Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by steveandthedogs, May 24, 2014.
no longer ignoring you ;o)... so did it show you had a member ignoring you? just curious
No not that I saw. No PM,nothing in profile. I may have missed it but don't think so.
As with photographs it is almost never up to the one who makes the picture as to how it is interpreted. A string of derogatory remarks, no matter how eloquently intoned, is rarely seen by others as anything other than that no matter the producers original intention.
Personally I see 'nonsense' being a very good way to get the conversation back to where it needs to be or to another place entirely depending on ones ability to steer a conversation. Aside from that, there are much better ways to counter what you perceive to be 'nonsense' than derogatory remarks.
Patently they did not put the other party off continuing to respond (I can only assume reading them that this was the intention), and the statements did not lend any weight to your arguments, which, as other forum members have since stated, were capable of talking for themselves. Your arguments appeared to be sound and as the responses which did not have said put downs in proved by being all the more stronger - even the forum member you have been arguing with provided thanks for earlier information on a matter in an earlier response. Sometimes people cannot word what they want to say properly, and sometimes responses are misinterpretations of the original question even if they are technically correct in regard to that question. I firmly believe that if someone is taking the time to ask the question half the battle is already won - they are actually speaking about it, whether or not they are, to you or anyone else, correct or incorrect. They have recived the alternate way of looking at the subject which is better than staying silent and just assuming.
Whether it is my place to do so or not I would, and indeed have in the past, had similar words for any forum member (including yourself in a previous thread) who repeated aimed derogatory terms at another forum member (after a recount for this thread, the total came to 28 which, again, I consider to be a bit OTT). It does not matter if they are wrong or you are right, it is not what you say, it is very much how you say it. let your argument be your sword, not cutting words, for all they do is blunt your response in the ears of your opponent. We all know you are more than capable of it or you would not have jolly nice articles in our favourite magazine
On that matter, and in this instance in particular, I worry as much for your reputation as a representative of Amateur Photographer magazine as I do for the recipients of the various unintentional (or otherwise) remarks used in some responses...
...Imagine a newcomer to the publication has picked up a copy of the relaunched New Look AP today, read your article in the back of the Mag and registered to the forum to ask you more about Alfred Horsley Hinton, his output, the Linked Ring, and everything else you touched upon. Before starting a thread for your attention, they take a quick look into the other threads on the forum to check their question has not already been answered and find, in this one discussion, multiple instances of an AP article writer putting down someone they feel (rightly or wrongly) does not know something and who is trying to converse on the subject with them. "Silly Question", "Sheer Nonsense", "I have wasted several minutes in replying", "Are you incapable of understanding", "I cannot be held responsible for the deficiencies in your education or your understanding", "A tiresome irrelevance", "You are beyond help", "I repeat... ...he is beyond help". Would that put them off making contact with you or even posting on the forum at all? Would that put them off buying another copy of AP? Yes, you may argue that these snippets are out of context, but where a reader of the discussion may not have a clue about and/or give two hoots about the subject (like me in both cases ), it is very much the way you put your point across regardless of how you personally regarded it. Chastising someone for their silly question then correcting them is very different to politely informing them they may be misinformed or mistaken and then providing a contradictory point.
You have a wonderful knowledge of a lot of subjects and have an enthusiasm for sharing it. Please do not ruin your very good reputation for the want of having the last word. It would be terrible to be deprived of future articles or indeed your excellent company on the forum.
If they draw that conclusion from a single thread on the subject of politics (not photography), especially having read the posts (from one person alone) to which I was responding, I'd say there wasn't much hope for them either. Thanks for the kind words about my knowledge in other fields, but I really believe you are being unnecessarily thin-skinned on Olybacker's behalf.
Highlight: I tried a gentler approach, and it didn't work. He kept repeating the same nonsense again and again. Would you not apply the word "nonsense" to a constant denial that a principal purpose of the EU was an attempt to avoid war? Or, as you prefer it, "promote peace"? And what of his endless attempts to conflate laws requiring people to carry identification with laws on freedom of movement?
You will see from earlier posts that I freely admit that the desire for the last word is a character flaw and that I have now placed Olybacker on "Ignore" to remove the temptation.
You really should listen to Mr Avatar.
PS If I were the editor I'd be singularly unimpressed with your attitude to potential readers!
My attitude to potential readers is first, that they're not fools, and second, that they are not milksops who want "on the one had, on the other hand", so I'd suggest I have a higher opinion of them than you do.
I haven't expressed any opinion about potential readers.
Implicitly you have, by saying you'd be "unimpressed" with my view of them. Unless you think they're too stupid to look beyond ONE columnist's replies to ONE reader in ONE thread, why would you suggest that I listen to Atavar?
Read the post again.I said that if I were the editor I would be unimpressed with YOUR attitude
That's not expressing my opinion (other than in relation to yours) about potential readers either explicitly or implicitly.
You should take notice of the Atavar because he makes some excellent points that relate to posting in general and you in particular.
Now I'll allow you to have the last word. It's how you convince yourself that you have 'won'. I'm out of this thread.
