To the group: Due to the nature of Jason Shoemaker's comments I must reply putting this on the record. I apologize as I really do want to put this to rest. Thank you.
----
Hi Jason Shoemaker,
Sigh. I really can't believe that you'd post what you posted good sir. Unbelievable. You have opened yourself to possible liable action good sir. Unbelievable. Please stop that forthwith. Thank you.
Please respond to this posting and thread privately per the request of others in the group. Thank you.
Sigh.
Jason Shoemaker wrote:
On 9/15/07, *Peter William Lount* <peter@smalltalk.org mailto:peter@smalltalk.org> wrote:
Randal L. Schwartz wrote: >>>>>> "Peter" == Peter William Lount <peter@smalltalk.org <mailto:peter@smalltalk.org>> writes: There are also other laws other than copyright to consider. In British Columbia, where I am located, a party to a conversation may make it public if it's in defense of their person as my posting clearly was. End of story....
Also I didn't retaliate with any personal attack. I simply stated the facts of what was said and asked the person to stop their attacks, which seems to have occurred as the subsequent email-posting exchange shows. Furthermore, out of a desire to have positive conversions subsequently follow, I provided suggestions of how to ask appropriate questions rather than initiate ad hominem attacks. I suppose that you support ad hominem attacks upon the person even if they are sent privately to attempt to influence, "bully" or "inflame" someone's behavior in a negative way with false accusations? How would you have handled it in a way that would positively influence the person's initiating the ad hominem person attack? All the best, Peter William Lount peter@smalltalk.org <mailto:peter@smalltalk.org>How is telling someone in private that they are being trollish, an ad hominem?
Telling some one that they are being trollish is an ad hominem personal attack under all circumstances. It's a dramatic negative statement about the person, it's intended impact is to stifle discussion and free speech. It is bullying plain and simply. Often the rest of the group will then moderate the person's comments down or remove them from the group. I felt personally attacked in this case. I felt bullied. It was heightened by the fact that the person and I had a long standing positive history spanning many years with a good cooperative feeling. To be called a troll was deeply offensive to me.
How to handle this in a bad way? Let me think.
I submit to you good sir that you are handling this very badly indeed. As I will show your posting is highly incendiary and likely so on purpose. I ask you to cease such negative comments in public.
How about try and make them lose face publicly?
That wasn't my intention. My intention is to stop ad hominem personal attacks cold before they continue. In my experience people who use ad hominem personal attacks continue to do so unless it's addressed immediately with the actual facts of the matter.
If a person who makes ad hominem attacks looses face in public that is a consequence of their making ad hominem personal attacks. They need to take responsibility for the fact that they made a personal attack and deal with any consequences.
I hold no malice or ill will towards the person. I have said my peace, the point was taken, he adapted, he moved on as indicated by no more personal attacks in our dialog since, and as far as I'm concerned the matter is settled. It's some of you who haven't moved on yet. Please move on. Thank you.
Expose their private email, and add some 'facts.'
Now your tone suggests that the facts were concocted. My statements of the facts are entirely accurate.
When attacked you are permitted to reveal relevant private conversations that you are a party too. That is the law.
Yes, I will expose people attacking me. I will expose when I'm bullied. It's known as self defense. Spreading the word about it helps the attacks to stop.
Tell them they have to follow some of the laws of your home country.
Now you are distorting the situation good sir. If fact I assert that it is very possible that you are deliberately distorting the facts of this in an attempt to harm my reputation. I ask you to cease such nonsense.
I never said I that the law compelled me somehow to reveal what happened. That's pure nonsense and you know it. I simply stated that there are laws (in many countries) that allow one to defend oneself by disclosing relevant private communications when one is a party to the conversation.
So it's important to be careful who you personally attack for your private communications may become public. It's also important to not liable people in public sir. The best policy is to not attack people.
Help teach them how to ask 'appropriate questions', so I don't have to do this to them again. :))
Yes, he assumed that because the example I'd written had a mistake in it that I must therefor be a troll rather than simply pointing out the mistake and asking me to clarify.
He made an insulting personal attack by calling me a troll. That was his action. He is responsible for the consequences of attacking someone personally. I'm not going to sit around and take personal attacks. I will shout about it loud and clear. Personal attacks are unacceptable in most areas of life. I freely shout it out.
Yes, it's loud. If you don't like that that is too bad. If others don't like that it is too bad. Don't make personal attacks and you won't have to deal with the consequences of them.
There is no substantial difference if the attack is private or public. The person who is attacked is the one who feels the negative consequences immediately. They are the one who feels suppressed! The attacked is the one who is being bullied by the attacker. It is a very unpleasant experience good sir. I will not stand it by being quiet. I will speak up and attempt to stop the bullying in an appropriate professional manner within the law and without making an ad hominem attack upon their person in return. I never called him any names or said anything about his person except for the facts of what he said to me. That is being professional about the matter.
I create new code of conduct for the group.
It's the code of conduct that society permits in many countries so it's not a new code of conduct at all.
