Vanishing Topics?

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
pete75
Posts: 12959
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby pete75 » 15 Jan 2020, 11:38pm

Tangled Metal wrote:
kwackers wrote:
mattheus wrote:OMG. If the *internet* is inconsistent, we may as well give up now. Civilisation is foobared - let alone accurate CUK forum debate :(

Well the whole point of Wiki is that it can be edited by anyone.
All MM has to do is edit the article to show that a different viewpoint exists and provide his reference.

Easy peasy and one of the reasons I'm a fan of it.

AIUI wikipedia has an editing process that has different levels of access. New contributors I believe, and I could be misled here, have a vetting or modding process to go through, they can't necessarily change what is already there. Others have more rights.

I know a guy who apparently has rights to delete or modify parts of wikipedia pages without any oversee by the organisation. AIUI he has a side interest in reverting political party's activists edits back to what was there before. Or those of businesses or celebrities.

Personally I don't know if I agree this open source encyclopedia site is wholly a good idea. There's no credentials given for contributors. It relies on people reviewing sources and editing/ correcting any errors. Does that happen? What is tbe status of sources? You read a peer reviewed, academic publication you can mostly trust the process. You read a wikipedia referenced source there's no check on it, it's not peer reviewed by academics with weight of reputation in the field.


I wondered how accurate the stuff on Wikipedia was. A while ago I sat down with a friend who is a prof of AI at the Sorbonne and asked her to look at articles related to her spheres of knowledge. She said they were accurate and well written. She's a pretty serious academic being the only woman on the science committee of a fairly high powered EU "think tank" and also an editor at Springer, a leading academic publisher. In other words the articles passed muster regarding peer review.

jb
Posts: 919
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 12:17pm
Location: Clitheroe

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby jb » 15 Jan 2020, 11:48pm

Don't knock it, Wikipedia is a good starting point for looking into something and probably 90% of its content is non controversial.
I use it all the time for technical stuff that I just need background information for.
Last edited by jb on 16 Jan 2020, 12:04am, edited 1 time in total.
Cheers
J Bro

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6557
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Tangled Metal » 15 Jan 2020, 11:59pm

Me too which is why I only have my doubts about it.

pete75
Posts: 12959
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby pete75 » 16 Jan 2020, 12:03am

jb wrote:Don't knock it, Wicapedia is a good starting point for looking into something and probably 90% of its content is non controversial.
I use it all the time for technical stuff that I just need background information for.


Wicapedia? Isn't that something to do with witchcraft? :D

jb
Posts: 919
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 12:17pm
Location: Clitheroe

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby jb » 16 Jan 2020, 12:05am

Whoops :cry: :D
Cheers

J Bro

Oldjohnw
Posts: 4125
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Oldjohnw » 16 Jan 2020, 12:24am

political hacks who browbeat opponents need ejecting too. For political threads to work everyone needs to play nice. By that I believe acceptance of others rights to their views is at the core. That acceptance does sometimes mean letting comments you disagree with politically slide.


Seems contradictory. Eject people who disagree with you but accept others rights to their views.

Re Wiki: students are not allowed to use it as source, material, although the references given in Wiki at the end of an article are useful.
John

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 2922
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby roubaixtuesday » 16 Jan 2020, 7:09am

Tangled Metal wrote:Nope! Not naming anyone. Not least because one regular poster I once had those banning thoughts about seems to have changed. I actually like reading what that poster puts out now. People change or an accommodation comes about where people can decide to not take things so seriously if they disagree.


In which case, it does sound as though you simply want people "ejecting" who disagree with you.

I don't actually think that's the case, but you don't seem able to articulate what differentiates those who do, and do not, deserve ejection.

