Reply #18: Response

[JohnnyCougar]

I agree there have been many flame wars. I respectfully disagree that you are accurately describing the cause of the flame wars.

Since neither of us is in the position to do a scientific analysis of this, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I don't, and I know dozens of DUers who don't.

What is your position, then, as to a course of action to be taken?

I am not so sure that unity is a good goal. Unity is different than solidarity. Solidarity encompasses differences of opinion and style within the common cause. The call for unity is totalitarian in it's effect and limits dissent and full and free participation by all potential allies.

Refer to the lungs and mouth analogy of my original post. I do not suggest that we all conform to the same opinion. In fact, the whole point of that analogy was to point out the effectiveness of solidarity. Nowhere does my original post limit dissent and full and free participation.

Do you have a particular point of view to add to this discussion?

I would say that the flame wars here have been between those demanding unity and those suggesting open discussion toward the goal of reaching consensus and solidarity.

I haven't noticed this sort of conflict yet. Maybe it went over my head. I think you have misinterpreted my post, though. The intent is absolutely not to limit open discussion, but to find common ground between two points of view that are present, by my observation, on this board. Again, we can argue forever about the presence of these points of view, but since it is out of the question to do an actual scientific analysis regarding this matter, I suppose we will have to find solidarity between our own points of view, and agree to disagree.