[Newspoetry] okay, now THIS is a flame war!

[sigfried at shout.net]

prince myshkin said:
> >From: Joe Futrelle <futrelle at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
> >Reply-To: Joe Futrelle <futrelle at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
> >To: prince myshkin <myshkins at hotmail.com>
> >Subject: Re: [Newspoetry] don't worry I'm running out of two cent pieces
> >Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 13:00:37 -0600
> >
> >Rick, this is exactly the bullshit you were doing 5 years ago with
> >Rishi.  You defend Andy for being a jerk to your "friends" just
> >because he's your best friend.  Can't you see what's wrong with that?
> 
> (!!!!)
> 
> um... no, why don't you explain it to me.

It was probably time a while ago for some netiquette lessons.  First,
there seems to be some confusion about the meaning of the term "flame
war".

A flame, as defined in the Jargon File
(http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/index.html) is:

	[at MIT, orig. from the phrase `flaming asshole'] 1. vi. To post an
	email message intended to insult and provoke. 2. vi. To speak
	incessantly and/or rabidly on some relatively uninteresting subject or
	with a patently ridiculous attitude. 3. vt.  Either of senses 1 or 2,
	directed with hostility at a particular person or people. 4.  n. An
	instance of flaming.  When a discussion degenerates into useless
	controversy, one might tell the participants "Now you're just flaming"
	or "Stop all that flamage!" to try to get them to cool down (so to
	speak). 

Flame war is defined as:

	[common] (var. `flamewar') An acrimonious dispute, especially when
	conducted on a public electronic forum such as Usenet. 


The Jargon File is canonical.  As far as I know, there's no canonical
account of netiquette.  I did find an online book on the subject at:

	http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book/index.html

It contains a chapter called The Art of Flaming
(http://www.albion.com/netiquette/book/0963702513p71.html) which describes
in some detail the general phenomenon of flame wars, including a slight
mention of the fact that flaming and flame wars can be fun if engaged in
skillfully.  The chapter also includes a quote (Graham Wolff Christian)
describing the most common and unfortunate development of flame wars:

		 *Every* discussion list of which I have been a part--no matter what
		 its subject--has fallen victim to such ills--a few have gone down
		 in e-flames. The pattern is absolutely consistent. Writer A drops a
		 light remark--always *tangential* to the main discussion. Writer B
		 interprets the message in the worst possible light and fires off an
		 outraged reply, in which writer A is called a racist, a classist, a
		 fascist--whatever seems to apply. Writers C-L chime in, rather like
		 the crowds in a DeMille film, muttering "Shame!" or "I agree!" or
		 "A is right!" or "B is right!" Writer A replies saying, "Gosh, it
		 was just a joke. I'm not a fascist. Lighten up." Writer B says,
		 "This issue (the South, date rape, Nicaragua) is DEADLY SERIOUS. I
		 won't lighten up. I won't." By the time things have cooled down,
		 Writers A and B have left the list; or Writers N-DD have left the
		 list; or the list has died. These are not *odd* occasions--they
		 happen to *every list.*

Also, it is considered a breach of netiquette to quote personal email
in a public forum without first asking the writer's permission.