Do you actually make an attempt to read & understand other posts? I put up an overview - trying to be as accurate as possible - of the background to and the formation of the ECSC and asked you to correct if there were errors. You did not. Tacitly you agreed to its correctness. My statement above was based on that.
If you cannot respond in a debate on this subject without disparaging remarks, insults, distortions or silly claims:
1a. I learn nothing,
1b. I am less likely to have a chance or feel the need to change my opinion or belief(s),
2. Your particular cause is not helped, and
3. The equivalent on the 'Farage Side' gains strength and lobs back similar in your direction, which doesn't help you! Or me, again, probably!
So, let's get back on track with a serious analysis of the strength & weaknesses of the EU as originally designed and presently configured. Do you accept that Farage and UKIP is a 'creation' of the EU? I would say he is & they are.
Aside from the prime objectives of the EU which you say have been or are being achieved (where I disagree) what other good qualities or achievements or benefits can you list concerning the EU?
Sorry, you've lost me. You create a hypothetical situation of being editor, in which you proclaim that you would be "unimpressed", but then you say that being "unimpressed" is not your opinion. Whose opinion is it, then? I can see it as no-one's other than yours, in your self-appointed role as imaginary editor.
This is nothing to do with the last word. It's just that I'm genuinely unable to understand what you're saying.
OK - really my last post in this thread.
Even you must be able to work out that what I'm, indirectly, saying is that I think (repeat I think) that your attitude to potential readers is wrong and that, by bringing in the notion of being editor, I was referring to the possible commercial implications.
At no point was I expressing my own opinion of potential readers and so your statement that you think more of them than I do is particular nonsense. I repeat that I was expressing an opinion on your attitude.
I don't generally get involved in debates in the Lounge since I do not have the skills to properly articulate my thoughts. I am nevertheless moved to post agreement to Avatatar's and MickLL's comments. I too enjoy reading the Roger Hicks column and particularly now following the change in emphasis in the 'All New AP'. I am, however at a loss to know why an otherwise respected columnist seems to be determined to destroy that respect, by me anyway, by the tenor of his recent posts.
This is like jackals howling in the house of commons.
On the one side, Oly defending the indefensible, and now coming up with the ridiculous idea that Farage is the product of the EU. There have always been little Englanders in the this country. And right, wing ones did not start with Mosley. Such ideas certainly do not need, or deserve any defence.
On the Other side we have the acerbic remarks and pithy argument of Roger, who in the true liberal tradition of a parliamentarian stands up for the natural British values the country was built on.
The "I hate Roger" " lets do him" attitude/intent of the last few posts, is just what I would expect from a right wing rabble, it is not something I expect to see on this forum.
Both of these attitudes are what you expect when discussing political issues.
If you tie your colours to the mast of any side, you are measured as one of them.
You're expressing your opinion of my opinion, which you think is wrong. Well, obviously, I think yours is wrong: if, that is, I understand your point as being that I don't have sufficient regard for AP readers or potential readers. If you are not saying that, what are you saying? And for which readers am I exhibiting insufficient regard? One, with a bee in his bonnet about the EU?
My view is that most people actually enjoy a challenge to their established thinking, or simply being made or helped to think about things they hadn't thought about much before. This is pretty much what I'm paid to do.
Your comment about "if I were editor" is completely irrelevant -- as you say, you are expressing your opinion -- and I find it slightly hard to understand why it's OK for you to use words such as "Even you must be able to understand" and "particular nonsense" but then to object to my saying something similar.
We all speak on this forum as equal members with an equal say on anything we may wish to comment on.
It absolutely has no context with AP at all. The opinions are our own. There are no commercial implications.
Freedom of speech is especially important on political matters.
Remarks like yours could easily be construed as an attempt to silence an opinion based on nothing more than the implied blackmail, of invoking the censure of an employer.
This might seem to be appropriate for a member of UKIP but not a member of this forum.
After discussing this with a wise friend, I have come to the conclusion that the only possibility is to abandon this thread completely. I have been utterly unconvinced by any of the arguments advanced, but it is increasingly clear that I am unlikely to change the minds of those who disagree with me. Anyone with an open mind is likely to have been convinced one way or the other by now, so there is no advantage to anyone in pursuing the matter.
I look forward to "seeing" you all on other threads.
It was entertaining for a while.....the continual arguing that black was really white. But I would go further than Roger and beg for the mercy that a lock down would bring. Send for the humane killer please!
I absolutely concur with Rogers view, that further discussion in this thread is pointless.
As opinions on the subject are totally entrenched and going nowhere, apart from the possibility of descending into personal attacks, there is nowhere for it to go.
I too will be happy to meet you all in other threads.
If that's the way it came over then I have to say that it was not meant that way. It was merely a disagreement with Roger and support of Avatar whose post I agreed with wholeheartedly. Silencing Roger is impossible so any attempt is doomed to failure!!! (For the avoidance of doubt my tongue is now in my cheek)
I admit that I gave Roger a bit of his own medicine in being rude.
I regret if my post has given members any distress or offence (or what ever other word you want to use) but I need to emphasize that I'm trying to silence nobody but as you say we are all entitled to an opinion and the freedom to express it.
Separate names with a comma.