[Leica] Fight at OK Corral

[Erwin Puts <imxputs@ision.nl>]

RP Johnston remarked (in part)

"Looks like you have taught Erwin how to sling the mud.  Congratulations."
    
In the five or so years that I have been on the LUG in an increasingly
passive sense, I have indeed witnessed incredibly bad behaviour and
uncivilized acts. I have been the target of a long line of mudslingers. In
all cases the mud was composed of nasty ad-hominem remarks, combined often
with  the accusations of being paid by leica do conduct  their PR. never
have anyone of these accusations been based on any evidence or fact. In fact
in all situtions the normal legal approach has been turned upside down.  In
any civilized society you are not guilty of what you are accused of, UNLESS
the accuser can bring credible evidence to support his claims.
Not so on the LUG: here the law of the wild west rules: who has the bigger
gun, is right. 
BD's "facts" were a remark by me about a sewing machine, and some
superficial reading of my text about my getting the M7 before the release
date.  That seems to be good enough on this list to be found guilty and then
and this is my point now, I need to defend myself along a long list of
precise questions provided by the accuser and after that the accuser has the
last word noting that now he is satisfied
and I am free to go. Well in any court in the world this would be indeed a
return to the Dark Ages of the Inquisition.
This then is the law on the LUG:
accuse somebody without evidence and then you are guilty unless you yourself
give evidence to the contrary to be judged on value by the accuser himself.

That is the gunpoint law: I accuse you of stealing horses and when you
cannot defend yourself I will hang you. Any defence will be judged by me.
Why: I have a gun and you not.

Recently on this list a very nice guy from Sweden (and Swedes are generally
very nice) wondered in what situation he found himself. The remarks were
very significant: people were proud that this list was a tough place, where
rude behaviour was valued as a positive asset of a man, (Go west young man!)
and if you were weak of heart, you should find yourself another spot. It may
be that some humor was involved here, but the style is important.

I am surprised about this: rude behaviour, unfounded accusations, and the
dressing up of any subjective opinion as  facts to suit any persons goals
(Truth finding on the Lug we call this procedure), are not only tolerated
but the norm of the day.
But a man as Anthony gets kicked off the list because of bad manners.
What were his bad manners? used he bad language? did he attack anybody? did
he accuse anybody? None of this: he only had the habit of asking questions
and was not easy to satisfy. But not one of his posts were about persons, or
about accusing persons. He did upset many  on this list as his way of
discourse was a bit outside what was usual on the list. But in no way did he
act uncivilized. And if no one had responded, his questions would have been
unanswered. And he had stayed or left.
But so strong is the collective anger that this man has been expelled from
this list, while not conforming to the rule of the game (this is our town,
we elected the sheriff and we decide what the law is). But others, and I
could make a long list, who behave themselves in a way that is unacceptable
according to cultural standards, are applauded.

Well to finish with a comment on the remark by RP Johnston:
yes I have unfortunately learned to sling mud and the LUG has been the best
training camp I have seen.

Erwin


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html