Senior, Member, New ?????

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by humbug101, Feb 6, 2002.

Loading...
  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Actually, Rich, whether it is Levicoff, Douglas, myself or whomever--Yes, I think diligence is in order regarding professional protocol for productive dialogue. It has nothing to do really with subscription to a creation myth, although I do, it has everything to do with acceptable parameters for public and professional dialogue.

    IMHO, it is not pettiness at all, but rather the promotion of acceptable patterns of speech. I would not want my wife or daughter to be the recipients of such language, and in an open forum such as DegreeInfo, professionalism warrants refraining from the use of expletives/profanity/vulgarity.

    Profanity adds nothing to one's position, only that one lacks the discipline to control one's vocabulary. And that is what does nothing to further the cause of DL. There have been numerous occasions when a poster would go into a tirade, using unacceptable/offensive language, as though it lended credibility to their position. The opposite is the effect.

    My only concern in responding is that we continue to promote solid, substantive and professional interaction.

    Sermon #2, because we are all sheep. :)
     
  2. DaveHayden

    DaveHayden New Member

    Ok so Russell didn't forget the smiley! I personally think lecturing someone about their language is juvenile and uncalled for.
     
  3. Tom Head

    Tom Head New Member

    I don't generally lecture people about their language--but then again, I also don't lecture people about lecturing people about their language. (Though I sometimes do lecture people about lecturing people about lecturing people about their language.)


    Cheers,
     
  4. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I didn't realize that sharing my opinion on an issue--which is standard protocol for DegreeInfo--was tantamount to lecturing. My reason for addressing the issue is only to promote wholesome language, nothing more.
     
  5. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Let us know when you're promoted to the position of defining what is and is not "wholesome." Until then, try to have a sense of humor about things. Your religious beliefs are your own. I won't attempt to assail them, and you should not attempt to push them on others. The use of the the idiom "goddamn" has nothing to do with decency. Quit trying to bring others down to your desired level.

    Rich Douglas, intolerant of the intolerants.
     
  6. mamorse

    mamorse New Member


    Not to worry, my friend. For what it's worth (and my opinion isn't worth much around here), I didn't feel that you were out of line. Preach on, bro!

    Mark:D
     
  7. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    There is no "God." Therefore, there is no God to "damn" things. It is a commonly used phrase that has nothing to do with religion or decency. That you are offended by it is your own affair. Do not make it mine.

    Religious people want to claim the right to set moral standards, but they have no more privileged position than any one else has. Shut up already and let's talk about DL.

    Geez, Russ, you're about the most balance person on this forum. Why get bent about this?

    Rich Douglas
     
  8. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I also value and respect your opinions regarding DL, Rich.

    I only shared my opinion on the use of expletives, stating that such terminology did nothing to further the cause of DL.[/] It was never my intention for this to digress into any form of contention or hostility, so let's agree to disagree on the issue, and remain DL comrades.

    Now, on to the business of degree mills. :D
     
  9. Tom Head

    Tom Head New Member

    What I find interesting about this conversation is that you're the only one talking about religion; Russ is talking about etiquette. Whether or not the etiquette has its basis in religion doesn't seem relevant to the discussion; the Dalai Lama doesn't believe in a God either, but I rather doubt he says "Goddamn."

    I do like the religious diversity of this forum; we have a vast number of people who are active in the Christian ministry, some of them evangelical, but at the same time we can have a cheerful discussion about Buddhist studies programs without anyone getting offended. It's a really nice atmosphere. Let's not pretend it isn't.


    Cheers,
     
  10. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    The idiom I used can only be offensive to those who subscribe to "God." In fact, likely a Judeo-Christian "God." That's why I mentioned it. Without that context, it has no particular meaning. And it is common usage in our language, literature, pop culture, and is frequently heard in mainstream media. It was used for emphasis; someone else chose to be offended, and chose to upbraid me for it. That's why I reacted. I see only one side of this issue is allowed.

    Perhaps "gosh darn" would have been more acceptable. Golly!

    I think it would have been better if someone had simply moved on without foisting his particular view of what is right and/or moral on someone else.

    Rich Douglas, still intolerant of intolerance.

    "Fargging icehole!"
    Richard Dimitri in "Johnny Dangerously." Now there's a guy who knew how to curse!
     
  11. Guest

    Guest Guest

    I don't know that it is common usage, although it is certainly used by some.

    But lets apply this logic to DL. Degree mill degrees are somewhat common, given the thousands of graduates from such "schools." We frequently hear about such degrees in the media, on this forum, etc. But does that justify degree mills? You would be one of the first, Rich, to state your case.

