[Lightly edited, 2023]
I am not a regular contributor to this newsgroup, but I would prefer that it not be closed down. The charter for humanities.philosophy.objectivism (h.p.o) states that “[d]iscussion on h.p.o. may consist of attempts to support, elaborate, apply, question, or refute the tenets of Objectivist philosophy on the part of participants” and that “[t]hose who disagree with these ideas may of course also post to h.p.o. for the purposes of civilized debate and discussion of Objectivism.”[1] Thus, given the original intent of the forum, you are asking that h.p.o be run in a manner contrary to its design, for your convenience.
As for fora on the web, while I am surely not aware of all the web sites for the discussion of Objectivism you mention, most, if not all those of which I am aware place ideological limits on the content of contributors’ posts. While some such fora may be interesting occasionally for passive reading, or even useful as pedagogical tools (though that is questionable), under few circumstances would I want to actively contribute, because in such fora free intellectual discussion is by design impossible: if the dices are loaded–if the rules say, yes, you can discuss Ayn Rand’s ideas, but only if you don’t say anything too out of line–then you have agreed in advance that some arguments are lost before they have started–that there are some subject that are forbidden regardless of truth. You have created a system in which rational, adult conversation is in principle impossible.
As has already been pointed out, if you don’t like h.p.o, you are free not to read it. But, despite the fact that you are right–most of the content here is rubbish–it is also the last place of which I am aware that encourages free discussion of Ayn Rand’s ideas with only social pressure, argumentative power, and (at least in theory) moderation for blatantly uncivilized behavior as the means of maintaining the “intellectual purity” you appear to desire. I wouldn’t trade it for a thousand “objectivismonline.net”s.
There is of course no reason why those who want to manage or participate in such fora shouldn’t be able to do so if they want, and by any rules they can dream up. But it is a mistake to think that such places allow adults to have rational intellectual conversations. They are, in my opinion, primarily places where those with little true intellectual self-confidence can engage in mutual pack-pattery–and sport in the abuse of new contributors. Personally, I am too proud to post to a web forum in which my words are subject to the whims of some snot-nosed college student who read Atlas Shrugged once. If the users of online Objectivist fora truly have the wit, let them come here in the full gladiatorial light of day and make their cases, and let them face the brunt of real attack from those who need not fear secret moderatorial reprisal. Let them step up and, as they say, pet the pony.
Evans Winner
Albuquerque, New Mexico
January 8, 2008Footnotes:
[1] See the h.p.o charter at
http://www.killfile.org/~tskirvin/hpo/hpo.charter