Theos-Talk Archives (May 1996 Message tl00877)

Michelle writes>
>Firstly this isnt America - its the internet with its own philosphy called
netiquette.

Richard Ihle writes>
Firstly, this isn't Theo-Sophia; it's the T.S. with its own philosophy called
"Theosophy."

--Sorry, off topic. . . .

I think being a schoolmaster so many years has ruined me.  If I don't watch
myself, I think like a schoolmaster.

An example of this is that many months ago when the serious "interpersonal
trouble" started appearing on theos-l, I actually considered writing up some
"class rules" for the list.  No, I have to be honest honest with you, the
first thing that crossed my mind was that there was a problem with the
seating chart:  Chuck and Alexis seemed like a bad combination sitting so
close to each other, so one of them would just have to have his desk changed
to the opposite side of the room. . . .  Well, even I could see that was
absurd, so I then turned my attention to developing some class rules.

Fortunately, I caught myself thinking like a schoolmaster in the nick of
time.  I don't like the idea of a group-adopted "netiquette."  I don't like
the cute way the word is spelled.  I don't like the way it sounds when you
say it.  Mostly, I don't like the fact that someone else thinks I might need
it.

Is there anyone on this list so stupid that he or she has not already thought
of everything on Michelle's list for himself or herself?  For example, is it
possible that some of the participants in the private little board-wide
conversations do not already realize that the banter may be irritating to
many others?  Don't they usually weigh this possibility for themselves but
then decide to post anyway just because another opportunity for verbal
exhibitionism is just a little too delicious to pass up?

Such a thing is merely an egoic indulgence.  Egoic indulgence sooner or later
leads to pain of one sort or another; pain sooner or later leads either to
Self-correction or the masking of the pain with an even more extreme egoic
indulgence which sooner or later can, I believe, actually lead to
Self-erasure:  this is as basic a theosophical "law" as I can formulate.

But now netiquette seems to want to send Chuck, Alexis, and possibly Alan out
into the hall to finish their private conversations and not let them back in
the room until they are "ready to join the others in serious classwork."

Well, you know what?  On some days, I am actually in the *mood* to listen to
their private conversations, and I sometimes think I have probably learned as
much from their idle chat as I have from many grander expositions.  But it
uses up *bandwidth* you say?

What is this "bandwidth" anyway?  Is it a valid technical concept or is it
just someone's way of saying, "Shut up"?  With half of cyberspace seemingly
filled up with female crotches flying back and forth, is what we are doing on
tiny theos-l really in danger of depleting some cyber "raw material" in a
significant way?

My vote is to let things stay as they are.  To my psychogenetic eye, I see
steady Self-awareness improvements in everyone--especially in the aftermaths
of our infamous fights.  I say, let us be famous on the net for our fights.
 I won't be involved in any, if I can help it, but let the fighters fight
until they fully understand the personal psychological reasons for not
fighting.

As I recently told someone privately, teaching high school is probably not
the most glorious way to spend a lifetime.  In fact, there is probably really
only one distinct advantage in it:  You get to know *high school* when you
see it.

And OK, without iron-clamp *netiquette* I suppose theos-l *will be* like high
school in some ways.  So what?  If you were popular in high school, just
apply some of the techniques you learned:  smile a lot, talk behind people's
backs. . . .

Godspeed,

Richard Ihle