The Tea Shop IMO gets a lot of posts from people who don't seem comfortable having their preconceptions challenged, particularly when faced with evidence which contradicts them.

kwackers
Posts: 14503
Joined: 4 Jun 2008, 9:29pm
Location: Warrington

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby kwackers » 16 Jan 2020, 8:34am

pete75 wrote: I wondered how accurate the stuff on Wikipedia was. A while ago I sat down with a friend who is a prof of AI at the Sorbonne and asked her to look at articles related to her spheres of knowledge. She said they were accurate and well written. She's a pretty serious academic being the only woman on the science committee of a fairly high powered EU "think tank" and also an editor at Springer, a leading academic publisher. In other words the articles passed muster regarding peer review.

That's not too surprising, most of the people I know who are heavily academic or technical make a point of editing errors or updating wiki articles.

As a starting point you can't go far wrong with Wiki but then if you're serious about the subject then Wiki is probably somewhat lightweight so you'd dig deeper elsewhere anyway.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6557
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Tangled Metal » 16 Jan 2020, 8:35am

Oldjohnw wrote:
political hacks who browbeat opponents need ejecting too. For political threads to work everyone needs to play nice. By that I believe acceptance of others rights to their views is at the core. That acceptance does sometimes mean letting comments you disagree with politically slide.


Seems contradictory. Eject people who disagree with you but accept others rights to their views.

Re Wiki: students are not allowed to use it as source, material, although the references given in Wiki at the end of an article are useful.

Political hacks who browbeat opponents isn't about the opposition but about the browbeating aspects. It's the oppressive, overpowering way they selectively quote every part paragraph, sentence or part of a sentence to attempt to gain an advantage over someone with different views on a subject.

I can see how you obviously picked on opponent and got to that idea. I await another selective quote. :D

Oldjohnw
Posts: 4125
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Oldjohnw » 16 Jan 2020, 8:48am

Tangled Metal wrote:
Oldjohnw wrote:
political hacks who browbeat opponents need ejecting too. For political threads to work everyone needs to play nice. By that I believe acceptance of others rights to their views is at the core. That acceptance does sometimes mean letting comments you disagree with politically slide.


Seems contradictory. Eject people who disagree with you but accept others rights to their views.

Re Wiki: students are not allowed to use it as source, material, although the references given in Wiki at the end of an article are useful.

Political hacks who browbeat opponents isn't about the opposition but about the browbeating aspects. It's the oppressive, overpowering way they selectively quote every part paragraph, sentence or part of a sentence to attempt to gain an advantage over someone with different views on a subject.

I can see how you obviously picked on opponent and got to that idea. I await another selective quote. :D


I admit I ignored your word 'browbeating' , partly because I didn't know what you meant and mostly because it was itself perjoritive, subjective and, er, browbeating! :) :D
John

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6557
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Tangled Metal » 16 Jan 2020, 8:57am

roubaixtuesday wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Nope! Not naming anyone. Not least because one regular poster I once had those banning thoughts about seems to have changed. I actually like reading what that poster puts out now. People change or an accommodation comes about where people can decide to not take things so seriously if they disagree.


In which case, it does sound as though you simply want people "ejecting" who disagree with you.

I don't actually think that's the case, but you don't seem able to articulate what differentiates those who do, and do not, deserve ejection.

The Tea Shop IMO gets a lot of posts from people who don't seem comfortable having their preconceptions challenged, particularly when faced with evidence which contradicts them.

As I mentioned someone who I did have a bit of conflict with due to highly different views and a sense mine were being crushed from me (slight exaggeration of course) became much more open to letting me have my opposing views. A change in their behaviour made me think it's possible for even the most ardent internet warrior to change their habits.

For example, I've had those to and fro' discussions on political threads many times. Many people make it work by reaching the point where they acknowledge we're not going to agree. The classic agree to disagree step away. That's an honorable and respectful way to go. Other times I've even gone so far at actually saying that but the person debating with me carries on, picking at opposing opinions and posts.

Easy solution stop but let's be honest here there's a masculinity aspect to debates. Competition creeps in and I don't think there's many not guilty of that at times.

I'm sure that I'm not the only one who sees a general pattern to forum, political threads. OP gives the topic, people give opinions, people debate opinions then people go too far and it becomes oneupmanship. Often involving just a few regulars.

