Not to bring up a (for me) painful thread, but a thread from today (in which someone was requesting info to help with a story/novel whatever,) got me wondering.
In a GD thread (well, it turned into one, anyway,) I had opened the other day about responding to a self-proclaimed gunfreak, I was accused by one or two posters as passing off Dopers’ words as my own (which, again, I did not do.) I am confused. Over time, I have seen at least a couple of posters who have asked various questions about various scenarios or attributes as they were working on stories or novels and needed more accurate info than what they had in their own brains.
It seems that people responded quite graciously and were more than willing to provide any and all info they had. No one every questioned whether or not the author would be footnoting them or referencing them correctly. I guess the author was given the benefit of the doubt and it was assumed that the right thing would be done.
Now…did I just come across a couple of somewhat mean and snarky Dopers (who didn’t see the other threads and, therefore did not unload on these guys, as well?) or what? Why was I condemned (by ONLY a couple) but these authors weren’t. I don’t want ANYONE do be condemned, mind you. I’m just curious about the discrepancy.
Ok, that was pretty poorly worded, but can someone give it a go? Thanks!
Without seeing the thread, there’s no way to know. Actually, the only people who could know why you got the response you did, but others don’t would be the posters who took you to task. Lots of threads rub someone the wrong way, and they’ll latch on to one small detail and blow it out of proportion, or decide that they know your thoughts and motivations better than you do.
Here’s the first thread,which I started. Whenever I open such a thread, I always begin by saying it’s for whatever story I’m working on so anyone who doesn’t want to participate can say “Screw you, Rhymer!” and ignore it, or post this link, or whatnot.
ETA: 'Pon reflection I see the OP was more concerned about the thread she opened than the one I did. Ah, well, it’s not like my being an impetuous flapdoodle isn’t public knowledge anyway.
I saw one poster who was short with you, but there were a couple who were quite helpful and took some time to share some good advice and pointers about debating.
Sometimes the person who’s rudest is the one you focus on, and the helpful posters fade into the background. I think that’s what happened in your thread.
Don’t let it bother you. And don’t be afraid of GD. You’ll be fine.
I deliberately didn’t read the threads referenced because I want my answer to be spontaneous as it relates to the title of your thread.
So here goes:
It’s* knowledge*, isn’t it?
What - I’m supposed to give attribution for imparting everything I may have read in my life which pertains to a given topic?
Well sure, if I remember who said it, I’m likely to say, “Well as Hrffffrrrhhherrr once wrote…”
But the thing is, I may have read it here, but if it got filed away in my memory banks, and I regurgitate:p it later, I might not remember where it came from.
Okay, since I didn’t read the referenced threads or the accusations I will do so now - I just wanted to take the subject and examine it at its lowest “common denominator”, as it were.
Hazle, my two cents regarding that thread, for what it’s worth:
Some people are loons. This is why our dear Uncle Cecil gave us the Ignore function. You should use it liberally when you encounter garbage. (And you should also note that one man’s loon is another man’s genius; don’t sweat it if you find some Dope graybeard to be an offensive idiot. Ignore, ignore, ignore.)
But on to this thread: If I come across something on the Dope that I like, or agree with, or learn from, I shamelessly adopt it as my own. Why not? How in heaven’s name is anyone supposed to learn anything if they aren’t allowed to adopt an idea presented to them by someone else? It’s beyond absurd to suggest that if you ask a question about something on the Dope, and people educate you, and you learn from them, you’re not allowed to talk about it ever again unless you provide appropriately formatted footnotes to your arguments.
I thought the criticism in that thread was completely ridiculous. What the hell is the point of this board if not to ask questions and use the answers? Don’t worry about it.
Thanks Mbossa! I didn’t even know this thread existed. Here is my response.
“Wow! I didn’t even know this thread existed until Mbossa pointed it out in another thread! So thoughtful and informative. Doesn’t hurt that it also makes me feel fairly supported and much better. Thanks so much for your thoughtful inquiry. Much obliged! Cheers!”
Well, sorry, but I have to take the opposite opinion. I agreed with the person in the GD thread and some of the others there.
For me, it was the way that the OP was written. I didn’t like the terms “hand this guy his lunch” and I didn’t like the way that you wrote that term off.
There was also another OP you started recently that you got into a miscommunication about something else in MPSIMS.
That OP also had a phrase that could be taken in the wrong way. I would just suggest re-reading your OPs before you submit them and try to see them from a dispassionate view or from a stranger’s eyes.
I understand why both of those people in both of those threads reacted the way they did.
And this is exactly my point. On a board like this one, there are always going to be people who disagree with you – just as there are in real life. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion. But as has been pointed out, Hazle, in that other thread, there were a couple of people who attacked you, while the majority supported you. Not that you should necessarily just go with majority rule, but it’s worth considering that your position and viewpoint aren’t wrong.
But I continue to urge judicious application of the Ignore function; it’s done wonders for my blood pressure.
I can’t agree. I feel furt’s response was classic Straight Dope contrariness: “I don’t feel like answering the topic so I’m going to score points off the OP instead.” It accomplished little and it did not educate.
I’ll agree there is plenty of contrariness here, especially in GD. However, I think furt had a bit of a point. The “I want to crush him” in Hazle Weatherfield’s OP was not the ideal motive to go into an honest debate with. Augmenting this attitude with the arguments of others, unattributed, is not a praiseworthy method of ignorance fighting. That having been said, it’s also not a rare or particularly noteworthy one. Plenty of people sling the arguments of others, and the person she was debating with was almost certainly copy-pasting blurbs from NRA and other groups sites, probably without attribution.
In the end I hope they both took a little time to examine the arguments they were repeating, and to think about them critically, so they could learn more about the topic, but I’m not particularly put out if they didn’t. Joining in an opinion, instead of doing independent analysis, is a fine tradition, carried on at high levels of debate, including the US Supreme Court. Suggesting people who prefer not to do independent analysis should not participate(the “I’d prefer you not vote” bit was particularly nasty) in the process would eliminate the VAST majority of people. We may be left with political debates left to only the elite, and that would be a bigger shame than allowing “me too” people to participate. Do you hear me Clarence Thomas? I’m sticking up for you here.
Nor, I must stress, was furt’s reply. “Learn to debate” is not a very praiseworthy method; witness Hazle’s response. Do we strive to make people slink away in shame or do we strive to help people learn?
A helpful response worthy of the Dope would have been, “A good place to start is to learn a bit more about the subject. Let me show you some previous threads on gun control so you can see those arguments on gun control, and what the responses were.”
