|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 4:08:13 GMT 3
Following these 8 simple rules would elevate these fora to levels of debate expected of any educated people or the professionals we are. It would also ensure that these fora take their expected role as a reservoir of ideas on how best to develop our beloved country.
1. Participation
Debate starts with the posting of a topic by a forum member. Once the topic is posted you can do one of three things: (1) Agree with the topic or views expressed by the posting member on it, if any and qualify and extend your agreement as necessary (2) Disagree with the view or views expressed on the topic and provide your reasons why you disagree or (3) say nothing about the topic and follow silently, if you have to or simply hit the delete key, send it to Spam, etc.
2. No Ad Hominem Attacks
This means do not divert or attempt to divert from discussing the issue raised by a person making an argument to discussing his personal or professional life, unless either or both are an issue. For example, if the question is whether or not a person is qualified to hold a particular public office, then it is appropriate to discuss that person’s personal or professional life but only to the extent relevant to establish or discredit the person’s character. Discussion of people’s personal or professional lives in all other cases is irrelevant and must always be avoided no matter the temptation to do otherwise. The reason such discussions of personal or professional lives does not make one’s argument valid or less valid in a debate and any such discussions degenerate into unworthy discourse that defeats the purpose of having debate, namely, sharing information and positively learning from those who engage in it. This rule is best summed by the maxim small minds discuss personalities, great minds discuss issues and ideas.
3. No Use of Foul Language and Insults
In debate involving educated people beyond High School or professionals, the use of foul language and insults is completely unacceptable and is the number one reason people with otherwise great and valuable contributions leave fora. The use of foul language and insults is the most stable recluse for people who don’t know how to debate, can’t debate or have nothing to debate and by definition those types of individuals do not and should not belong to a group that has adults and professionals as members.
4. No “Slippery Slope” Arguments
A slippery slope argument, is one that most alarmists and inciters use often to warn of dangers ahead if a certain action is taken or not taken simply because the first thing they claim has happened or is about to. For example, you’ll hear from one engaged in a slippery slope arguing, “if you elect so and so, then the snow in Mt. Kenya will melt and produce a gush of water that would flood the whole country.” That is an extreme example on the worst kind; a more subtle and common slippery slope would go something like this, “if you elect John Doe as president, then corruption will be 10 times worse than it is now.” Why is this not allowed in debate? Because (2) it is impossible to know if that’s actually going to happen and (2) such scare tactics may prevent taking of an action that is, in fact, beneficial and improve a situation while at the same time making it even worse.
5. No Comparisons to The Devil Hitler, Nazis, or Commies
Almost 20 ago, Godwin’s Law was created as a response to the tendency of internet discussions to go Reductio ad Hitlerum. The rule simply states, "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” I am modifying this rule to say, desist the use of all references to Hitler or the devil or anything eerily close, thus, “John Doe is a devil” and the like is not an argument to be made in an intellectual discourse.
6. 6. No Justification Based on Similar Actions By Others
This is one of the most common rule broken in these for a: guilty by association. You cannot condemn anyone merely on account he or she is associated with people you disapprove or even those who have actually done wrong. Instead, the only thing one can do, is to ascertain whether the person himself or herself is guilty of the same conduct. An example of this argument is, “John is a thief. John works with Jane. Jane therefore is a thief also” or “all politicians are corrupt, Dan is a politician. Dan therefore is a corrupt politician.” Makes no sense at all does it?
7. No Hijacking of Topics or Starting Multiple Threads On The Same Topic
It is simply rude to hijack a topic to advance some other topic people participating in that thread may not be interested in. Start your own and if it attracts no attention, get used to it; it happens to everyone and all the time. Similarly, resist the urge to steal other people’s topics and starting your own thread on the same topic; very counterproductive habit. You can make the same contribution in the existing thread and reduce clutter and difficulty in finding or following topics, for those interested in doing so.
8. Be Civil to One Another, Respect One Another
Rule No. 2 requires that you avoid ad hominem attacks but there is more one can and must do than merely avoiding ad hominem attacks; be civil and respect one another, proactively. Conversely, stop the hate rage and anger over total strangers. After all, you never know the person you hate or disrespect so much is the very person you may desperately need down the road in your live.
Copyright 2011 Samuel N. Omwenga, Esq.
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Nov 7, 2011 14:00:31 GMT 3
Omwenga
•Your point #1- is basic guideline, thats fine with me.
• Your point #2- receives thumbs up from me.
