Thread: Just, wow.
View Single Post
Old 05-27-19, 04:40 AM
  #94  
Jim from Boston
Senior Member
 
Jim from Boston's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,384
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 800 Post(s)
Liked 218 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by Kedosto
I think it’s important to remember that just about everything you read on a forum - of any subject - is opinion. There’s very little real, honest to goodness factual information.

There’s no shortage of highly opinionated jacktards around here, and there’s a few who are quick to bully anyone daring to disagree with their strongly held opinions. But, in the end, they’re just opinionated bullies sitting at a keyboard.

As far as the ignore feature is concerned, I don’t ignore the opinionated jerks as even they can at least offer a viewpoint I might want to hear. Just because I might not agree with the opinion of a keyboard jacktard, doesn’t mean they may not have a point.

I do ignore two people. One, whose posts appear to be drunken ramblings mostly influenced by their level of intoxication. And two, a probably decent guy who may actually have something to contribute but I can’t appreciate it due to a penchant for nesting quotes into a virtually unreadable mess. Both are harmless but annoying and since this is something I engage in on my terms, well, that’s how it goes.

Good on you for recognizing the dynamic. It’s best not to engage with the toxic, but beware they’re often difficult to avoid.
Originally Posted by Paul Barnard
I don't have those two on ignore, but I have conditioned myself to breeze right past their posts. It's unfortunate too because one of them is a good and knowledgeable guy. I simply can't force myself to suffer the style.

I have two on ignore here and that's just to keep me from accidentally responding thinking there's a conversation to be had. Once I know someone has no inclination whatsoever to engage in meaningful dialogue, I am done with them...
You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? Then who the hell else are you talkin' to? You talkin' to me? Well, I'm the only one here[who fits that description]. Who do you think you're talking to? Oh, yeah? Ok...


"The name is Boston…Jim from Boston.”

In the past 10 years subscribing to BikeForums with over 6500 posts, I have read several such critiques as above, usually started by one subscriber, followed by about 2 or 3 syncophants. I suppose I should revel in my notoriety, as in the manner, "I don't care what the newspapers say about me as long as they spell my name right."

In those instances over the years, I have tried to explain my posting style, accumulating various explanations in my justification. Of course all are explained with the use of quote boxes. My last and most comprehensive attempt, was totally dissed (links) by @mstateglfr.

Maybe no one reads far enough into my posts to get to my signature line explaining my style. “
I use nested, sequential quotes (to be read in that order) to improvise an imaginary conversation. Anything outside a quote box is my contribution to the current ‘conversation.’ “

So, in the following post, FWIW, I have re-written that last attempt, totally devoid of quote boxes, only paraphrasing other subscribers (depriving them of the recognition and appreciation of their contributions). I think a quote or mention is as much of a kudo as a LIKE, since it is conspicuous and is viewed by a wider audience than just the author and those who actually view the LIKED post.

I would like to reply now though, specifically to the above-quoted posts about “a probably decent guy who may actually have something to contribute but I can’t appreciate it due to a penchant for nesting quotes into a virtually unreadable mess…a good and knowledgeable guy” who “has no inclination whatsoever to engage in meaningful dialogue.”

My correspondence style is exemplified by a recent thread started by @Paul Barnard. I replied to his Opening Post, quoting (links) three other subscribers, PB himself twice, and myself twice from other threads with comments germane to his OP. Now, how is such inclusive quoting a disinclination to engage in meaningful dialogue?

Indeed IMO, when I quote, it indicates that I have read, and considered the author's position, and now I'm responding….a Dialogue / Conversation… I just do it among a group of presumably interested subscribers, rather than a single confidant.

In any case for readers who prefer short pithy posts, to Keep It Simple, this was a most memorable critique of my style:
Originally Posted by TruthBomb
It’s visual diarrhea, pollutes any thread, and is the opposite of succinct (briefly and clearly expressed)...
Originally Posted by chefisaac
[…but] LISTEN to @Jim from Boston

he knows his $hit!

Last edited by Jim from Boston; 05-27-19 at 05:01 AM.
Jim from Boston is offline