GODWIN'S LAW
Bambouche
1,484 Posts
Godwin's law (also Godwin's rule of Nazi analogies) is an adage in Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law states that:
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.[/b]
There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the 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. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation.
It is considered poor form to arbitrarily raise such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely-recognized codicil that any such deliberate invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful.
Origin[/b]
Godwin's law is named after Mike Godwin, who was legal counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the early 1990s, when the law was first popularized. (Godwin is now the legal director at Public Knowledge.)
Finding the "meme" of Nazi comparisons on Usenet both illogical and offensive, Godwin established the law as a "counter-meme," a term Godwin expressly uses in his 1994 article about Godwin's Law (see external link below). The law's memetic function is not to end discussions (or even to classify them as "old"), but to make participants in a discussion more aware of whether a comparison to Nazis or Hitler is appropriate, or is simply a rhetorical overreach.
Many people have extended Godwin's law to imply that the invoking of the Nazis as a debating tactic (in any argument not directly related to World War II or the Holocaust) automatically loses the argument, simply because the nature of these events is such that any comparison to any event less serious than genocide, ethnic cleansing, barbaric medical tests or extinction is invalid and in poor taste.
Richard Sexton maintains that the law is a formalization of his October 16, 1989 post
You can tell when a USENET discussion is getting old when one of the participents (sic) drags out Hitler and the Nazis.[/b]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
[Dude's been reading your mail.]
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.[/b]
There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the 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. Many people understand Godwin's law to mean this, although (as is clear from the statement of the law above) this is not the original formulation.
It is considered poor form to arbitrarily raise such a comparison with the motive of ending the thread. There is a widely-recognized codicil that any such deliberate invocation of Godwin's law will be unsuccessful.
Origin[/b]
Godwin's law is named after Mike Godwin, who was legal counsel for the Electronic Frontier Foundation in the early 1990s, when the law was first popularized. (Godwin is now the legal director at Public Knowledge.)
Finding the "meme" of Nazi comparisons on Usenet both illogical and offensive, Godwin established the law as a "counter-meme," a term Godwin expressly uses in his 1994 article about Godwin's Law (see external link below). The law's memetic function is not to end discussions (or even to classify them as "old"), but to make participants in a discussion more aware of whether a comparison to Nazis or Hitler is appropriate, or is simply a rhetorical overreach.
Many people have extended Godwin's law to imply that the invoking of the Nazis as a debating tactic (in any argument not directly related to World War II or the Holocaust) automatically loses the argument, simply because the nature of these events is such that any comparison to any event less serious than genocide, ethnic cleansing, barbaric medical tests or extinction is invalid and in poor taste.
Richard Sexton maintains that the law is a formalization of his October 16, 1989 post
You can tell when a USENET discussion is getting old when one of the participents (sic) drags out Hitler and the Nazis.[/b]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
[Dude's been reading your mail.]
Comments
FASCIST!
WhatHappened?
MAKIN THE FINEST BITCHES TOSS MY SALAD
I'd change the "or" to an "and," but yeah, I'd agree. Interesting post.
In a dimly related note:
Drunk Poli-Something-Major Guy A Few Years Ago: "This bullshit legislation is a total rape of the system."
My Girl Claire A Few Years Ago: "Dude, do you understand what it's like to be penetrated?"
Drunk Poli-Something-Major Guy A Few Years Ago: [silence]
^^^^
taken from the alicia keyes thread. And it seems that thread is dead now. But what does it mean if one compares oneself to Nazis? I dont think that is necessarily in bad taste and does not compromise the Poster's position.
Again, where's the synchronicity graemlin??
phenom 2: girls who post on boards under dude's / asexual monikors (again often known to be chicks only by the boards cognisenti)
There's a few posts on the front page right now that are yearning for GODWIN status.
HAH!
YOU TALKING TO ME?
PSYCHO!!!
ANTI-SEMIGHT!!!!!
SPECIESIST.
i notice this and it kind of bugs me but it's one of those weird things that it's hard to call people on and to know how to change it. i do regret having miss in my name and was thinking of changing it but it would seem heavy-handed.
there is the duality that happens where in direct posts between individuals all is well and nice, but still the general atmosphere of a Board or a thread can be pretty fucking ugly and sexist.
i don't know if male posters who do think a female poster is full of shit hold back or that they have this innate forgiveness where they don't even hear it or read it or see it in the same way they would if it were a dude.
it would hurt and be embarassing, but i'd rather be called on my shit than be forgiven cause i'm a chick.
LOL
too much of a good thing will spoil them - best to leaving them begging for more.