• Your point #3- you recall when RAO referred to Uhuru as “drunkard” etc and Uhuru retorted with “Kihia”? Both of these guys are educated beyond high school. You see the control of exchanges sometimes is a matter of who “hits the hardest” I am not saying it’s acceptable, I am simply stating that it happens and will happen rules or no rules
• Your point #4- is the very essence of heated debates for it draws and calls out for refutes, perspectives and status quos.
• People can still infer your point #5- depending in their communication skill and come out intelligent without necessarily communicating hate.
• Your Point #6- Birds of FEATHER FLOCK together, in debates these are juicy loopholes and skilled debaters will be exploit them, to take away these "edges" will water down debates in some instances birds of a feather do really flock together.
• Your Point #7- I agree with this, but sometimes two people could post on a similar topic without the Knowledge that others have posted, it now becomes the responsibility of the moderators to put topics in order
• Your point #8- IS a “YES” and “NO” for me, other than participate and enjoy different opinions on different issues, I do not view Jukwaa as “DATING SITE” some people WOULD NOT like to meet me down the road, for I might just brainwash or Mouthwash them.
Here is my view... people who start THREADS ought to evaluate information with respect to THE QUALITY OF CONCLUSIONS it may POINT TO.
When one starts a thread, it might help to understand one, how to reason and two, they should know how IMPORTANT it is TO RECOGNIZE AND CRITIQUE DIFFERENT METHODS OF REASONING and even more important to have an understanding of the logic of decision making.
I think that SUCCESFULL WRITTEN SOCIAL SKILLS entails within itself the successful communication of arguments to audiences.
In my opinion the key factor here is one’s ability to communicate “complex ideas” clearly with written words.
finally, the argumentative interaction of members at Jukwaa, in many debate so far reflect or should reflect the ability to process the arguments of OTHERS QUICKLY and to reformulate or adapt or defend previous positions held adequately.
If one was to stricttly follow Omwengas great suggestions, it is possible that Jukwaa might become a bore, and exclusive just for the sake of being intellectually exclusive....
|
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 18:37:57 GMT 3
If one was to stricttly follow Omwengas great suggestions, it is possible that Jukwaa might become a bore, and exclusive just for the sake of being intellectually exclusive.... , That's an interesting take on this I wonder what others think. I understand most of what you are saying, though. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Nov 7, 2011 19:32:20 GMT 3
This chap joins Jukwaa in August 2011, and 82 posts later he is already telling us that we do not seem to know how to behave in Jukwaa!!
This is not only offensive but rather condescending of those that have been in Jukwaa these many years and perhaps contributed his attraction to come and peddle his pro-Raila propaganda!
Jukwaa over very many years has praised and bashed leaders, has taken positions on many political events and the number of members in Jukwaa keep growing as opposed to his fear that people walk away from Jukwaa. Why not try and understand the resilience of Jukwaa without thinking you have a solution to the imagined problems in Jukwaa?
|
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 20:12:03 GMT 3
This chap joins Jukwaa in August 2011, and 82 posts later he is already telling us that we do not seem to know how to behave in Jukwaa!! This is not only offensive but rather condescending of those that have been in Jukwaa these many years and perhaps contributed his attraction to come and peddle his pro-Raila propaganda! Jukwaa over very many years has praised and bashed leaders, has taken positions on many political events and the number of members in Jukwaa keep growing as opposed to his fear that people walk away from Jukwaa. Why not try and understand the resilience of Jukwaa without thinking you have a solution to the imagined problems in Jukwaa? @kamalat, I know this is difficult for some but try to separate the individual from the issues where the two are not connected or where it's irrelevant to do so. My rules are based on my more than 20 years of blogging experience on these fora (blog was coined recently) and are not specific to any forum but I was prompted to post them here because I saw violations of at least one. Nothing in my rules would prevent or constrain Jukwaa from doing what it does best; in fact, it complements just that. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Nov 7, 2011 20:31:00 GMT 3
OmwengaKamale has no problem with your rules. He is just feeling like a potato is stuck in his throat for the only and simple reason that he thinks you are supporting Raila. Funny thing though, is that he does not want to deal with the issues you raise in your threads. Instead he attacks you personally. Did you have a rule on ad hominem? Kamale: here is further insult to your injury. Kula hii article ya Sarah Elderkin on your Muthamaki: the-star.co.ke/opinions/others/47750-uhuru-needs-to-tell-us-more-about-his-record
|
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Nov 7, 2011 20:36:18 GMT 3