    I'm not sure whether this is an issue of being intolerant of intolerance, or of being intolerant of all that is different from my personal position. :)

    Now, what about the latest degree mill? :D
     
  12. Tracy Gies

    Tracy Gies New Member

    Accreditation for Religions


    Accreditation has proved to be at least somewhat useful in helping consumers determine the relative merit of academic programs. Perhaps there should be a similar system in place to help everyone determine the relative merit of religions. Those religions with the highest accreditation would be able to always claim that they hold the moral high ground on the basis of their accreditation.

    Baptists would, of course, hold the gold standard of accreditation in such a system;)

    Tracy<><
     
  13. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    There's a show on TV called "The Best Damn Sports Show on Television". I haven't heard any criticism of its name, at least around here. Of course I live near San Francisco, and there are a lot of things that are criticized elsewhere that aren't criticized around here.

    That suggests that standards on word usage may differ from place to place and from subculture to subculture. Whose standards do we accept? The rap "musician" in Compton? The Bible-thumpin' fundie in rural Oklahoma? Or something in between?

    My position is that both of those extremes aren't really ideal. I'm an proponent of Aristotle's ethic of moderation. Virtues easily become vices when they are carried to excess. And this whole thing is drifting a little too far in the "no-drinking, no-dancing, no-fun" direction for my personal taste.

    I'm with Rich Douglas on this one.
     
  14. qjackson

    qjackson New Member

    I vote we set up six regional vernacular accreditation bodies, each answering to the Department of DegreeInfo.com, to establish regional expletive standards. Non-regional accreditors, such as DECT (Distance Education Cussing Theorists), would have some say, but they would not be as acceptable as such accreditors as WASC (White Anglo-Saxon Cussers).

    As long as someone is from one region, and their language is acceptable to the accreditor of their particular region, their language would be acceptable to those in all other regions.

    Non-American cussing would be regulated by GAPP (Generally Accepted Profanity Principles).

    And of course, there would be the non-accredited cussers.

    We could debate endlessly the merits of for-profit cussing (Carlin), and non-profit cussing (everyday variety).
     
  15. Bill Highsmith

    Bill Highsmith New Member

    There is not a single person on this forum who can't be offended in some way or another if only one knows their hot buttons. One key to peace among siblings, friends, and marrieds is the discipline not to push hot buttons, however tempting they may be and how great their effect.

    Those who've been here very long have noted your missionary purpose as a MIGS student, your subsequent conversion, and now your new missionary purpose as a counter-proselyte of MIGS.

    Since your conversion, people here have been tolerant of your past unholy alliance with MIGS and do not preface your name with former MIGS student to demean you, as I have done to make my point.

    Tolerance is a two-way street. With such a large landscape of people here, it may not always be possible to avoid stepping on landmines. But some of the landmines have be mapped out. Why step on them?
     
  16. Tom Head

    Tom Head New Member

    I don't really care one way or the other whether you curse; I'm just pointing out that you're the guy who's trying to push his religious beliefs on other people here. Bill Dayson is also an agnostic, but I don't see him going around chiding Russ for believing in "creation myths." And that's what I find offensive; you just don't do that sort of thing in polite culture, especially when it's a non sequitur. It's religious bigotry. There's not really another name for it.

    No, curse your head off as far as I'm concerned--recite "Howl" if it makes you happy, I don't care--but don't expect to be able to ridicule people for their religious beliefs without getting called down on it. This isn't a CSICOP convention.



    Cheers,
     
  17. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    LOL!! Damn, that's funny!

    Oops...

    Don't flame me!! Using the word 'damn' as an expression of forceful feeling is fully accredited common usage here on the West Coast by WASC, the Word Acceptance Society of California.
     
  18. Engaged Org

    Engaged Org New Member

    Proper use of language is important

    This is a most helpful conversation. Now we know the words we should avoid as we "out" people, ambushing them with TV cameras, discussion list exposure, etc. At least we won't offend each other - our little cozy community - as we damage others.

    Good thing we've got our priorities right, huh? I'd hate think we'd strain out a knat and swallow a camel.

    The religion biz busts me up. Worry about words, not about people.
     
  19. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator

    Re: Proper use of language is important

    First off, there is no "we" in regards to this board. It's made up of 1300+ people, and disagreements are inevitable, even healthy sometimes.

    And, even if there was a "we", it isn't "we" who damage people with fake degrees. They do that to themselves when they buy phonies and place them in their resumes. If you play with fire, you get burned sometimes.


    Bruce
     
  20. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Just two little things to add:

    First, the idiom I used was objectionable to some because of religion. It wasn't the word "damn" that got anyone in a lather, you know? I'm not pushing religion on anyone; I'm pushing it off me. :(

    Second, Russ is cool and a fine contributor to this board, IMHO.

    Rich Douglas, a big fan of CSICOP. :cool:
     

Share This Page