The most common situation it's seen in is in journalism when the journalist reveals private communications or interviews where the journalist was a party to the conversation or communication.
It's also used in cases of liable to defend oneself against people who are attempting to defame a person.
It also happens when people are mugged in a back alley and then tell others what happened to them, what was said, etc...
Besides, you are also assuming that he intended the communication to be private which may or may not be the case. It wasn't marked so. It had the same exact subject heading as the other messages. Often people hit "reply" rather than "reply to all". People where doing that throughout the particular thread in question - multiple times. That is a fact. If he had really wanted it to be private he could easily have marked it so in the subject and in the body of the message itself to clearly show his intention.
However, in our society one doesn't have an expectation of privacy when one makes ad hominem personal attacks upon someone even in private. Sorry.
Don't talk about X.
***** Others have asked that this off topic discussion be taken elsewhere, I'm simply attempting to respect those voices. *****
However, I will discuss this with as many of you as there are since it is unacceptable to have ad hominem personal attacks in a technical discussion. I'd prefer to put this to rest though. Please no more public emails. Send them privately thank you.
I will also defend myself from statements that are untrue, liableous or malicious. As I am compelled to do with your posting Jason Shoemaker.
In fact calling someone a troll is telling them that you don't want to hear about X. That X is heretical and can't be talked about. That the particular viewpoint about X is not allowed. Being called a troll is insulting as well. It is often intended as an insult too. That is in part why calling someone a troll is an ad hominem personal attack.
Saying that you were personally attacked by someone is in no way an attempt to suppress anything except the personal attacks. It's that simple.
Calling someone a troll is simply unwise. Don't do it.
So nobody feels suppressed.
How did you feel suppressed good sir? Are you not saying anything relevant to the topic of this group, Squeak and Smalltalk, as a result? I doubt you are suppressed in any way what so ever as is evident from your posting.
Don't make ad hominem personal attacks, false statements, malicious statements or liableous statements and you won't suffer the consequences of your actions in that regard.
It isn't my intention to suppress anyone. My intention is to respond appropriately and sternly with full resolve to all ad hominem personal attacks with (1) the facts, (2) a request to have the person stop the personal attacks and, (3) to offer alternatives for them to show that there are ways to move forward without personal attacks. That is being professional. That is a high standard of conduct that respects all involved, and yes, even the person who made the ad hominem personal attack in the first place.
The person in question continued onward with the discussion without further personal attacks so it seems to me that no one was suppressed good sir. All that was suppressed in that thread were personal ad hominem attacks from what is evident. That is a good thing. Very good.
Now if we can keep this thread civil we'd be doing fine. Actually if we can put this to rest we'll be doing better. Please put this to rest. Thank you.
Since you weren't a party to that conversation how on earth are you impacted? You're not! Unless you make a practice of attempting to influence your arguments with ad hominem personal attacks. They yes, I can see how one would be suppressed or might feel suppressed. That's a good thing though that improves the quality of the discussion. Isn't it? If you support the use of ad hominem personal attacks then I can see that it's a bad thing.
It's simply wise to keep things professional.
Oh, and of course, I'm defending your free speech rights. I published your private email, didn't I?
It's not in defense of free speech that gives one the right to publish a private email. It's in defense of one's person that gives one the right to publish relevant private conversations that one is a party to. It's a crucially important distinction that the law provides in many jurisdictions around the world. Why? The facts are important when one is attacked, more important that any privacy or other issues.
</irony>
Some of the things that jumped out to me.
Libel: Any false or malicious written or printed statement that __publicly__ ridicules someone or damages their reputation.
Libel, that is what your posting is bordering on good sir since you sent it to the wider group publicly written as it was. Clearly your statements are false and misleading as regards to the facts of what occurred. Clearly I can easily interpret them as malicious and liable. Please stop that forthwith.
So I'm thinking he isn't the one that damaged your reputation.
If people don't like someone standing up to bullies who use ad hominem personal attacks as a tool in discussions then that's too bad. I am a strident defender of a high quality of discussion without making ad hominem personal attacks. I will defend any personal attacks by informing the group that they occurred, ask the person to stop, and offer suggestions for alternatives to using ad hominem personal attacks as that is a professional approach, a socially accepted practice, a legally sound strategy and it's also respectful to the person who made the personal attack.
Clearly by now good sir it's clear that you posting is an attempt to damage my reputation. I would ask you to cease from doing so further.
I clearly understand the meaning of the point you are attempting to make however you proceed upon false premises as I've outlined above. If your intent is malicious then it's you are that are open to liable. Conduct yourself accordingly good sir.
Others in this group have asked that we take this off line. Please respect their wishes. I am attempting to do so. In the future please send your emails to me privately. Caution however, all ad hominem personal attacks against me will be published at my discretion so just don't go that way. I welcome all respectful conversations. I hope that everyone is now done with this. If you are not yet done please send private emails, thank you.
All the best,
Peter William Lount
cc. Legal Council.