I once shared these from another forum many moons ago.... Highly annoying habits of posters |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Nov 7, 2011 20:47:10 GMT 3
OmwengaKamale has no problem with your rules. He is just feeling like a potato is stuck in his throat for the only and simple reason that he thinks you are supporting Raila. Funny thing though, is that he does not want to deal with the issues you raise in your threads. Instead he attacks you personally. Did you have a rule on ad hominem? Kamale: here is further insult to your injury. Kula hii article ya Sarah Elderkin on your Muthamaki: the-star.co.ke/opinions/others/47750-uhuru-needs-to-tell-us-more-about-his-record RR I have no problem the chap supporting Raila. That is his right! What I have a problem is the patronising attitude the fellow seems to have in thinking that he can start defining rules of engagement in Jukwaa! This is how silly he sounds in his very first rule. (1) Agree with the topic or views expressed by the posting member on it, if any and qualify and extend your agreement as necessary
(2) Disagree with the view or views expressed on the topic and provide your reasons why you disagree or
(3) say nothing about the topic and follow silently, if you have to or simply hit the delete key, send it to Spam, etc.In the gospel according to Omwenga it is either black or white...no middle ground! |
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 21:06:38 GMT 3
OmwengaKamale has no problem with your rules. He is just feeling like a potato is stuck in his throat for the only and simple reason that he thinks you are supporting Raila. Funny thing though, is that he does not want to deal with the issues you raise in your threads. Instead he attacks you personally. Did you have a rule on ad hominem? Kamale: here is further insult to your injury. Kula hii article ya Sarah Elderkin on your Muthamaki: the-star.co.ke/opinions/others/47750-uhuru-needs-to-tell-us-more-about-his-record @roughrider, I have so noted and, yes, the ad hominem rule, the classic of all and also the most irritating to some merely for its existence is there. I did not invent the rule but boy does the rule get a whacking by those who hate it as it stands in the way of their dashing or trying to dash to the bottom to escape the intellectual and reasoned scrutiny applied up here! |
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 21:20:39 GMT 3
I once shared these from another forum many moons ago.... Highly annoying habits of posters@roughrider, Very apt observations. I was laughing reading #6 because I know at least 3 or so actors like that, including one who posts neutrally in one alias and vicious in another and the latter usually directed at me and other Raila supporters but he doesn't know I know and neither do the other ones but it doesn't take much to uncover them....anyway, still leaves you just shaking your head in disbelief. |
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 21:32:27 GMT 3
OmwengaThis is how silly he sounds in his very first rule. (1) Agree with the topic or views expressed by the posting member on it, if any and qualify and extend your agreement as necessary
(2) Disagree with the view or views expressed on the topic and provide your reasons why you disagree or
(3) say nothing about the topic and follow silently, if you have to or simply hit the delete key, send it to Spam, etc.In the gospel according to Omwenga it is either black or white...no middle ground! @kamale, The proposition may be silly to you, but let me break it down for you simply to show you why you need to take your time and make sure you understand what you are trying to trash before you do so; don't trash just for the sake of trashing because it invariably makes you look really bad in the area of logic and reasoning. When I say "agree" or "disagree," I am not saying doing either at the exclusion of the other. Rather, you can disagree in part, agree in part and vice versa and that's your middle ground. |
|
|
|
Post by justfacts on Nov 7, 2011 21:46:42 GMT 3
Kamalet,
Why would you bring up longevity in this forum as some filter on who/what one can post? I believe a new and fresh perspective is a good thing.
Secondly, attacking the person and not the content of their post is the preserve of lesser sites that pal around with hate speech and the avoidance of that is what makes this forum stand out.
I come here to pick minds and share opinions on national issues not for a lesson in web etiquette Omwenga would do well to leave it as such. A link to the said rules in one of his blogs would have done the trick though I sometimes get a nagging feeling of an attempt to piggyback on this board’s popularity to drive traffic to his cyber abode.
Why can’t we leave rules of procedure to parliament and lawyer? In any case we do have a moderator whose preserve is to weed out those falling short of minimum standards of civility.
|
|
|
|
Post by merlin on Nov 7, 2011 22:16:39 GMT 3
Keep abrest with change
The JUKWAA discussion forum is very successful in attracting readers. It has many visitors and the topics can be very professional and enlighten. However this does not stop the need for improvement as the world changes inclusive the tastes of readers. This Eight Simple Rules of Etiquette could be taken as an improvement and as a prerequisite of having read and agreed before anyone can place a reaction on topics.