Example recently could be with the debate between pwa and ph in a recent thread about labour and former immigration policy and NATO support vs begrudging tolerance. Although that one isn't that bad just opposing views that'll will never come together. It's still friendly if a little repetitive and dull (sorry my opinion). It's a reasonable example of where views have been given and very little new comes out about their POVs.

Look, I know I'm out of step in many ways with regular posters on here. There's very few right of centre people around. That's ok, I'll just accept a strident debate and hopefully learn to step away sooner.

Oldjohnw
Posts: 4125
Joined: 16 Oct 2018, 4:23am
Location: Northumberland

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Oldjohnw » 16 Jan 2020, 9:02am

Tangled Metal +1
John

pwa
Posts: 12115
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby pwa » 16 Jan 2020, 9:13am

Tangled Metal wrote:
Example recently could be with the debate between pwa and ph in a recent thread about labour and former immigration policy and NATO support vs begrudging tolerance. Although that one isn't that bad just opposing views that'll will never come together. It's still friendly if a little repetitive and dull (sorry my opinion). It's a reasonable example of where views have been given and very little new comes out about their POVs.


Guilty as charged. I suppose we rely on self discipline and when we are getting it right we withdraw from a debate when we see that we are saying the same thing on successive pages. I tend to be a bit wary of getting into Brexit talk these days because I've said all I have to say, and nobody wants to hear it again. I'm boring on the topic and so is everybody else. I note that R2 has gone quiet on non-cycling matters for the moment, which is I think a wise choice and I may follow suit.

roubaixtuesday
Posts: 2922
Joined: 18 Aug 2015, 7:05pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby roubaixtuesday » 16 Jan 2020, 9:18am

Tangled Metal wrote:
roubaixtuesday wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Nope! Not naming anyone. Not least because one regular poster I once had those banning thoughts about seems to have changed. I actually like reading what that poster puts out now. People change or an accommodation comes about where people can decide to not take things so seriously if they disagree.


In which case, it does sound as though you simply want people "ejecting" who disagree with you.

I don't actually think that's the case, but you don't seem able to articulate what differentiates those who do, and do not, deserve ejection.

The Tea Shop IMO gets a lot of posts from people who don't seem comfortable having their preconceptions challenged, particularly when faced with evidence which contradicts them.

As I mentioned someone who I did have a bit of conflict with due to highly different views and a sense mine were being crushed from me (slight exaggeration of course) became much more open to letting me have my opposing views. A change in their behaviour made me think it's possible for even the most ardent internet warrior to change their habits.

For example, I've had those to and fro' discussions on political threads many times. Many people make it work by reaching the point where they acknowledge we're not going to agree. The classic agree to disagree step away. That's an honorable and respectful way to go. Other times I've even gone so far at actually saying that but the person debating with me carries on, picking at opposing opinions and posts.

Easy solution stop but let's be honest here there's a masculinity aspect to debates. Competition creeps in and I don't think there's many not guilty of that at times.

I'm sure that I'm not the only one who sees a general pattern to forum, political threads. OP gives the topic, people give opinions, people debate opinions then people go too far and it becomes oneupmanship. Often involving just a few regulars.

Example recently could be with the debate between pwa and ph in a recent thread about labour and former immigration policy and NATO support vs begrudging tolerance. Although that one isn't that bad just opposing views that'll will never come together. It's still friendly if a little repetitive and dull (sorry my opinion). It's a reasonable example of where views have been given and very little new comes out about their POVs.

Look, I know I'm out of step in many ways with regular posters on here. There's very few right of centre people around. That's ok, I'll just accept a strident debate and hopefully learn to step away sooner.


I don't disagree with this, but I would challenge that any of it justifies ejection of people from the forum, as you seemed to advocate up thread. I just ignore this sort of interaction.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 6557
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Vanishing Topics?

Postby Tangled Metal » 16 Jan 2020, 9:20am

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... h/browbeat

lthough I was more thinking of the idea of intimidating by use of overbearing words or arguments.