56
edits
Etiquette: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(be careful what you ask or reveal) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
While this etiquette may make [[sysops]] sometimes more annoyed due to having to put up with more [[trolls]], no trolls will be harmed just for annoying any sysops, and this in the long run will make sysops far better life protectors! | While this etiquette may make [[sysops]] sometimes more annoyed due to having to put up with more [[trolls]], no trolls will be harmed just for annoying any sysops, and this in the long run will make sysops far better life protectors! | ||
A mainstream theory is that etiquette is a form of minimal [[negative ethics]], i.e. exceptions to an ethical framework that make it acceptable to humans who otherwise would not be able to apply it fully, "situations where ethics doesn't count", e.g. where lies are acceptable, or a number of standard hypocrisies. Judith Martin is very clear about this: etiquette is hypocrisy. I would say that it is the limits of ethics, and does not embody it except insofar as it protects bodies by what it discourages the investigation of. The [[Rise of Martinets|Martinets]], then, are those who break all ethical rules by extending etiquette to beyond its breaking point, to the point where it is actually enforcing an 'unethic' - a set of excuses to risk and [[bodily harm|harm bodies]] for [[ideology|ideological]] purposes. | |||