Many topics start on a professional manner referring to source information and offering an opinion by the submitter. However some of the threads develop only a few steps further into a sickening fight between personalities, the use of insults and used anonyms – handles - (see the Quixotic Invasion of Somalia will Devastate Us). This keeps people away from contributing valuable comments or initiating interesting topics for discussion.
Recently the diversity in topics is very limited and discussed in a very personal manner between a small inner group of JUKWAA members. Entries by new members are ignored or even chased away by commends such as made here in this thread by Kamalet.
This arrogance of being the best performing discussion group can lead to the down fall of JUKWAA.
|
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Nov 7, 2011 23:09:46 GMT 3
omwenga, rr first fyi or should i say caution, (should i care?) ;D this post potentially breaches the following rules from the preceding guidelines, no.4 (omwenga) - can be alarmist no.5 (rr) - is highly (but maybe not unnecessarily so ) verbose == is there a way to differentiate personal tastes (likes and dislikes or pet peeves) vs what the forum requires as a minimum in terms of purpose and standard oo and his co-founders/admins have listed this simply as follows in their tag line "our focus is kenyan politics in the context of a globalized world" "zero tolerance for, trash talkers, tribalists, sexists, homophobes, religious bigots and cyberstalkers" this is the club and space that forms jukwaa, and most of us joined this space based on those two statements as well as observing the debate that carried on here within those confines. by and large there are a few core contributors (or contributions) that have made jukwaa what it is. IMHO these are not guys conforming to some rules of engagement per se, but simply guys who have done their best to bring sobering facts to the table for review, analysis and some debate/discussion/veracity. the facts by themselves require few rules but that they be credible. in response to these facts, have been some guys whose sole purpose being that to discredit have in turn manufactured or tabled manufactured or heavily distorted articles. all the heat and fumes leading to poor netiquette is when guys try to bend the truth. some is done while truly trying to identify truth while other is due to those intent on muddying the waters. if someone in the first place has chosen the path of untruth, those guidelines cease to have any meaning and they are in fact turned as to be a weapon against those who in the first place are your regular courteous member who does not even need to be reminded of such rules. simplistic analogy - when a house owner accidentally locks keys in the house, they become frantic and a nervous wreck on approaching the house or door. on the other hand, a thug with an ak47, and a battering ram has no such thoughts crossing their mind as they approach the door. moving on. the guidelines you post above fall under the category of likes and dislikes and defines perhaps whom you would enjoy debate with. now dont get me wrong, i silently observe many of those myself and a few others and can therefore chose whom, when and what to engage and those others that need not expend too much effort. also, the moment you introduce some highly refined guidelines there is a possibility that you could not only start heading towards a straitjacket effect stifling more open discussion and foresight alludes to some of the associated symptoms in his closing statement above. but also that with more defined or refined rules, then you must prepare out of necessity, and over time, to define even more finer rules (can explain this further if necessary). some IT folks sometimes call this elegance or feature creep. there really is nothing wrong with all this (the rules), but we must be conscious of what it is we are creating in terms of the future (long term) otherwise we inadvertently can create "monsters" "fiefdoms" and other such niche clubs forever shunned by the very people we hope to otherwise engage and finally am not clear on why you would want to create your own list when there already is established a list that is quite comprehensive www.albion.com/netiquette/corerules.htmlbut i guess yours reflect this thinking here of re-adapting the rules to modern day challenges as outlined here www.alexandrasamuel.com/world/25-rules-of-social-media-netiquettei however think the original 1983 netiquette guides remain relevant and just that some of the scope can be expanded to accommodate new technologies and tools. of course back in the day, computer use was largely restricted to IT, technical professionals and mostly senior executives and in restricted facilities (so one would suppose more higher level of self discipline if not integrity) unlike today when its quite ubiquitous and not odd that the 11 year old child picking their nose in the backyard next door is simultaneously updating his fb status from some iPad or other mobile device and may in fact be roasting you, I or someone else on some blog. === anyway bottom line, yes we need basic guidelines, lets also figure out what makes the most sense. [edited] oops - forgot to deliver the punchline here ;D doesn't strike anyone as odd, that about 80% of a community give or take a few, are upright law abiding and generally out to engage amicably