Quote:
|
Originally Posted by guccilvr
so wait.. why are we living in the past?? I thought the whole point of evolution was to just move forward. Constantly bringing up the past doesn't do much good when things have been changed and the push forward is already in place.
|
That's a disheartening statement coming from a Super Moderator. Did you read the whole thread? I think it is a pretty good context for letting people bring up past events that don't sit well during this time of change... especially when Hal asks for feedback. It's one thing to chime in and disagree with the claims being made, but another to dismiss people entirely and cite the reason as "the push forward is already in place." From your position of authority on this board, that comes off as just a fancy way of saying, "drop it, or else."
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sultana
I think it's important to try to evaluate posts on their own merit as much as possible. Sure, sometimes it's hard, but it's not impossible.
It can be annoying when folks are having a thread about the merits of various brands of peanut butter, and someone suddenly pops off with, "of course you'd like *Skippy*, you gun-loving, first amendment-hating dork..." or something like.
Not at all saying you (SC) are doing that, or have done it. Certainly others have though, and I exaggerate for effect.
|
I just wanted to address this, even though some people around here seem to think I'm just being crazy, indiscernible or simply that I'm beating a dead horse. I personally think it is important not to let this get brushed under the rug.
Sultana, your first suggestion is generally a valid one, but it just emphasizes Hal's point over again... and the deficiencies of such an attitude. Suppose I were to take issue with something you said and I told you, 'You just need to try to think a little more like a dancer, Sultana. I think that would help you understand better.' I would be suggesting that you don't know/do something you already do. If I didn't know that you were a dancer, maybe it wouldn't bug you as much, but wouldn't you be a little irritated hearing that from somebody who should know that by now? To take the focus off of Sultana now...
I have not been arguing that posts shouldn't be evaluated on their own merit; in fact, my protestations are to argue exactly the opposite - that posts
should be evaluated for their merit. But to what end?
To form an opinion about that person and his/her contributions. I think anybody who denies that is fooling himself. Think of why your friends and loved ones are your friends and loved ones... isn't it the same reason? Because they have given you many reasons over time (countless events) to trust and love them. In Hal's version, we ignore what we know about a person and each post is an island... but then we are challenged to judge a post's merit. This is truly a conundrum. How can we be take a good reputation as motivation to post in a respectable fashion if we are at the same time eschewing the notion of a reputation?
That said, I think the real disagreement with me is that some people perceived my actions as picking on someone. It never had anything to do with evaluating a post based on its merit.