Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by Kittamaru, Nov 28, 2017.
You don't get it, do you?
You don't get what you've done?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Too many here use science as a club to beat others over the head with. They use science and "the rules" as an excuse to censor and curtail casual conversation on diverse and interesting issues. And that's against the true spirit of science. On top of that the mods get personally involved in debates and end up flaming and using their power to infract just to win arguments. That's why this forum is dying. It's like trying to have a relaxed conversation on a battlefield with a target on your back. Let it die I say. It deserves it.
Having been somewhat under the spotlight on this forum in recent times, I'm sure most won't mind me making a comment. It's obvious rightly or wrongly that I do not tolerate "bullies"gladly, including science bullies...it's obvious that believing this site to be primarilly a "science forum" I also do not tolerate anti mainstream advocates gladly. With regards to the first, I will near always respond in kind...bullying, by bullying back, sarcasm by return sarcasm, non scientific and anti mainstream claims, by refutation and requests for evidence. Let me also add that in my time here, I have been involved with many so called anti relativists, or those that seek to invalidate GR and accepted cosmology in general from behind a computer, on a science forum, open to every Tom, Dick and Harry. Those that believe that claims from this crowd can legitimately invalidate GR or any other aspect of science, on a public forum, probably also believe in Santa Claus.
The many who have tried and claimed with "utmost certainty" to have invalidated GR is probably well known to most, and those that I have personally engaged are chinglu, the god, expleteive deleted, qreeus, rajish trivedi, constant theorists, and of course our old friend farsight, who simply as distinct from the others, took Einstein totally out of context and misinterprted on most occasions.
My own expertise credentials, and education has prevented me from mathematically showing the above mentioned claiments as wrong, so in many cases, I use the approach of the illegitamacy of their claims in that they claim them on forums such as this, and by ignoring the proper peer reviewed chanells. Just as obvious, also is the fact that some are apparently smart people and educated, but then again, there also smart educated people who still take the bible quite literally, that still believe in a heliocentric universe and even a flat Earth, that believe anything seen as a UFO is of Alien origin, that believes in ghosts goblins the supernatural etc etc etc....
These above mentioned members would not last a week on other science forums, and in essesnce are simply taking advatage of the lax rules and leanings towards quantitiy over quality. To use the label that James has labelled me as "a science cheerleader" or in more reality simply one who follows the scientific methodology, perhaps with this leaning to quantity over quality and the lax rules, I have and am in the wrong forum. The simple fact that I will at all times attempt at refuting this crowd has taken up a fair load of my otherwise valuable time...hence my now active participation on another forum which with stricter code/s and less tolerance for the anti mainstream brigade, I have far less need to post in reply.
I hope you mob make the right decision. No I have not voted in either of the two threads open for opinions on reform etc.
What's to get - you and Bells (the only other two moderators that seem to still come 'round these parts) seem to have no desire to have this fabled "conversation" that keeps being spoken in hushed whispers in dark alleys. James made the suggestion to put it to the forum as a whole.
If, however, you feel putting it to the forum as a whole was a bad idea™
Some people need to feel "special" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If the members buy in to the site, there is nothing to be agitated about, no one to lecture, and therefore nothing to feel "special" about. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
See, that's the thing. You're thinking so simplistically there's no point even in trying the life is like an onion bit.
Consider idea such as editorial context, or prevailing narrative.
What question are you putting to the forum?
The part where you concede irrationality is the "bad idea™".
Look at your poll. It frames this community in such a manner that presupposes its members not intelligent or capable enough to properly handle matters historical or literary.
Here is a difference in narrative, just as a not-quite random example. There is a thread I'm unwilling to crash, and I haven't figured the proper tone for striking the obvious point. The underlying pathos has to do with fear of death. The resulting difference is a confessed envy of comfort including a smugness we all know believers in fantasy sometimes bother the rest of us with.
There is nothing wrong with this, but fear of death transcends the difference observed for the sake of that topic discussion.
I haven't figured out how to address the lack of actual sympathetic sympathy. Competitive jealousy is perfectly human; I wouldn't denounce it. But the framework is devoid of an entire historical record that actually unites humanity ideologically regardless of what we do with it; the issue presented bears striking implications if we ask why this empathy or sympathy is available, but not something either more social or less antisocial, or perhaps it is more a question of either more cooperative or competitive.
By the way, have you ever seen Ergo Proxy? I honestly don't know if I can explain why the robots are kneeling in prayer if the narrative difference I described isn't important. The great tragedy of self-awareness, as expressed in literature and history over the course of millennia, is a failure to understand one's purpose for existence.
Fear of death is virtually or effectively universal among humans.
So is the mysterium.
In the case of the thread I am recalling, the fact of human yearning for purpose and comprehension thereof seems entirely absent from the framework, and I am absolutely fascinated by the dearth.
Remember, for instance, I am a Sisyphan Camusite; the reason why they're kneeling as if in appeal unto God is perfectly apparent to me. Self-awareness brings recognition of the Absurd; it is a terrible burden.
And we would, actually, do the comedy version, let's say in a Simpsons casting, with the line, "Why, God? Why?"
I honestly can't believe you don't know some verison of that line.
I honestly can't believe you are incapable of comprehending the joke without stopping to argue that God doesn't exist.
Nor do I expect the topic poster in the thread I'm recalling is so removed or rarefied.
Still, though, it is hard to find a communicative pathway into an inherently antisocial posture.
When you let the deliberately clueless set the terms, for instance, it's astonishing what you can come up with.
Again, look at your poll.
Your editorial context, the prevailing narrative, basically frames this community as a bunch of fucking morons.
And, yeah, you know, that part might have been a "bad idea™".
I kind of want to post that picture of Palpatine smiling... Actually, why not...
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, seriously, there was impressive. Utterly and completely off the mark, but impressive none the less.
The question I believe, is simple. The answers I provided cover a few of the ideas that have been tossed out, and then there is the option for someone to post their own idea.
How any of that constitutes "framing this community in such a manner that presupposes its members not intelligent or capable enough to properly handle matters historical or literary", I am unsure. I am not, as you say, "framing this community as a bunch of fucking morons."
But, of course, you are welcome to interpret it however you wish.
Why not respond with a page when a paragraph will do. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Still, though, it is hard to find a communicative pathway into an inherently antisocial posture.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Sesquipedalian Loquaciousness comes to mind.
They say a mind is a terrible thing to waste but so is a "learn a word a day calendar" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's also ironic that one can speak of "letting the clueless" set the agenda while accusing someone else of treating the members as "fucking morons" Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well that caused to me to look and this is the first thing I found at tvtropes.com
Sesquipedalian: A long word, or characterized by the use of long words. From the Latin roots meaning "a foot and a half long."
Loquaciousness: That would be garrulousness, verboseness, effusiveness. How about "chattiness"?
A predilection by the intelligentsia to engage in the manifestation of prolix exposition through a buzzword disposition form of communication notwithstanding the availability of more comprehensible, punctiliously applicable, diminutive alternatives. Also known as "gross verbosity". Related to this is the use of inkhorn terms, loanwords from a foreign origin that are pretentious to an average speaker.
In brief: "smart" characters using long words when short ones would be better, especially when they are also motor mouths. Characters afflicted with this trait often seem to go out of their way to over-complicate their speech, probably because writers think that this is the only way to show that someone is more intelligent than the average writer. This could also be the trait of a particularly anal-retentive character who always has to be right, the trait extending so far that the character always has to use exactly the right word — never using "blue" when "azure" or "indigo" or even "royal blue" would be more accurate, for example.
Occasionally such characters may drop the long words if things get particularly dire, to emphasize just how bad things are (in the same way as a Sarcasm Failure). Alternatively, they may get even more wordy as they get more emotional, leading to increasingly detailed but ultimately incoherent ranting that falls too easily into wangst. Frequently another character will respond with something like "Wouldn't it be easier to just [whatever the brainy person said, in layman's terms]?" or "And [layman's terms version], too!" In The United States, when someone really has no idea what the person says, they'll say something like, "Could you repeat that in plain ol' Galveston English?"
Williams SyndromePlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! can lead to this kind of behavior. People with Asperger Syndrome and some forms of Dyslexia may do this in an attempt to be as precise as possible, ironically making themselves harder to understand.
The Narcissist, The Paranoiac, and other less-than-pleasant personalities may engage in this as well, often to try and convince others - or themselves - that they are smarter than most people. On a more sinister level, it can also be used as a form of verbal Gaslighting, in order to confuse, swamp, and manipulate the receiver so that a particular end may be met. The Con Man sometimes makes use of this trope too when passing off as a professional or an expert in their apparent "field", duping others into thinking that the only reason they don't understand what he/she is selling is that they are smarter than them or that they can trust them, when in fact they are spouting nonsense and looking to take advantage of their ignorance.
While maintaining a strong endeavor to avoid flogging a deceased equuine, err I mean trying hard not to beat a dead horse, in some cases technical jargon is necessary to be understood, but in too many cases a person doesn't consider that the audience is not that technically inclined and a simpler, although less precise description would work just as well.
Perhaps you have been too unkind.
Haha...or too accurate. Gaslighting was a favorite ban to threaten at one time from this poster as well.
Many years ago I heard Jack Nicholson being interviewed about some political issue. I don't know if he finished high school but he definitely isn't a college man.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
He thought he was being "erudite" but he was just unintelligible for the most part. He definitely wasn't speaking with ease. He was trying to appear to be well spoken but he was anything but.
Much of what you post above would apply to him and his speech that day.
Sliding off topic but my approach is to be as simple in my speech as possible in order to be, hopefully, more widely understood.
I told someone that I was pragmatic and they though I had a medical condition.
When I enter real estate I had to reduce my vocabulary in order to be effective.
I do think it is a challenge to use simple every day words.
Rather than say I am pragmatic I now say "I am a nuts and bolts kinda guy" but still some will think that I am a mechanic.
When speaking face to face I take great care to look for the others meaning which often can be different to the words they use.
However I personally enjoy reading most everything Tiassa writes I find his style very good.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's not. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
To each their own - I rather like this quote:
A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupery
I like that and I like his books as well.
''Let it die I say. It deserves it''. So, who here is forcing MR to start more threads and continuing to reply to posts? S/he wants to go. Forever the soggy doughnut victim. RIP MR. Bless.
If non-existence of SciFo is what you want, then all you have to do is unbookmark it.
Your actions belie your claim.
With MR, I think it's something to do with...The roar of the greasepaint, the smell of the crowd. Limelight.
Support your poll with rational argument.
I challenge the bigotry you have shown in your poll.
Seriously, justify that narrowminded, bigoted, ignorant bullshit.
Separate names with a comma.