on a social matters i.e play by the rules. and about 20% or less are the opposite will try just about anything to go against the norms of the society they (want to) reside in. about 80% of the rules of engagement for society are designed to minimise the impact of the said 20% while easing that of the 80% and in net effect the 20% end up using 100% of the rules/guidelines to confine, restrict, torture or otherwise render the 80% ineffective or disadvantaged. == btw on a personal note, if not for these blogs and forums (yes even the most vile and filthy) many of us would not have had a full appreciation as to the real, true underlying feelings and pent up emotions and rage that exploded (violently so) to the surface in 2007. all the stereotyping, the ethnic hatred, etc etc (need i add from all sides of the divide) just following the comments of haters, sycophants and such like, over the years from about 2004 to date, have definitely revealed far much more than a face to face encounter would have, and this has in a way prepared kenya(ns) and made them more aware of whom their neighbor really is. whether its arrogance, chauvinism, hegemony, intransigence etc. in fact, much has been revealed through the abusive language, dismissals and what not. previously all this was hidden under false smiles and executed in the dark, behind your back or in some dark rooms somewhere. now there are no surprises. |
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 7, 2011 23:31:40 GMT 3
Kamalet, A link to the said rules in one of his blogs would have done the trick though I sometimes get a nagging feeling of an attempt to piggyback on this board’s popularity to drive traffic to his cyber abode. Why can’t we leave rules of procedure to parliament and lawyer? In any case we do have a moderator whose preserve is to weed out those falling short of minimum standards of civility. , I am a lawyer but that's not why I posted the rules; as I said in earlier comment, I did so because I saw a violation of at least one of them. If it had occurred to me that this would even be an issue to some, namely, the mere posting of the rules, or that posting a link to my blog would have been sufficient, I would have done so or figured another way to communicate the message about debating and civility. I am not sure whether you are trying to make an issue traffic to my site and if so, that's unfortunate. My blog is for my subscribers specifically but I don't limit myself to my blog because I wish to get my message out as deep and wide as possible because the more we share, the better. Our country will be a better informed country and in turn a better developed country the more people we reach and share our progressive or otherwise nation building ideas and information. That's what I assume all of us do in these fora. |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Nov 7, 2011 23:58:31 GMT 3
In any case we do have a moderator whose preserve is to weed out those falling short of minimum standards of civility. , You beat me to it, and you cover the subject for me. Oloo and Kathure are a terrible direstrait to navigate, a skylla and charybdis peril awaiting foul voyagers! No need for more etiquette to turn jukwaa into a sterile high-society club of no originality, creativity and passion. Omwenga, If you have bothered to read kathure's interjections on this board, you would have known those bases are already covered. I sail close to the wall. I know her. You also missed the sharp exchange between I and another correspondent on polemics... and the salts and spices with which arguments are made palatable. And you are obviously no student of rhetorics! Jukwaa's archives are a treasure trove you better dig into! It is hard to come up with something new here! But is good to see you ran away from your blog to engage here! |
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Nov 8, 2011 1:18:27 GMT 3
TNK Rule #3 of Netiquette struck a chord with me.
Here is why… Many years ago I was employed as one of the youngest senior managers in a high profiled Kenyan organization with international affiliations worldwide. I was zealous, excited, and I wanted to make an impact.
Immediately upon taking my seat, I started reforms, making changes and streamlining anomalies. Where loopholes once existed, I ruthlessly and effectively sealed. According to my estimation, I was working smartly and efficiently. I recall I was in Mombasa when I was ordered to fly back to Nairobi, then straight into a board meeting and to my surprise within one year I was fired.
My problem then was youthful zeal, my passion backfired, it failed to inspire the majority. Had I LURKED BEFORE I LEAPED, I would have noticed that those loopholes were man made PANYA ROUTES that infact oiled the pockets of some LARGE MBUTAS [or big fish] within the organization. ofcourse I have no regrets, am beyond that now, but I learnt a valuable lesson in the process.
Do you remember one P.M LUMUBA?
In summary rule #3 of Netiquette states that, one should “Lurk before you leap” it goes on to qualify that statement as follows “When you enter a domain of cyberspace that's new to you, take a look around. Spend a while listening to the chat or reading the archives. Get a sense of how the people who are already there act. Then go ahead and participate”
When one understands that rule and goes further to apply it, they are likely to avoid unnecessary collision.
