My 'disruptiveness'

Doktor DynaSoar targeting at OMCL.mil
Tue Feb 17 12:15:40 EST 2004


On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 10:40:59 GMT, "k p  Collins"
<kpaulc@[----------]earthlink.net> wrote:

} A number of folks have commented
} on what they've referred to as my
} 'disruptiveness'.
} 
} In this post, I'll explore that, a bit.
} 
} What have I, or am I, 'disrupting?
} 
} Discussions here in b.n?
} 
} Come on, folks! If a discussion
} cannot be sustained in the face of
} anyone's comments, then that's
} disclosing, with respect to what was
} the 'information-content' of the dis-
} cussion, isn't it?
} 
} Yup.
} 
} So it can't be that.

It is disruptive to insert irrelevant information. Worse, it is
misleading. Whn there's a specific question, and your respond with
material that at best wastes the time of the reader and is likely to
confuse them, THAT is disruptive. Irrelevant information is not and
does not lead to discussion of the matter at hand. If anything, it
leads discussion of entirely different things. Since it was the
questioners intent to obtain a direct answer to a direct question,
when this happens, yes, it is disruptive.

This has been explained several different ways now. Do you understand
it? I am not asking if you agree or if you like it, I am asking if you
understand.





More information about the Neur-sci mailing list