What does Al Kossow have against VCF?
I think this discussion as titled, is inappropriate on principles. First, it's a public discussion about an individual, their actions and their supposed motivations. What special knowledge or authority, do particular persons have or possess, regarding some one person other than themselves? I call this "gossip". Second, this is a discussion group sponsored by a non-profit educational corporation, for public purpose. I doubt discussions of this class suit those purposes. Any plausible rules of moderation would not permit persons to post negative commentary about an individual. If the owners of this discussion group fail to moderate, it falls to the members to self-moderate. And so I post accordingly. Discussions about the operation of a mail list, are usually counter-productive; I choose this lesser evil. Third, if there's a plausible discussion about something more appropriate, such as say changes in tastes in the vintage computing community (general or particular) - then change the subject line to reflect that discussion, and continue that discussion. Put another way: If no one moderates or complains about gossip and personal arguments, and those posts continue, then that becomes the standard. It becomes normalized. Makes it easier to do the next time, and the next. This is the core argument for moderation. Regards, Herb Johnson -- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey in the USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net
There is a reason many of us are only loosely affiliated with the group. These sorts of discussions happen way too frequently for my liking. I love the core principals of VCF, but these sorts of discussions have me rolling my eyes once again. Pete
On Aug 18, 2021, at 11:44 AM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I think this discussion as titled, is inappropriate on principles.
First, it's a public discussion about an individual, their actions and their supposed motivations. What special knowledge or authority, do particular persons have or possess, regarding some one person other than themselves? I call this "gossip".
Second, this is a discussion group sponsored by a non-profit educational corporation, for public purpose. I doubt discussions of this class suit those purposes.
Any plausible rules of moderation would not permit persons to post negative commentary about an individual. If the owners of this discussion group fail to moderate, it falls to the members to self-moderate. And so I post accordingly.
Discussions about the operation of a mail list, are usually counter-productive; I choose this lesser evil.
Third, if there's a plausible discussion about something more appropriate, such as say changes in tastes in the vintage computing community (general or particular) - then change the subject line to reflect that discussion, and continue that discussion.
Put another way: If no one moderates or complains about gossip and personal arguments, and those posts continue, then that becomes the standard. It becomes normalized. Makes it easier to do the next time, and the next. This is the core argument for moderation.
Regards, Herb Johnson
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey in the USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net
Please allow me to respectfully disagree, since I first posed the question. I need to explain more. We all know who Al Kossow is. He is a pillar of the community, he is held in high regard. I hold him in high regard and so his opinion holds weight. When a person who is important in the community makes such a statement, you have to ask why. Which is what I did. Is it a critique of the organization? Is it a critique of the members? Is it a critique of our focus as hobbyists? VCF is an educational non-prof that does good work for the community as a whole, but when a member of the community who is that important makes such a claim, then you try to figure out why. My original question was "What does Al Kossow have against VCF?" I then stated to Mike Loewen: "I agree that Al Kossow has contributed immensely to the community and continues to do so. I respect what he does. Given his contributions and position in the community it was one of the reasons I asked the question in the first place. I just didn't know what warrented that response about VCF." Neither of these were negative against Al Kossow. I repeat, His opinion carries weight which affects how VCF is viewed. If it was anyone else, I wouldn't have asked. If Bill Herd or Amiga Bill or Jason Scott said anything like that, I would want to know why as well. I didn't go out to disparage Al Kossow, but to ask if there was a known issue as to why he would say something like that. If it's a valid critique then it's something that needs to be addressed. My mistake was not writing all of this in the original question as I considered this less formal. On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:47 AM Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I think this discussion as titled, is inappropriate on principles.
First, it's a public discussion about an individual, their actions and their supposed motivations. What special knowledge or authority, do particular persons have or possess, regarding some one person other than themselves? I call this "gossip".
Second, this is a discussion group sponsored by a non-profit educational corporation, for public purpose. I doubt discussions of this class suit those purposes.
Any plausible rules of moderation would not permit persons to post negative commentary about an individual. If the owners of this discussion group fail to moderate, it falls to the members to self-moderate. And so I post accordingly.
Discussions about the operation of a mail list, are usually counter-productive; I choose this lesser evil.
Third, if there's a plausible discussion about something more appropriate, such as say changes in tastes in the vintage computing community (general or particular) - then change the subject line to reflect that discussion, and continue that discussion.
Put another way: If no one moderates or complains about gossip and personal arguments, and those posts continue, then that becomes the standard. It becomes normalized. Makes it easier to do the next time, and the next. This is the core argument for moderation.
Regards, Herb Johnson
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey in the USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net
Why not ask Al to explain, instead all this talking behind his back? On 8/19/2021 11:39 AM, Christian Liendo via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Please allow me to respectfully disagree, since I first posed the question. I need to explain more.
We all know who Al Kossow is. He is a pillar of the community, he is held in high regard. I hold him in high regard and so his opinion holds weight.