TNK said “Just following the comments of haters, sycophants and such like, over the years from about 2004 to date, have definitely revealed far much more than a face to face encounter would have, and this has in a way prepared Kenya(ns) and made them more aware of whom their neighbor really is. Whether its arrogance, chauvinism, hegemony, intransigence etc. in fact, much has been revealed through the abusive language, dismissals and what not. Previously all this was hidden under false smiles and executed in the dark, behind your back or in some dark rooms somewhere”
With the above statement, I hear you saying that all manner of interactions and exchanges reveal hidden things and could be, therapeutic in the end. Mmmhhh..That’s interesting!!
|
|
|
|
Post by patriotism101 on Nov 8, 2011 7:52:50 GMT 3
This chap joins Jukwaa in August 2011, and 82 posts later he is already telling us that we do not seem to know how to behave in Jukwaa!! This is not only offensive but rather condescending of those that have been in Jukwaa these many years and perhaps contributed his attraction to come and peddle his pro-Raila propaganda! Jukwaa over very many years has praised and bashed leaders, has taken positions on many political events and the number of members in Jukwaa keep growing as opposed to his fear that people walk away from Jukwaa. Why not try and understand the resilience of Jukwaa without thinking you have a solution to the imagined problems in Jukwaa? quote author=patriotism101 board=general thread=6083 post=82620 time=1320727672] I am going to mix wheat and chaff here, just because I cannot stand pretenders. I rarely agree with Kamale, but when I do, unlike him, I am man enough to acknowledge the agreement. I dont know this Omwenga man, but someone pointed out on another thread that he has been debarred from practising law in DC. Out of curiosity, I checked the DC bar website and reviewed the allegations against bwana Omwenga. Omwenga brushes of the person and states that his tribulations resulted from his efforts to help with PEV negotiations. He goes on to state that he is a CEO bla bla bla-the whole ten yard. OO throws his support and reminds the whistleblower not to engage in personal attacks. I could have let it pass. But for Omwenga to sit down and blow his horns on how to behave on this blog, to pretend that he has some moral/ethical aptitude to teach anyone how to behave on the internet when he was unable to deliver to his clients who were involved in life changing situations is an abuse to our intelligence. Omwenga may own a company and be a CEO, but without ethics 101/customer care, your business is doomed to fail. |
|
|
|
Post by tnk on Nov 8, 2011 8:16:55 GMT 3
foresight
would like to take you up on that interesting anecdote sometime re: netiquette No. 3. valuable lessons learned indeed. and it would appear that you moved on with ease.
as for the less desirable comments, i probably wouldn't have characterized it as therapeutic, but on reflection, that is a possibility. i would rather think of it as "forewarned is forearmed"
|
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 8, 2011 17:21:48 GMT 3
This chap joins Jukwaa in August 2011, and 82 posts later he is already telling us that we do not seem to know how to behave in Jukwaa!! This is not only offensive but rather condescending of those that have been in Jukwaa these many years and perhaps contributed his attraction to come and peddle his pro-Raila propaganda! Jukwaa over very many years has praised and bashed leaders, has taken positions on many political events and the number of members in Jukwaa keep growing as opposed to his fear that people walk away from Jukwaa. Why not try and understand the resilience of Jukwaa without thinking you have a solution to the imagined problems in Jukwaa? quote author=patriotism101 board=general thread=6083 post=82620 time=1320727672] I am going to mix wheat and chaff here, just because I cannot stand pretenders. I rarely agree with Kamale, but when I do, unlike him, I am man enough to acknowledge the agreement. I dont know this Omwenga man, but someone pointed out on another thread that he has been debarred from practising law in DC. Out of curiosity, I checked the DC bar website and reviewed the allegations against bwana Omwenga. Omwenga brushes of the person and states that his tribulations resulted from his efforts to help with PEV negotiations. He goes on to state that he is a CEO bla bla bla-the whole ten yard. OO throws his support and reminds the whistleblower not to engage in personal attacks. I could have let it pass. But for Omwenga to sit down and blow his horns on how to behave on this blog, to pretend that he has some moral/ethical aptitude to teach anyone how to behave on the internet when he was unable to deliver to his clients who were involved in life changing situations is an abuse to our intelligence. Omwenga may own a company and be a CEO, but without ethics 101/customer care, your business is doomed to fail. I suppose by this profound proclamation you are now finally happy and set for the rest of your life unlike those like you who never have. What a pity. |
|
|
|
Post by patriotism101 on Nov 8, 2011 21:02:28 GMT 3
Omwenga,
I have no idea what you mean- but my point is- your choice of topic to discuss is in poor taste especially as it relates to the "victims". You are the type that gives ODM a bad name. We need people who are professional both in the private as well as public life. If your private practice is so messed up and you in complete denial, how do you convince people that you can deliver when called upon to do the Job?
