Robert
Tapehead
Let's try this from another angle Rob,
At what point do you believe an "objectivist" should leave what's clearly a subjective thread? After his first post stating an objection (with his reasons) and when there's no response (assuming he hasn't said anything belligerent provoking a response of course.)
regards,
dave
I can't answer that since I don't accept your very black and white definition of objectivists and subjectivists. For example, by some measure, I'm far more of a subjectivist than you. Think about it. I've spelled this out many times.
Don't you believe the thread's majority have the right to discuss a matter in a peaceful, uninterrupted manner regardless of how you or I feel about the worthiness of the subject? (Especially when they've made it clear with silence or with replies that they are not interested in our opinion?)
No I don't.
Free from aggression and name calling, yes absolutely.
Free from challenge or criticism, absolutely not. That's what blogs are for.
On open forum I believe that any opinion goes, for the very obvious reason that many more will be reading a thread that actually post in it. Look at it this way. Just suppose for a moment that the general consensus of such a thread really is getting it completely wrong but the majority are just going with the flow. A policy of deliberate abstention from such threads for anyone holding a strongly contrary view gives you a potentially quiet life but a potentially bad thread, especially for anyone reading and minded to pay attention.
Now I really must hit the sack.