When a person who is important in the community makes such a statement, you have to ask why. Which is what I did.
Is it a critique of the organization? Is it a critique of the members? Is it a critique of our focus as hobbyists?
VCF is an educational non-prof that does good work for the community as a whole, but when a member of the community who is that important makes such a claim, then you try to figure out why.
My original question was "What does Al Kossow have against VCF?"
I then stated to Mike Loewen:
"I agree that Al Kossow has contributed immensely to the community and continues to do so. I respect what he does. Given his contributions and position in the community it was one of the reasons I asked the question in the first place. I just didn't know what warrented that response about VCF."
Neither of these were negative against Al Kossow.
I repeat, His opinion carries weight which affects how VCF is viewed. If it was anyone else, I wouldn't have asked.
If Bill Herd or Amiga Bill or Jason Scott said anything like that, I would want to know why as well.
I didn't go out to disparage Al Kossow, but to ask if there was a known issue as to why he would say something like that.
If it's a valid critique then it's something that needs to be addressed.
My mistake was not writing all of this in the original question as I considered this less formal.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:47 AM Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I think this discussion as titled, is inappropriate on principles.
First, it's a public discussion about an individual, their actions and their supposed motivations. What special knowledge or authority, do particular persons have or possess, regarding some one person other than themselves? I call this "gossip".
Second, this is a discussion group sponsored by a non-profit educational corporation, for public purpose. I doubt discussions of this class suit those purposes.
Any plausible rules of moderation would not permit persons to post negative commentary about an individual. If the owners of this discussion group fail to moderate, it falls to the members to self-moderate. And so I post accordingly.
Discussions about the operation of a mail list, are usually counter-productive; I choose this lesser evil.
Third, if there's a plausible discussion about something more appropriate, such as say changes in tastes in the vintage computing community (general or particular) - then change the subject line to reflect that discussion, and continue that discussion.
Put another way: If no one moderates or complains about gossip and personal arguments, and those posts continue, then that becomes the standard. It becomes normalized. Makes it easier to do the next time, and the next. This is the core argument for moderation.
Regards, Herb Johnson
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey in the USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net
-- DuaneCraps sdɐɹɔ ǝuɐnp
Because I figued someone knew what we did On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 11:47 AM Duane Craps via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
Why not ask Al to explain, instead all this talking behind his back?
On 8/19/2021 11:39 AM, Christian Liendo via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Please allow me to respectfully disagree, since I first posed the question. I need to explain more.
We all know who Al Kossow is. He is a pillar of the community, he is held in high regard. I hold him in high regard and so his opinion holds weight.
When a person who is important in the community makes such a statement, you have to ask why. Which is what I did.
Is it a critique of the organization? Is it a critique of the members? Is it a critique of our focus as hobbyists?
VCF is an educational non-prof that does good work for the community as a whole, but when a member of the community who is that important makes such a claim, then you try to figure out why.
My original question was "What does Al Kossow have against VCF?"
I then stated to Mike Loewen:
"I agree that Al Kossow has contributed immensely to the community and continues to do so. I respect what he does. Given his contributions and position in the community it was one of the reasons I asked the question in the first place. I just didn't know what warrented that response about VCF."
Neither of these were negative against Al Kossow.
I repeat, His opinion carries weight which affects how VCF is viewed. If it was anyone else, I wouldn't have asked.
If Bill Herd or Amiga Bill or Jason Scott said anything like that, I would want to know why as well.
I didn't go out to disparage Al Kossow, but to ask if there was a known issue as to why he would say something like that.
If it's a valid critique then it's something that needs to be addressed.
My mistake was not writing all of this in the original question as I considered this less formal.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 11:47 AM Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I think this discussion as titled, is inappropriate on principles.
First, it's a public discussion about an individual, their actions and their supposed motivations. What special knowledge or authority, do particular persons have or possess, regarding some one person other than themselves? I call this "gossip".
Second, this is a discussion group sponsored by a non-profit educational corporation, for public purpose. I doubt discussions of this class suit those purposes.
Any plausible rules of moderation would not permit persons to post negative commentary about an individual. If the owners of this discussion group fail to moderate, it falls to the members to self-moderate. And so I post accordingly.
Discussions about the operation of a mail list, are usually counter-productive; I choose this lesser evil.
Third, if there's a plausible discussion about something more appropriate, such as say changes in tastes in the vintage computing community (general or particular) - then change the subject line to reflect that discussion, and continue that discussion.
Put another way: If no one moderates or complains about gossip and personal arguments, and those posts continue, then that becomes the standard. It becomes normalized. Makes it easier to do the next time, and the next. This is the core argument for moderation.
Regards, Herb Johnson
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey in the USA http://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net
-- DuaneCraps sdɐɹɔ ǝuɐnp
participants (4)
-
Christian Liendo -
Duane Craps -
Herb Johnson -
Peter Fletcher