Godwin's Law

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • martin ewen
    Senior Member
    • Dec 2000
    • 1887

    Godwin's Law

    Godwin's Law
    From The Jargon Dictionary - http://www.netmeg.net/jargon/terms/g/godwin_s_law.html


    Godwin's Law /prov./ [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups.

    Ah, so if I call you a Nazi, I lose, while if you are a Nazi, you win...
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    More precisely, the subsequent value of the thread is zero. It may be continued anyway - some people will put great effort into explaining why the analogy between Nazis and whatever is annoying them is, on this occasion, fully justified and illuminating. And other people will patiently explain why it isn't and why such comparisons are demeaning to those involved in either event.

    There are indeed many things in the world that resemble the Nazis in all sorts of ways. However, not all of these resemblences are worth pointing out.

    Suppose M(X) is some measurement of how bad X is (how much X restricts human freedom, how many people are killed by X, how much discrimination against unpopular ethnic groups is entailed by X, whatever), and M(N) is how bad the Nazis are according to this measurement. If you think A is an extremely bad thing, you may observe that M(A) is close to M(N), and you may be tempted to compare A to the Nazis. However, when you are in this situation, you can almost always find some B such that M(B) is even closer to M(A) than M(N) is. (For example, rather than comparing [2001-?? US Attorney General] John Ashcroft to Hitler, you can compare the post-9/11 detention of Muslim terrorism suspects to the Palmer raids.)

    So if you post a message in which you compare A to the Nazis, it's usually a sign that you didn't bother to find B before sending your message, i.e., you're too lazy to compose a more substantial argument, i.e., your messages regarding A are not worth the effort of reading or replying to
  • Greedybogle
    Member
    • Dec 2002
    • 60

    #2
    Hey, be careful - the Nazis used math too.

    Comment

    • Peter Voice
      Moderator
      • Dec 2000
      • 1065

      #3
      So, according to Godwin's Law, this thread was over as soon as the first post was made.

      [ 06-12-2003: Message edited by: Peter Voice ]</p>
      Every-one should watch their drawers!
      http://www.chalkcircle.com.au/

      Comment

      • DEBBIE ROBINSON
        Senior Member
        • May 2001
        • 131

        #4
        nice one peter.
        But I've still got a headache no thanks to Martin.
        Does any of it really really make sense......?

        Comment

        • Mr.Taxi Trix
          Senior Member
          • Dec 2000
          • 1273

          #5
          So just by mentioning it as a metaphore, you lose? I can see the logic, but that's a little absolute. This Godwin sounds like a fascist.
          If you say "I'm not sleeping in Jerseys" does it sound close enough to disqualify you?
          Or at least discredit your viewpoint?
          I'm confused, but I'll put aside my feelings and go along with it, out of fear.

          Comment

          • martin ewen
            Senior Member
            • Dec 2000
            • 1887

            #6

            Comment

            • martin ewen
              Senior Member
              • Dec 2000
              • 1887

              #7
              Here is the exception ,

              "Hitler!" Ha! The thread is over!

              Nope, doesn't work that way. Not only is it wrong to say that a thread is over when Godwin's Law is invoked anyway, but long ago a corollary to the Law was proposed and accepted by Taki "Quirk" Kogama (quirk@swcp.com):

              Quirk's Exception: Intentional invocation of this so-called "Nazi Clause" is ineffectual.

              More Rules


              Rule #7-B: There is no topic so thoroughly covered that noone will ever bring it up again.

              Rule #90120: Applying your standards to someone else's post *will* result in a flamewar.

              Rule #1: Spellling and grammer counts. So do grace, wit, and a sense of humor (the latter two are different), as well as a willingness to meet odd people, but these are lesser considerations.

              Rule #547 (Arne Adolfsen): When people know they're wrong they resort to ad hominems.

              Comment

              • miquee
                Member
                • Feb 2003
                • 84

                #8
                spelling and grammar COUNT. not countS

                Comment

                • martin ewen
                  Senior Member
                  • Dec 2000
                  • 1887

                  #9
                  I would have thought that perhaps the 3 'l's in 'spellling' as well as the misuse of the plural ''s' in 'counts' may have given you an ironic framework but i see that you are an Engish teacher so you probably couldn't help yourself.

                  Comment

                  • Butterfly Man
                    Senior Member
                    • Dec 2000
                    • 1606

                    #10
                    Robert’s Redundancy: As a discussion evolves, the number of New Members to be caught in Martin’s web mind fuck - you’re fucked syndrome approaches and converges to every 1.


                    Knitwit One ... Pearls 2. <img src="graemlins/square.gif" border="0" alt="[square smile]" />

                    [ 06-14-2003: Message edited by: Butterfly Man ]</p>

                    Comment

                    • jester
                      Senior Member
                      • Dec 2000
                      • 1084

                      #11
                      Look. If my using examples of how Hitler gradually made it all right to dislike a brand of people by pumping us full of examples of how these people offend us ended the "South American Busker Problem thread" I'm not really very sorry I mentioned it.

                      "The Jewish Problem" started off as a not very strongly offensive discourse and soon led to "The Final Solution." Mark my words, in 10 years there will be boat loads of Chilean Pan Pipe Players seeking safer shores and they will be starving three miles from Australian Waters and eventually they will be dumped on an obscure island. Next thing, everybody owning one of their CDs will be frogmarched to the ministry for tacky music where they will be sent off to a secret location only to be reeducated....

                      I never called anybody a Nazi. I just expressed my discomfort with blaming a race for a problem with pitch hogging.

                      Comment

                      • miquee
                        Member
                        • Feb 2003
                        • 84

                        #12
                        "martins web mind fuck"
                        mind fuck is giving it a bit too much credit, maybe a mind handjob, but i'd say more like a mind playing with itself in public
                        later

                        Comment

                        • martin ewen
                          Senior Member
                          • Dec 2000
                          • 1887

                          #13
                          Thanks for watching. It'd be no fun without you.

                          Comment

                          • jugglermatt1
                            Senior Member
                            • Oct 2002
                            • 155

                            #14
                            I would just like to know where exaggeration fits into all this Godwins law nonsence . Also if I was to compare something to be a BIT like the Nazis , is that allowed ? And the continual search for a substantial argument was not a tool used by the third reich themselves ? A tool which Mr Ewen seems use a lot himself .
                            Also regarding the vendor vs artist problem , If an artist had a web page advertising himself , and on that web page was an advertisement promoting his skills at web designing , offering discounts, prices , ant other forms of sad trickery capitalistic style . Would that not make the artists web page null and void ? According to Mr Ewan it would , and stealing the food out of the mouths of artists babies at that .So if I read articles here at Perf.Net. See Martins web page , and then see prices of things to buy off him , does that not make his artfull sketchings just a device for a sale

                            Comment

                            Working...