keep posting if they want to, but I doubt it will affect |
21 |
the outcome of a vote. It just wastes everybody's time. |
22 |
|
23 |
Speaking for myself, I try to look at a debate, maybe poke and prod at |
24 |
it a little to see if anything lurks under a stone, and then take it |
25 |
all in and try to make the best call. I do tend to look at how |
26 |
widely-supported an argument is, though the strength of the argument |
27 |
itself matters more. How many times the argument gets made really |
28 |
doesn't concern me all that much. So, regurgitating your own argument |
29 |
basically adds nothing, but a simple ++ to somebody else's adds a |
30 |
little, and saying something that nobody has yet to point out adds |
31 |
most of all. |
32 |
|
33 |
Rich |