META: Re: [extropy-chat] Reccommendations for a mailing list

[Adrian Tymes]

--- "kevinfreels.com" <kevin at kevinfreels.com> wrote:
> Science and technology?

The "how" of transhumanism.

> What about religion and
> philosophy?

While they may have much to offer, in practice these
days they are often blind alleys and dead ends.

> Where do the
> social sciences fit in?

The scientific aspects fit in quite well.  Wild
guesses about human nature without data to back them
up are not "science".

> I don't think there is a problem with the content of
> the list.

I do.  I may have been guilty of contributing to the
shift, but I can recognize my mistakes when they're
pointed out.  Harping on the current administration's
policies, as opposed to finding ways to develop what
we wish to develop despite the somewhat hostile
environment - or, at least, to *EFFECTIVELY* address
said hostile environment (complaining about it does
not, in and of itself, help) - is not extropian.
Debating whether certain points of history were more
or less "libertarian" or any other political label
does not meaningfully help us achieve a transhumanist
future.

> If we could get back to labeling such as POLITICS:
> RELIGION: NANO: etc,
> things would be better for all.

No, we need to enforce moving political discussions to
their own list.  Possibly, auto-forward a certain
thread (identified by title) to extro-politics when
the various debates under it become mostly politics.
This is not banning or censorship by any means: the
posts still appear in public forums.  It is merely an
aid to those of us who wish to ignore said content.
(Note that despite semi-frequent suggestions for
labels, very few posters use them.  That suggests not
that posters should use them, but that the suggestion
to use them is itself impractical and that better
solutions are needed.)