Re: virus: META: a rule for the list

David McFadzean (
Wed, 22 Oct 1997 09:38:53 -0600

At 08:26 AM 10/22/97 -0400, Paul Prestopnik wrote:

>I think the idea is that in making a post you may be trying to travel down
>a certain path, to explore the end of it, and then due to the attacks,
>irrelevant to your argument, you find the travel taking place in a
>direction perpindicular to the intended. I agree that limiting feedback is
>not the best solution, but in some cases, it may be a better solution than
>never getting anywhere.

Maybe the best strategy is just to ignore attacks that are irrelevant.
Don't waste your time refuting objections when you have no reason to
believe that your refutations matter to the objector. The only problem
is that ignoring objections might appear like you have no refutations,
but this is a risk that one has to take.

For instance Brett recently posted a number of objections to my T-grid

>Though I remember it was to be multidimensional (and that the corners folded
>in--perhaps in many numbers of ways...) the illustration seems to indicate
>that two people coming from different perspectives are opposed in some way.

This is so confused I don't even know where to start. So I choose not to reply
in the hopes that readers won't take Brett's word for it.

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Church of Virus