From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Subject: Re: Tired of Tai
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 13:04:59 GMT

In article <32820001@hpkslx.mayfield.HP.COM> seghers@hpkslx.mayfield.HP.COM (David Seghers) writes:

>>/ hpkslx:rec.org.mensa / sue@miracle.com /  8:39 am  Nov 16, 1992 /
>>What's going on here?
>>I disappeared about 3 or 4 _months_ ago, being tired of all the fluff,
>>mostly regarding Scott Tai.  Now, I finally pick up this newsgroup
>>again, and find that you people are still squabbling over him!  Aren't
>>there more important, or at least more interesting, things to post about?

>More than long enough.  Seeing the volume which "Tai" produces, he/she/it
>*is* the fluff.  I really think "Tai" is attempting a filibuster in order
>to drive others away from this group.   I'm just amazed at the number
>people who rise to it's BS.  It's just trying to get a rise - ignore it
>and it will haunt another group!

Much to my dismay, I find myself needing to disagree with both of you. I do
nto find myself tired of Tai's posts, nor do I find myself wanting to ignore
or kill off his posts. Luckily, being the intellectual super-beings that you
are, you should have no qualms with killfiling Tai and his "ramblings".
Personally, I will continue to enjoy and consider each and every one of his
statements.
   You see, I believe that Tai has been responsible for some of the more
interesting and fascinating threads that have visited this group. Although
you certainly don't agree with him, and you certainly don't respect his
contributions, you still muster up the energy to reply to his posts. In
turn, this leads to some brilliant articles that would have otherwise been
overlooked.
   Perhaps at this point someone should address the purpose of
rec.org.mensa. I have been trying to find a thread which interested me, and
be a little more patient before posting again. Why? I'd rather not irk the
super-mensa-pompous-powers that be, such as Steinway and Dynamo. But, I
can't suppress my complaints that you people are slipping into that trend of 
trying to nurture or control the direction of the newsgroup. You have every
right to ignore that which you do not like, post that which you feel like,
and to unsubscribe to any group which is not of your liking. However,
instead it seems like you hope to achieve results through public whining and
childish displays of "I want answers, but I provide no solutions.
   Dear Sue, do you really think that your little complaint merited a post?
If so, when you ask "Aren't there more important, or at least more 
interesting, things to post about?", why not SUGGEST SOMETHING? Stop looking
to others for answers. If you don't like the quality of the newsgroup, then
CHANGE it. You seem to be about as meaningless as the individual who
complains about their political system, yet has no idea why, or what to do
about it. Passive uneducated whining is usually not tolerated or appreciated
in any forum, and perhaps the best we could do is to ignore your post.
However, I fear in doing that, you would intimidate and discourage some of
the best minds on the net, such as that which you complain of.
   In summary, I'd like to propose a little theory. This is not intended to
nourish or supplement anyone's ego, but to present a possibility for you to
suppress, ignore, or condone. I have found that some of the more creative,
intelligent, and original individuals on USENET have often been the least
accepted or appreciated. Any reasons why? Or do you disagree with my
hypothesis from the start? In turn, it presents another question:
   Now that electronic media is beginning to present itself within our
society in so many ways, is this setting a dangerous precedent? Electronic
media takes away from the spontaneity of conversive discourse, and levels
off the intellectual differences between individuals. Take an example: One
individual, Ted - writes his post in 3 minutes, and it comes across as a
superb array of literary delights, and present some intelligent conclusions.
Then, we have Joe, who takes an hour and a half, relies purely on his
thesaurus, various editing maneuvers, etc... Do you see the difference? All
of a sudden, a new form of communication has reduced two men to equal
platforms, when they otherwise would nto. Imagine Joe and Ted in person: the
differences would be overwhelming between the two. Sort of a merger of
Einstein and Orwell for instance...
   In any case, just a few points to ponder...
steve
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA