Forums > Social Discussion > the digression of threads via semantics
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I've started to realise that many threads seem to be breaking down based purely on what words MEAN rather than the general point of the thread. I know we need to be more concise in the naming of threads but why do people find this issue to be such an interesting topic.
Discussions on many threads have moved from the point of the topic to an arguement on the meaning of words. should we now all put the definition we are talking about in the original post so this doesn't occur or is it just the fact that we seem to have differing opinions on language? After all it is an international board surely we should try and stick to the simplest / obvious meanings rather than make it more difficult for people who do not have English as a first language to understand or are the language / cultural differences what causes these debates to degenerate?
wiki explaination of semantics
has anybody else noticed this? I ask because it happened in MCP's thread on expert verses amateur and seem to frustrate poor meg because it wasn't the point she was trying to make.
I've started to realise that many threads seem to be breaking down based purely on what words MEAN rather than the general point of the thread. I know we need to be more concise in the naming of threads but why do people find this issue to be such an interesting topic.
Discussions on many threads have moved from the point of the topic to an arguement on the meaning of words. should we now all put the definition we are talking about in the original post so this doesn't occur or is it just the fact that we seem to have differing opinions on language? After all it is an international board surely we should try and stick to the simplest / obvious meanings rather than make it more difficult for people who do not have English as a first language to understand or are the language / cultural differences what causes these debates to degenerate?
wiki explaination of semantics
has anybody else noticed this? I ask because it happened in MCP's thread on expert verses amateur and seem to frustrate poor meg because it wasn't the point she was trying to make.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
SILVER Member
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Posted:
Maybe people should just try and make it a little more clear what their point is when they start a thread.
Doesn't hurt to write a few paragraphs like you've done here to explain yourself, but a thread with an ambiguous (and seemingly semantic) subject line and nothing more than a few words or links in the first post is open to interpretation, IMO.
Personally, if I make a thread, I consider it my own responsibility to keep the conversation roughly on topic. You kinda get out what you put in with these things, y'know? People can't read your mind.
(Besides, it's still better than being ignored).
Maybe people should just try and make it a little more clear what their point is when they start a thread.
Doesn't hurt to write a few paragraphs like you've done here to explain yourself, but a thread with an ambiguous (and seemingly semantic) subject line and nothing more than a few words or links in the first post is open to interpretation, IMO.
Personally, if I make a thread, I consider it my own responsibility to keep the conversation roughly on topic. You kinda get out what you put in with these things, y'know? People can't read your mind.
(Besides, it's still better than being ignored).
"Love the art in yourself and not yourself in the art."
--Konstantin Stanislavisky
BRONZE Member
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
HoP mage and keeper of the fireballs
1,965 posts
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Posted:
yup thread around this place can go way off topic but IMO it is the responsiblity of the origial poster (and the moderators to some degree) to keep the thread on the right track. On the other hand some (but not many) of the off topics posts do have somthing to contribute to the wider picture and this can be exploered but it shouldn't distract from the point at hand.
Xan is correct in saying that the opening post should be more than one line if the poster has a specific idea in mind however if the subject mater is fully open to interpretation then there is nothing wrong in starting a thread with a subject line and a smilee.
Sometime I get the feeling that a thread has touched a nerve with somebody and thus they intentionally try to derail the thread. Unfortunatly most of the HoP community know what the person is doing but stil they take the bait and spend the next 50 posts off topic giving this person their opinion rather than ignoring them and geting back to the subject at hand.
yup thread around this place can go way off topic but IMO it is the responsiblity of the origial poster (and the moderators to some degree) to keep the thread on the right track. On the other hand some (but not many) of the off topics posts do have somthing to contribute to the wider picture and this can be exploered but it shouldn't distract from the point at hand.
Xan is correct in saying that the opening post should be more than one line if the poster has a specific idea in mind however if the subject mater is fully open to interpretation then there is nothing wrong in starting a thread with a subject line and a smilee.
Sometime I get the feeling that a thread has touched a nerve with somebody and thus they intentionally try to derail the thread. Unfortunatly most of the HoP community know what the person is doing but stil they take the bait and spend the next 50 posts off topic giving this person their opinion rather than ignoring them and geting back to the subject at hand.
May my balls of fire set your balls on fire 
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
some people can ... think of a number between 1 and 10
very true but on the same aspect one problem that seems to occur is people rarely ask for definitions either (hands up guilty) I nearly gave this thread another title and if people use this thread I'll explain later, (now it isn't an even number now is it )
also I find similar semantic reitterations occuring just over a page (again megs expert thread) where someone went almost straight back to the language issue because (I assume) they hadn't read the first / previous page. it seems as these language issues rise the thread gets longer and people are less inclined to read through all the longer posts (now I reckon its the number 3 or 7). subliminally people skim the pages and pick up on what seems to be the "popular topic" which by and large are the shorter posts about language, this could be helped by breaking up the paragraphs (which I'm not doing as a kind of experiment
) until they come to their own conclusions about what should be discussed...(was it 7? if not it was worth a try but it IS the most popular number used in this common trick but I expect people to be smarter than you average street person picked to use by a number of aspects.
Should people who see these breakdowns be more willing to say
as a way to keep these threads on course?
Written by: Invader Xan
People can't read your mind.
some people can ... think of a number between 1 and 10
very true but on the same aspect one problem that seems to occur is people rarely ask for definitions either (hands up guilty) I nearly gave this thread another title and if people use this thread I'll explain later, (now it isn't an even number now is it
)also I find similar semantic reitterations occuring just over a page (again megs expert thread) where someone went almost straight back to the language issue because (I assume) they hadn't read the first / previous page. it seems as these language issues rise the thread gets longer and people are less inclined to read through all the longer posts (now I reckon its the number 3 or 7). subliminally people skim the pages and pick up on what seems to be the "popular topic" which by and large are the shorter posts about language, this could be helped by breaking up the paragraphs (which I'm not doing as a kind of experiment
) until they come to their own conclusions about what should be discussed...(was it 7? if not it was worth a try but it IS the most popular number used in this common trick but I expect people to be smarter than you average street person picked to use by a number of aspects. Should people who see these breakdowns be more willing to say
as a way to keep these threads on course? A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
Is digression the right word?
But when there's an obvious choice in a thread between a topic based on semantics and retreading a lot of old ground discussed before in previous threads, or a novel topic based on something that isn't semantics, and in fact based on learning spinning better... well I ASSUMED that people would discuss the latter... SILLY ME.
Is digression the right word?
But when there's an obvious choice in a thread between a topic based on semantics and retreading a lot of old ground discussed before in previous threads, or a novel topic based on something that isn't semantics, and in fact based on learning spinning better... well I ASSUMED that people would discuss the latter... SILLY ME.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I think that the person who starts the original post needs to make things clearer.
If it's not clear what the original poster wants people to discuss then I don't think that it's fair that they get upset that their desired topic wasn't discussed; as Xan said, "people can't read your mind"
And I don't think that it's fair to assume that people would know that a topic has been discussed before and therefore that something else was desired.
Because
1. not everyone would have been around for the first thread
2. people would "assume" that you had done a search for the apparent topic and therefore "assume" that it hadn't been done before.
I think that in the event of a discussion thread not going the way the original poster had hoped, then they should start a new thread explaining more clearly what they want so both parties can discuss the topics they want to discuss.
I think that the person who starts the original post needs to make things clearer.
If it's not clear what the original poster wants people to discuss then I don't think that it's fair that they get upset that their desired topic wasn't discussed; as Xan said, "people can't read your mind"
And I don't think that it's fair to assume that people would know that a topic has been discussed before and therefore that something else was desired.
Because
1. not everyone would have been around for the first thread
2. people would "assume" that you had done a search for the apparent topic and therefore "assume" that it hadn't been done before.
I think that in the event of a discussion thread not going the way the original poster had hoped, then they should start a new thread explaining more clearly what they want so both parties can discuss the topics they want to discuss.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
Sometimes there is a language barrier too
And then certain words can carry more meaning for a particular person as well.
So maybe if something touches a nerve, the bothered person might explain clearly too. If it wasn't the original intention then, that can be addressed.
Maybe this way some stuff can get resolved easier
Sometimes there is a language barrier too
And then certain words can carry more meaning for a particular person as well.
So maybe if something touches a nerve, the bothered person might explain clearly too. If it wasn't the original intention then, that can be addressed.
Maybe this way some stuff can get resolved easier
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
SILVER Member
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Posted:
Ok, I've got one... 
I think another thing we can all be guilty of is not reading the original post... Which is understandable. Because of the way discussions work, replying to the original post might not be appropriate at some points of a conversation. Sometimes the topic is more complicated than the original poster realised. Happens to me all the time.
No need to stress about stuff. Take the Steven Fry approach. Say something apropriately useful/ridiculous accordingly and then guide the discussion back to what you wanted to talk about.
Written by: MynciWritten by: Invader Xan
People can't read your mind.
some people can ... think of a number between 1 and 10
Ok, I've got one... I think another thing we can all be guilty of is not reading the original post... Which is understandable. Because of the way discussions work, replying to the original post might not be appropriate at some points of a conversation. Sometimes the topic is more complicated than the original poster realised. Happens to me all the time.
No need to stress about stuff. Take the Steven Fry approach. Say something apropriately useful/ridiculous accordingly and then guide the discussion back to what you wanted to talk about.
"Love the art in yourself and not yourself in the art."
--Konstantin Stanislavisky
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
ok. Xan did you read my whole post? I've already guessed your number in my second post
Fif: I agree on the language barrier I was going to put that in my original post but thought I'd let someone else bring it up,
rouge: do you really think starting a second thread about the same topic just because the discussion went awry? I would have thought that to be counter productive.
Meg... No your absolutely right but I mentioned that in my first post.
ok. Xan did you read my whole post? I've already guessed your number
in my second post Fif: I agree on the language barrier I was going to put that in my original post but thought I'd let someone else bring it up,
rouge: do you really think starting a second thread about the same topic just because the discussion went awry? I would have thought that to be counter productive.
Meg... No your absolutely right
but I mentioned that in my first post. A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
SILVER Member
(...trusty steed of the rodeo midget...)
403 posts
Location: the state of flux, Ireland
(...trusty steed of the rodeo midget...)
403 posts
Location: the state of flux, Ireland
Posted:
Instead of starting a new thread based on the original topic, why not split off a new thread for the branching topic instead, and then redirect the original thread back on track?
As occured when TheBorilMonkey and I were discussing Professional vs. Acting Professionaly.
**POOF**
new thread with poll attached.
Instead of starting a new thread based on the original topic, why not split off a new thread for the branching topic instead, and then redirect the original thread back on track?
As occured when TheBorilMonkey and I were discussing Professional vs. Acting Professionaly.
**POOF**
new thread with poll attached.
SILVER Member
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Posted:
Wrong and wrong. It was 8.
But you proved your point nicely there. Well done.
I admit, I often find a large block of text a little difficult to get into, especially when I'm killing time at work (like I am now), and particularly when it isn't broken up enough. The result is skim reading it, and if the actual point of someone's post is hidden away inside a paragraph of text, it can be easy to miss.
Slightly hypocritical, because I tend to write a lot, but there you go... Again, I suspect most of us are guilty of this to some extent.
Written by: Mynci
ok. Xan did you read my whole post? I've already guessed your number
Wrong and wrong. It was 8.
But you proved your point nicely there. Well done.
I admit, I often find a large block of text a little difficult to get into, especially when I'm killing time at work (like I am now), and particularly when it isn't broken up enough. The result is skim reading it, and if the actual point of someone's post is hidden away inside a paragraph of text, it can be easy to miss.
Slightly hypocritical, because I tend to write a lot, but there you go... Again, I suspect most of us are guilty of this to some extent.
"Love the art in yourself and not yourself in the art."
--Konstantin Stanislavisky
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
Is it really the digression of threads via symantics?
Wouldn't it be more of the digression of threads because of or due to differences in symantics.
In all honesty, the best and simplest way to be as clear as possible on the internet is to state the other person's opinion so you are sure you understand it.
Is it really the digression of threads via symantics?
Wouldn't it be more of the digression of threads because of or due to differences in symantics.
In all honesty, the best and simplest way to be as clear as possible on the internet is to state the other person's opinion so you are sure you understand it.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I think squarefish is right, if a dissolution occurs due to a semantic nature a branching could be useful, it would keep the original thread thread intact and leave a click point to move to an equally valid yet different thread.the only worry would be a mass of "branches" from the original trunk thread with similar topics creating a jumble in the forum.
I think squarefish is right, if a dissolution occurs due to a semantic nature a branching could be useful, it would keep the original thread thread intact and leave a click point to move to an equally valid yet different thread.the only worry would be a mass of "branches" from the original trunk thread with similar topics creating a jumble in the forum.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
NYC
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
9,232 posts
Location: NYC, NY, USA
Posted:
This happens all the time.
You just create a new thread and then link it with a URL in the old one.
This happens all the time.
You just create a new thread and then link it with a URL in the old one.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I'm not talking about starting a new thread because the discussion went off-topic. I'm talking about starting a new thread where the original thread's meaning was unclear.
You start a thread.
Your meaning is unclear.
Other people take the thread to mean A
Therefore everyone talks about A.
It stays on-topic about A.
Therefore the discussion never actually went "awry" and another thread about your intended topic (which would naturally have to be explained more clearly) would be a thread about B.
Written by: Mynci
rouge: do you really think starting a second thread about the same topic just because the discussion went awry? I would have thought that to be counter productive.
I'm not talking about starting a new thread because the discussion went off-topic. I'm talking about starting a new thread where the original thread's meaning was unclear.
You start a thread.
Your meaning is unclear.
Other people take the thread to mean A
Therefore everyone talks about A.
It stays on-topic about A.
Therefore the discussion never actually went "awry" and another thread about your intended topic (which would naturally have to be explained more clearly) would be a thread about B.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
apologies rouge I misunderstood
I triesd out squarefish's idea last night, it involved a double post almost BUT I tries NOT to derail a thread. I posted in a thread I thought proper and then put a link with a small explaination in another thread that "might" have had relevence
[Old link]
I'm not sure if thats a way of doing it rather than starting new threads especially on popular topics,
was Mr mint sauce correct starting a new thread (no offence) OR could this older, not recently posted on thread by benjamin been hijacked or would it have been a digression? it wouldn't have quite been semantic variation though it WAS a thought on the meaning of "intelligent design"
apologies rouge I misunderstood
I triesd out squarefish's idea last night, it involved a double post almost BUT I tries NOT to derail a thread. I posted in a thread I thought proper and then put a link with a small explaination in another thread that "might" have had relevence
[Old link]
I'm not sure if thats a way of doing it rather than starting new threads especially on popular topics,
was Mr mint sauce correct starting a new thread (no offence) OR could this older, not recently posted on thread by benjamin been hijacked or would it have been a digression? it wouldn't have quite been semantic variation though it WAS a thought on the meaning of "intelligent design"
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
upset = no. Disappointed = yes. Thinking that hoppers are in general stupid = yes.
1) pointless topic based on semantics and not much else.
2) topic that could highlight a way to make you better at spinning, or indeed, close to the best.
Strange that I thought people here would be interested in learning spinning, not in semantic arguments. Maybe I should go post it on a linguistic philosophers board and they're be real excited about how to become an expert. God forbid hop should ever be about learning and not arguments.
Written by: Rouge Dragon
I think that the person who starts the original post needs to make things clearer.
If it's not clear what the original poster wants people to discuss then I don't think that it's fair that they get upset that their desired topic wasn't discussed; as Xan said, "people can't read your mind"
And I don't think that it's fair to assume that people would know that a topic has been discussed before and therefore that something else was desired.
Because
1. not everyone would have been around for the first thread
2. people would "assume" that you had done a search for the apparent topic and therefore "assume" that it hadn't been done before.
I think that in the event of a discussion thread not going the way the original poster had hoped, then they should start a new thread explaining more clearly what they want so both parties can discuss the topics they want to discuss.
upset = no. Disappointed = yes. Thinking that hoppers are in general stupid = yes.
1) pointless topic based on semantics and not much else.
2) topic that could highlight a way to make you better at spinning, or indeed, close to the best.
Strange that I thought people here would be interested in learning spinning, not in semantic arguments. Maybe I should go post it on a linguistic philosophers board and they're be real excited about how to become an expert. God forbid hop should ever be about learning and not arguments.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
that's a very nasty thing to say and I think that it was entirely inappropriate.
Most threads in discussion are not about spinning, or becoming better at spinning, therefore I don't see why people should automatically think that it was about spinning and becoming a better spinner. Especially considering that the articles themselves weren't specifically about spinning.
If people were not interested in a discussion on semantics, then why did they participate in what appeared to be one?
Written by: mcp
Thinking that hoppers are in general stupid = yes.
that's a very nasty thing to say and I think that it was entirely inappropriate.
Most threads in discussion are not about spinning, or becoming better at spinning, therefore I don't see why people should automatically think that it was about spinning and becoming a better spinner. Especially considering that the articles themselves weren't specifically about spinning.
If people were not interested in a discussion on semantics, then why did they participate in what appeared to be one?
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
nasty, probably. Inappropriate? Why? It's not inappropriate, it's honest, to be blunt. That's what I was thinking.
So if it's about learning a subject well enough to become an expert, and everybody around (mostly) is learning spinning and fire arts... then making that connection is not obvious? WTF?
Like if I post an article on how to make practice sessions more effective when playing the bagpipes... you assume I want to discuss the different brands of bagpipes? Well, errrr no I don't actually.
I don't care if people are interested in discussions on semantics. I'm not, I leave that to the sophists. I prefer to discuss things that have an effect on something / anything, preferably, when on hop, something related to learning or spinning or both.
nasty, probably. Inappropriate? Why? It's not inappropriate, it's honest, to be blunt. That's what I was thinking.
So if it's about learning a subject well enough to become an expert, and everybody around (mostly) is learning spinning and fire arts... then making that connection is not obvious? WTF?
Like if I post an article on how to make practice sessions more effective when playing the bagpipes... you assume I want to discuss the different brands of bagpipes? Well, errrr no I don't actually.
I don't care if people are interested in discussions on semantics. I'm not, I leave that to the sophists. I prefer to discuss things that have an effect on something / anything, preferably, when on hop, something related to learning or spinning or both.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
SILVER Member
(...trusty steed of the rodeo midget...)
403 posts
Location: the state of flux, Ireland
(...trusty steed of the rodeo midget...)
403 posts
Location: the state of flux, Ireland
Posted:
This has to win a prize for possibly the most ill-considered post ever.
Tell me MCP, are you putting yourself into that category as well?
Or are you some how above all others?
Because if you say that you are, you are engaging in elitist behaviour and would have to be prevented from accesing the seniors lounge, in accordance with the proposed rules for that forum, as posted by Malcom.
Perhaps a retraction is in order, yes?
This has to win a prize for possibly the most ill-considered post ever.
Written by: mcp
Thinking that hoppers are in general stupid = yes.
Tell me MCP, are you putting yourself into that category as well?
Or are you some how above all others?
Because if you say that you are, you are engaging in elitist behaviour and would have to be prevented from accesing the seniors lounge, in accordance with the proposed rules for that forum, as posted by Malcom.
Perhaps a retraction is in order, yes?
SILVER Member
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Your friendly neighbourhood mad scientist
479 posts
Location: Over the hills and far away, United Kingdom
Posted:
Microwave conversations!
Post a couple of links, leave to cook for 1 day and there will be a pre-made conversation waiting for you when you get back. No need to participate or engage in all of that messy politeness.
Sorry, I was going to come up with a sensible response.
But I'm too stupid.
Microwave conversations!
Post a couple of links, leave to cook for 1 day and there will be a pre-made conversation waiting for you when you get back. No need to participate or engage in all of that messy politeness.
Sorry, I was going to come up with a sensible response.
But I'm too stupid.
"Love the art in yourself and not yourself in the art."
--Konstantin Stanislavisky
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
No. I never retract anything I say. It's a personal opinion and hence it's the truth, even if it's not true.
Errr, how does elitist behavior OUTSIDE of the senior forum get me banned from it...? (If this 'behaviour' is elitist at all.)
How can i put this sarcastically: Clearly I was stupid for assuming option 2 would be discussed, instead of option 1. I thought I made that clear before. Sometimes I think I'm stupid for posting at all, considering the time and effort I put in, and the near dearth of interesting replies I get back. Economics would tell me I'm wasting my time, I think.
Written by: squarefish
This has to win a prize for possibly the most ill-considered post ever.Written by: mcp
Thinking that hoppers are in general stupid = yes.
Tell me MCP, are you putting yourself into that category as well?
Or are you some how above all others?
Because if you say that you are, you are engaging in elitist behaviour and would have to be prevented from accesing the seniors lounge, in accordance with the proposed rules for that forum, as posted by Malcom.
Perhaps a retraction is in order, yes?
No. I never retract anything I say. It's a personal opinion and hence it's the truth, even if it's not true.
Errr, how does elitist behavior OUTSIDE of the senior forum get me banned from it...? (If this 'behaviour' is elitist at all.)
How can i put this sarcastically: Clearly I was stupid for assuming option 2 would be discussed, instead of option 1. I thought I made that clear before. Sometimes I think I'm stupid for posting at all, considering the time and effort I put in, and the near dearth of interesting replies I get back. Economics would tell me I'm wasting my time, I think.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Classically British
5,689 posts
Location: Epsom, Surrey, England
Posted:
Perhaps, but then I wouldn't get to annoy you further with frivolous innaccurate replies.
I just love the mild irony that a thread about digression has digressed.
Fetch me the wombat, i'm going snorkelling
Perhaps, but then I wouldn't get to annoy you further with frivolous innaccurate replies.
I just love the mild irony that a thread about digression has digressed.
Fetch me the wombat, i'm going snorkelling
Burner of Toast
Spinner of poi
Slacker of enormous magnitude
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
ahh but durbs it hasn't digressed via semantics unless you want to get semantic about it
Meg... surely I could say the same about a recent post I saw you make in a thread about hydrogen powered cars.. or are you working on a routine in one perhaps don't make out you never post about anything other than spinning the evidence is a couple of threads away
if you want this to reference to spinning how's this:
digression via semantics occurs in spinning threads too
therefore possibly curtailing your learning curve and reducing the art of spinning to an argument about terminology. when you make up names for moves you are creating a new meaning for a word / a new word for a meaning creating a memory tool that links your mind to a movement digressing from this terminology by argument about meaning could leave you confused and possibly doing poi instead of staff.
but that's just words whats a hybrid? the semantics of this terminology have been discussed many times, I hold it's the fusion of 2 props others use it in poi to describe something or other.
ahh but durbs it hasn't digressed via semantics unless you want to get semantic about it
Meg... surely I could say the same about a recent post I saw you make in a thread about hydrogen powered cars.. or are you working on a routine in one perhaps
don't make out you never post about anything other than spinning the evidence is a couple of threads away if you want this to reference to spinning how's this:
digression via semantics occurs in spinning threads too
therefore possibly curtailing your learning curve and reducing the art of spinning to an argument about terminology. when you make up names for moves you are creating a new meaning for a word / a new word for a meaning creating a memory tool that links your mind to a movement digressing from this terminology by argument about meaning could leave you confused and possibly doing poi instead of staff.but that's just words whats a hybrid? the semantics of this terminology have been discussed many times, I hold it's the fusion of 2 props others use it in poi to describe something or other.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
Er, yeah. I know I post about things other than spinning. What has that got to do with anything? I think it's an interesting topic considering we're burning fossil fuels in order to entertain people. Oh no wait, so now it's related to spinning. Dagnamit.
Er, yeah. I know I post about things other than spinning. What has that got to do with anything? I think it's an interesting topic considering we're burning fossil fuels in order to entertain people. Oh no wait, so now it's related to spinning. Dagnamit.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
touché
but if you read my first couple of posts (one of my earlier points) you will see I was inspired for this thread by your's on experts / amateurs and how people were driving you nuts by not getting the point, I was trying to find ways to utilise threads so people didn't diverge from spinning related topics. I also mentioned the fact I had another title in mind, which was:
the transgression from spinning topics to that of language due to terminology / semantics.
the point being how people draw a conclusion from a threads title and post without reading the content / getting the point. And how correct use of language in thread titles COULD (this is HoP after all ) maintain a minimum of "chatter" and keep threads useful and to the point.
I don't want to argue with you meg I'm just trying to find out how to be a more porductive member of the community (and about time too)
touché but if you read my first couple of posts (one of my earlier points) you will see I was inspired for this thread by your's on experts / amateurs and how people were driving you nuts by not getting the point, I was trying to find ways to utilise threads so people didn't diverge from spinning related topics. I also mentioned the fact I had another title in mind, which was:
the transgression from spinning topics to that of language due to terminology / semantics.
the point being how people draw a conclusion from a threads title and post without reading the content / getting the point. And how correct use of language in thread titles COULD (this is HoP after all
) maintain a minimum of "chatter" and keep threads useful and to the point.I don't want to argue with you meg I'm just trying to find out how to be a more porductive member of the community
(and about time too) A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
Yes, and I appreciate your contributions mynci. I wasn't arguing with you, just joshing.
As for people not reading posts and stating it in the first line of their replies? In most cases I have no words to express my fury at that.
Written by: Mynci
the point being how people draw a conclusion from a threads title and post without reading the content / getting the point. And how correct use of language in thread titles COULD (this is HoP after all
I don't want to argue with you meg I'm just trying to find out how to be a more porductive member of the community
Yes, and I appreciate your contributions mynci. I wasn't arguing with you, just joshing.
As for people not reading posts and stating it in the first line of their replies? In most cases I have no words to express my fury at that.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I know in your head you just called me mincey *pouts*
Written by: mcp
Yes, and I appreciate your contributions mynci. I wasn't arguing with you, just joshing.
I know in your head you just called me mincey
*pouts* A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
PLATINUM Member
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Flying Water Muppet
5,276 posts
Location: Edin-borrow., United Kingdom
Posted:
That's what I alway call you... in my head and real life. And if it helps, I just did it again... myncy.
Written by: MynciWritten by: mcp
Yes, and I appreciate your contributions mynci. I wasn't arguing with you, just joshing.
I know in your head you just called me mincey
That's what I alway call you... in my head and real life. And if it helps, I just did it again... myncy.
"the now legendary" - Kaskade
"the still legendary" - Kaskade
I spunked in my friend's aquarium and the fish ate it. I love all fish. Especially the pink ones. They are my bitches. - Anon.
Stargazer
6,650 posts
6,650 posts
Posted:
And where are we in regards of this thread now?
Put me on the stupid side of HoP, I still believe that we connect different meanings to the same words. It's perfectly legal to verify (between the lines: "Hey are you talking about *this* or is it something else?).
But to continue in "chit chat/ tit for tat mode", indulge on limerick responses and cease to engage ones own mind is what derails threads.
It's not the responsibility of the "thread owner" (IP) to keep it on track. It's the responsibility of each and every participant to issue an intellectual restraint order and refrain from posting, unless it tackles the topic.
And where are we in regards of this thread now?
Put me on the stupid side of HoP, I still believe that we connect different meanings to the same words. It's perfectly legal to verify (between the lines: "Hey are you talking about *this* or is it something else?).
But to continue in "chit chat/ tit for tat mode", indulge on limerick responses and cease to engage ones own mind is what derails threads.
It's not the responsibility of the "thread owner" (IP) to keep it on track. It's the responsibility of each and every participant to issue an intellectual restraint order and refrain from posting, unless it tackles the topic.
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
BRONZE Member
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Macaque of all trades
8,738 posts
Location: wombling free..., United Kingdom
Posted:
I think that may be part of the problem, peoples thoughts on the topic drift. (apart from it seems the seniors lounge) I think definitions of ambiguous words or a clear statement what the thread is NOT about could help a lot to keep a thread on track. but how often does a person see an 11 page thread and only read the last page and NOT the original post? I know I have been guilty in the past.
I think that may be part of the problem, peoples thoughts on the topic drift. (apart from it seems the seniors lounge) I think definitions of ambiguous words or a clear statement what the thread is NOT about could help a lot to keep a thread on track. but how often does a person see an 11 page thread and only read the last page and NOT the original post? I know I have been guilty in the past.
A couple of balls short of a full cascade... or maybe a few cards short of a deck... we'll see how this all fans out.
© 1998 - 2025 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com