Nothing personal- before you remove a speck from your brothers eye-just make sure you don't have a log in your eye.
Peace
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Nov 9, 2011 8:55:02 GMT 3
Kamalet, A link to the said rules in one of his blogs would have done the trick though I sometimes get a nagging feeling of an attempt to piggyback on this board’s popularity to drive traffic to his cyber abode. Why can’t we leave rules of procedure to parliament and lawyer? In any case we do have a moderator whose preserve is to weed out those falling short of minimum standards of civility. , I am a lawyer but that's not why I posted the rules; as I said in earlier comment, I did so because I saw a violation of at least one of them. If it had occurred to me that this would even be an issue to some, namely, the mere posting of the rules, or that posting a link to my blog would have been sufficient, I would have done so or figured another way to communicate the message about debating and civility. I am not sure whether you are trying to make an issue traffic to my site and if so, that's unfortunate. My blog is for my subscribers specifically but I don't limit myself to my blog because I wish to get my message out as deep and wide as possible because the more we share, the better. Our country will be a better informed country and in turn a better developed country the more people we reach and share our progressive or otherwise nation building ideas and information. That's what I assume all of us do in these fora. Omwenga You cannot be a very clever man. If you seriously feel that members of Jukwaa require your reminding about the rules, you will be pleased to know that unlike your little blog of subscribed members (and what makes Jukwaa an unsubscribed blog?), the owner of Jukwaa allows reasonable freedom of speech and never sharks his responsibility of yanking out errant members. So go back and read the rules of Jukwaa - we do not need to change our constitution to adopt yours ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Omwenga on Nov 9, 2011 15:20:11 GMT 3
Omwenga You cannot be a very clever man. If you seriously feel that members of Jukwaa require your reminding about the rules, you will be pleased to know that unlike your little blog of subscribed members (and what makes Jukwaa an unsubscribed blog?), the owner of Jukwaa allows reasonable freedom of speech and never sharks his responsibility of yanking out errant members. So go back and read the rules of Jukwaa - we do not need to change our constitution to adopt yours ;D My little blog is actually subscribed to and read by very influential people, including many in Who is Who in Kenya but as I said before, the more readers I reach, the better. Being gleeful about my "little" blog adds nothing to the political discourse but says a volume about your character. Cleverness has nothing to do with the rules I shared and this is really a non-issue I have said all I need to say about it. |
|
|
|
Post by patriotism101 on Nov 9, 2011 16:09:45 GMT 3
Onerous,
Don't be a hypocrite- quick to see violations on Jukwaa and equally quick to pass judgement. Jukwaa is just fine- keep your rules to your blog that is read by the who is who-in Kenya- puleez!
This holier than thou attitude reeks of arrogance which we don't need here. If you need hits for your blog, there is a better way to generate hits than to suffocate us with some old testament do as I say not as I do dogma
|
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Nov 9, 2011 19:08:05 GMT 3
Omwenga You cannot be a very clever man. If you seriously feel that members of Jukwaa require your reminding about the rules, you will be pleased to know that unlike your little blog of subscribed members (and what makes Jukwaa an unsubscribed blog?), the owner of Jukwaa allows reasonable freedom of speech and never sharks his responsibility of yanking out errant members. So go back and read the rules of Jukwaa - we do not need to change our constitution to adopt yours ;D My little blog is actually subscribed to and read by very influential people, including many in Who is Who in Kenya but as I said before, the more readers I reach, the better. Being gleeful about my "little" blog adds nothing to the political discourse but says a volume about your character. Cleverness has nothing to do with the rules I shared and this is really a non-issue I have said all I need to say about it. My last word on this Omwenga If you want to contribute to Jukwaa, please do, bring in political discourse - but also allow those that do not agree with you to be vehement and when they try to smoke your character out to determine where you are coming from - just know that you brought it on yourself. Feel for ever free to peddle your man Raila - and you will find there are those that agree with you and those that disagree with you. As for rules.....how about trying to find out where you have fewer "who is who" in your blog? You will then wonder why the who is who of Jukwaa such Mwalimumkuu, Reporter911, Okolwaka and a nobody like Kamale are not subscribers! |
|
