Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site rduxb.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!rduxb!daw1 From: daw1@rduxb.UUCP (WILLIAMS) Newsgroups: net.flame,net.politics Subject: Re: RE: Re: Noise pollution (flame) Message-ID: <789@rduxb.UUCP> Date: Sat, 12-Oct-85 13:12:03 EDT Article-I.D.: rduxb.789 Posted: Sat Oct 12 13:12:03 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 14-Oct-85 04:20:21 EDT References: <1227@ihuxe.UUCP> <771@rduxb.UUCP>, <5241@allegra.UUCP> <4412@alice.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Reading, PA Lines: 54 Xref: watmath net.flame:12290 net.politics:11461 > The first was involving work, where the use of personal > stereos, etc, was creating a work environment that was > counterproductive from the writer's viewpoint. This interference From *the writer's* viewpoint! How about this: The ten other people enjoying the music are doing their work at a somewhat higher efficiency since they are fighting boredom via the music. One guy is affected negatively. So it seems to me that "The Co." is better off WITH music. > with his work environment is detrimental to him, his (or her) > family, and to the company that he works for, hence the problem is > clearly of significant extent, over the long run. Detrimental to his family too? So he doesn't like music and goes home and beats the wife and kids? :-) > posting. The second writer, perhaps predictably, makes an emotional > point that seems mostly devoid of meaning. See final paragraph in this posting! > first posting is unreasonable, since the rock concerts are > affecting the individual's actions and well-being inside of > his (her) own home. ... I think that once again society as a whole is better off by having a night with a neighborhood rock concert with something for several hundred kids to do vs. having a quiet night for one guy who doesn't like it. Shouldn't the rule be to do whatever is better for society AS A WHOLE? I think it's kind of a neat idea. Now about the people who complain about poor logic: Sure, it's very easy to point out fallacious reasoning and invalid logic (emotional statements, personal attacks, hasty generalizations, etc.) in most any argument except those very carefully planned and executed. But here in net.flame it's standard operational procedure to get a little hot and do some name-calling. It'd be so dry reading perfectly logical arguments, and not much fun either. I like it just the way it is! 1 1 1 1 2 1 Doug Williams 1 3 3 1 AT&T Bell Labs 1 4 6 4 1 Reading, PA 1 5 10 10 5 1 mhuxt!rduxb!daw1 1 6 15 20 15 6 1 PS: The first person to point out all ten logic errors in my posting wins a free 1986 Corvette (wiper blade refill). Hah!