Conserving energy and time is always a balancing act. I know a lot of posters who draw on the emotional or informational support of the boards, and some who feel they are investing too much. You (a general you) are the only one that evaluate the decision. So I respect it and if you find yourself with too much time on your hands you can always reverse it.
Hope you find some peace in retirement!
Peace out Dinsdale, have fun. Feel welcome to drop by again if you ever change your mind.
Agreeing with that.
Good luck in your future.
Safe travels.
Vaya con Dios.
@Dinsdale , you are dead to me.
(It can’t all be good wishes, right?!)
Yup, exactly.
And you will very likely have to choose between weightlifting and whichever of the above you might have done with that energy.
Someone who doesn’t have that sort of limited energy may have trouble really understanding that: if you have normal energy, and are otherwise relatively inactive, lifting weights may increase your spoons, not use them up. (As will, probably, going for a walk; or a lot of other activities, especially if you can do them outside.) But also: someone whose health status, for whatever reason, limits their ability to keep being active in their previous fashion, is going to be in that position of having to choose what to spend the remaining energy on. One can’t, or at least shouldn’t, say that people who have gotten too infirm to do physical exercise in the interest of accomplishing something else are simultaneously not too infirm to do physical exercise that accomplishes nothing but exercise.
Having been atted in that thread I answered it there; which I see is my first post in that thread, so I certainly haven’t been hampering its progress. However it would be off topic in that thread to note something that’s been bothering me about parts of the discussion here: namely that some have said that those who don’t like what we read as the tone of the title and OP shouldn’t say so because we need to be thicker skinned and not so easily disturbed — and because it might discourage people from starting threads. Shouldn’t the people who start threads, or in general who post in fashions that disturb others even if they may not be meant that way, also be thick skinned enough to start threads anyway? Why is being disturbed something to be accepted in the thread starter, but not in those who reply or who respond to a reference over here?
(I have now read the first and last portions of that thread, though not most of it. I have also re-read the OP several times. I stand by the position that whatever the poster meant, taking that first post as a whole and not just the first paragraph, it carries to me a very strong tone of ‘people have all sorts of excuses for not lifting weights, but it’s Good for Everybody so they ought to be doing it.’)
I will now try to drop the subject here; and to minimize any further responses over there.
This being in response to me - nah.
Judge a thread by its title to decide if you want to read the op. I’ve been told that I’ve written a title or op that confused. I’m fine with that. I try to learn from it.
Read the op if the title interested you.
Respond if the op triggers a response.
Even Pit a bad title, or an offensive op. All fine to do.
But the folk who read the title and are triggered to respond without even reading the op? They are doofuses. What are they thinking?
Dinsdale would be so proud! You said “folk”!
With all genuine sincerity, you do you.
I actually agree with that. (Barring possible cases so out of line that the response should only be flagging them.)
Which is why I didn’t do that.
At least, unless by “respond” you mean glance at the title and move on without opening it. Anybody’s entitled to not read a thread for any reason. But on re-reading your post I don’t think you meant that.
I was not referencing you. If you even read the title and decided not for you, I’ve no issue.
That’s not what I said, or meant.
Complain all you want. Start a pit thread to make the complaint. Say it loud. Say it proud.
The point is to post. And begin a discussion. More dialogue.
What I was objecting to is people self censoring because of a fear of offending somebody. That’s less posting. Not good for a message board.
I’m also perplexed by people who get rankled by something that they perceive to be an affront to them, even when it didn’t address them directly. It’s far easier to just presume good faith instead, in my opinion.
which - supremely researched by @DSeid and @Dr_Paprika - was front and center of the “weight-lifting” thread for the last 100-200 posts … Every bit counts, and if you are willing to do only very little, doing it smartly, can add a couple of months/years to your (abstract you) life.
I stayed out of this thread for the longest time - for the same reason - but I have never seen a post w/ “moved up from 90 to 110kg today”, there … quite the contrary … very thoroughly researched studies of exercised that should fit all.
I’m thinking I don’t like thinking about exercise, so much.
Come on guys there’s a whole 5 other threads about exercising.
Remember, Rudy was dyeing.
@Dinsdale , that’s a classy sign-off. May your upcoming activities be rewarding and joyous. And you’ll definitely be missed, because whatever beefs people might have with your point of view from time to time, in my observation you are definitely one of those posters who starts a fair number of threads with good questions, resulting in a fine discussion.
I’d have posted the above BEFORE my dying-click-bait-title post, but didn’t see Dinsdale’s farewell post because I got an email notification of a response to my post, and then when I click on “view topic” in the email, it takes me directly to the response to my post, skipping over all the intermediate posts I haven’t read. And then it’s a bitch to scroll back and catch up on what I missed. (I know, I know, I should shut up about that here and post in “Site Feedback” if it bothers me so much. But I’m glad I was conscientious enough to go back find the unread posts, or I would have missed Dinsdale’s sign-off.)
The lesson is “Don’t click in emails” nor in your profile dropdown.
Work through your unread threads and encounter folks’ references to you in their native habitat and sequence.
Then rip them a new one with the benefit of the full context. 
Excellent advice. And you’re right, it’s bad to click on threads via the profile dropdown too, as it does the same thing as clicking on an email does.