[ale] Let's Party! (To celebrate computer viruses!)

[Michael B. Trausch]

On Wed, 2009-09-23 at 15:43 -0400, Jeff Lightner wrote:

> Please…

Ahh, hello Jeff.

> If people are more turned off by “inane” comments of some proponents
> than they are by the actions of Microsloth then it says more about
> their own mindsets than it does about us.

Or it says what is more generally often the case:  that people in
general are turned off by what they perceive to be unsubstantiated
bullshit.

Let's take an example, and see if _anyone_ on this list finishes reading
this message before spouting some sort of hate mail.

Take the following statement and note that I am not talking about anyone
in particular, and that it is just an example:  "Maria is a dirty,
nasty, bum-sucking ho."

Now, I could very well have proof to substantiate all of those things.
In order, let's say that Maria does not bathe, has lots of critters of
the insect persuasion living in her hair, is missing 75% of her teeth,
regularly wears nothing but a bikini and all of her ribs are showing,
and gives rimjobs behind the local Kroger for a nickel a piece---and
will do a lot more for a dollar.

If Maria is your mother, the initial statement is quite likely to
infuriate you.  This is basic psychology.

Take another example that is closer to the topic:  The Free Software
Foundation recently launched it's Windows 7 Sins campaign.  The Web
site, right from the get-go, tells Windows that they are sinners.  Ahh,
most excellent.  Alright, so I may not like religious fundamentalists,
but that doesn't mean I want to go out of their way to piss them off.
Hell, no.  Maybe you haven't noticed, but that's a good way to get them
in your face, not get them to leave you the hell alone.

And even those that are closer to the edge of the spectrum than the
middle are going to be driven away.  You just called them *sinners*.
Over a (extremely excessively) bloated compilation of _software_.

Nor am I saying that every person is like this.  The point that I am
driving at is this:  it is harmful, generally speaking, to intentionally
drive away potential newcomers.  Intentional, because basic sheeple
psychology is well-understood.  Clearly; Microsoft is a master at it.
And it has disasterous effects for those of us who run heterogeneous
networks who must attempt to keep them secure and free from various
types of infestations ranging from simple viral infections to botnet
malware.

So, not only are we driving people away, but we are perpetuating more
useless busywork for ourselves by being enablers, just because we want
to be childish?  Sounds counterproductive to me.  Aww, hell, who cares
about a logical argument anyway, right?
> 
> Personally I find this line or argument close to those for certain
> political or religious views.  Either you buy it or you don’t and
> attempting to force others to see it your way is itself a form of
> zealotry in my not so humble opinion.

That you would take a logical argument and call it political or
religious is somewhat of an offense to logic itself.  The whole point of
a logical argument is to do away with things that aren't.  And if you do
not wish to constructively participate, why do you bother?

Looking at your composed post, I wish to point out something of a
double-standard here.  We tell Windows users regularly, "hey, there is
better software out there, you should check it out and use it."  Some of
us choose to phrase it like that because we like to increase our chances
of success; others would rather say it thus:  "Hey, you're running Micro
$hit Bloodoze on that there hunk o' metal.  Let me install The One True
Operating System for you.  All Hail St. Ignucius and Torvalds the
Deities of the Universe!"  Yet still others sit inbetween.  The other
end of the spectrum is to do nothing, or closer to that end but not
quite there is to simply use our non-Windows systems where people can
see them and become curious (an effective psychological tool if ever
there was any, after all, curiosity always gets that damned cat).

>   “Adults” do play and word play is certain a form of play.   Those
> who decry such play try to imply those of us who engage in it are
> “children”.  They are themselves guilty of the same attempt to cast
> aspersions on opposing views as the ones that seem to offend them.  

Perhaps I made the mistake in comparing adults to children.  Children,
with biological and simple logical explanations which are readily
available and relatively well-understood, lack the ability to generate
reasoned, mature, effective arguments.  In part this is because their
brains are only freshly able to effectively process logical constructs
and in part this is because of their inexperience in the world and with
other human beings.  However, maturity is the real element here.

Immature arguments only work on two ends of the spectrum:  Immature,
impressionable people who either lack the ability or desire to think for
themselves, and those who are mature enough at the other end of the
spectrum and to sift through the crap to find the information (and are
willing to do so).  Using pointless jabs drives away the majority in the
middle.

Senses of humor aren't really what's at debate here.  The simple fact is
that the all-too-common crap that can be found in just about any
software user group (regardless of the software) drives many people
away.  And in this day and age, more and more people come to these sorts
of groups to try to get help.  The same crap happens on IRC, on Usenet,
in other mailing lists, and it's counterproductive to those of us who
would like to spend our time and energy advocating to users systems that
they would benefit from at least _trying_.

And at the end of the day, if someone does run thorough the entire
gauntlet of operating systems and winds up back at Windows because it's
what works best for them and they're just fine with managing their
system security on a regular basis, well, goodness.  That's their
choice.  It's certainly your freedom as well to tell them that they are
stupid if you want, but for crying in the mud, do it in private.  Such
unprofessional, elitist and self-righteous behavior doesn't belong in a
forum of so-called professionals; it _does_ belong in a group where it
is reasonably expected that such things can be found.  COLA on Usenet is
one such place.  If I wanted to read Schestowitz or any similar sorts of
things, I'd head there.

>  As a “adult” I’m quite willing to enjoy puns, irony, alliteration and
> other forms of word play and yes even if some without a sense of humor
> are “turned off” by it. 

I think we can all appreciate these things.  And there are even witty
ways to do so without cliché, immature things.  Microsoft (and many
other companies) produce _more_ than enough fodder for us to bury them
in, without leaving the realm of mature and logical discussion.  I
suppose the question is, are we intelligent enough to find it, or must
we always grab the low-hanging, rotted, bruised, fly-filled fruit and
sling it around?  I'd like to think that we're better than that.
History shows I'm wrong on that point.  I'd like to think that the
future is different.

	--- Mike

-- 
Blog:  http://mike.trausch.us/blog/
Misc. Software:  http://mike.trausch.us/software/

“The greater danger for most of us lies not in setting our aim too
high and falling short; but in setting our aim too low, and achieving
our mark.” —Michelangelo