»A question of presentation«

It's about time I bring this up. Many forum members have taken this stance:

Someone says, "I have the answers" and other posters/members take exception and call the person arrogant. The next step, usually, is to start criticising anything the person has to say from thence. The question is:
(Why) is this a necessary reflex action on the part of those of you who do it?

A follow-up question to this is:
Don't you think you limit yourself by not giving serious consideration to information unless it is presented a certain way?

There is more than one question in this opening post but, as the name of the thread suggests, they are all part of the one inquiry. I find the stance of many inconsistent with commentary about a movie that emphasises looking beyond the surface of things.

-------------------------------------------------

1.

Arrogance is its own reward....
The ways of humans are mysterious to those "more than human"....that's the tragedy, the lonely cross for the martyr to bear.

There are three possibilities:

1. It's a bad idea. This is the most probable case because good ideas are rare or have quite likely been thought of since 1999.

2. It's a good idea and I'm mad at you because I didn't think of it so I'm going to beat you down for coming up with it.

3. It's too complicated to quickly determine wheter it is good or bad but I'll use response #2 anyway.

psikey

ps - Of course there is number 4, in which case I'm jumping on you for the sheer joy of jumping on somebody.

dancur, you beat me to it.

i love making the sarcastic grammatical comments.

btw, many people beat down on know-it-alls because they're annoying.

It's an easy way to increase your post counter

PS I'm joking

dancur wrote:

exception

Acknowledged and revised accordingly.

aquin wrote:

btw, many people beat down on know-it-alls because they're annoying.

Why, really is there a need to do so or get annoyed in the first place? (SEE #3 of Psikeyhackr's response) Time will tell whether people really know what they're talking about and so will they. When I want to speed up the process, I usually ask viewpoint questions.

ps. I like the humour shown in the responses so far. Perhaps a sense of humour is just what is needed in approaching the subject at all times, yes?

intell wrote:

aquin wrote: btw, many people beat down on know-it-alls because they're annoying. Why, really is there a need to do so or get annoyed in the first place? (SEE #3 of Psikeyhackr's response) Time will tell whether people really know what they're talking about and so will they. When I want to speed up the process, I usually ask viewpoint questions.

Tone. Its the tone thats annoying. I'm open to ideas - which you should know. But its always a bit annoying when a know it all gets on a board and starts shouting his opinions w/ a negative tone (i.e. "You guys are idiots! I have all the answers! Listen to me, for I am the All Knowing Matrix King-guy! - ok, a bit exagerated).

I'm not raving mad when it happens, just annoyed enough to make fun of him.

Aquin wrote:

Tone. Its the tone thats annoying...

Amen to that!

Aquin wrote:

Tone. Its the tone thats annoying...

Gina Rink wrote:

Speaking of nay-saying, All this is happenstance too...indigochild.com... and this too...childrenofthenewearth.com...

From Wikipedia--Critics have also voiced concern that teaching children that they are Indigo will encourage children to adopt sociopathic behaviors, such as a false sense of human superiority, alienation, and a bizarre paranormal identity.

CaptPostMod wrote:

Aquin wrote: Tone. Its the tone thats annoying... Gina Rink wrote: Speaking of nay-saying, All this is happenstance too...indigochild.com... and this too...childrenofthenewearth.com... From Wikipedia--Critics have also voiced concern that teaching children that they are Indigo will encourage children to adopt sociopathic behaviors, such as a false sense of human superiority, alienation, and a bizarre paranormal identity.

Teaching kids that they're Indigo? Montoya?

i3.okoun.cz...

That would be hilarious! They go through life and the only thing they would know how to say is, "Hallo, my name is Indigo Montoya, you keeld my faja prepare to die!"

good times

So you 3 only give serious consideration to information presented a certain way (tone).

How productive is it really?

btw. How much of a tone is possible with written information in a forum? The only way to tell when people are joking sometimes is LOL j/k etc. And that's just humor.

intell wrote:

So you 3 only give serious consideration to information presented a certain way (tone). How productive is it really?

I give serious consideration to those who care about discussion, not just their own opinion and how best to defend it when people get annoyed.

I'm not sure what you asking is productive, but discussion can be passionate without being deragoatory or negative. Just present your ideas, be respecful to others and you'll learn something. Its as simple as that.

But, to me, a smart ass who only really cares about is own opinion should not be on a discussion board, he should be in politics

j/k - i'm sure our great leaders care about most everyone's opinions. especially when its in a poll.

ps - sorry if i'm a bit abrasive here, but really, i think alittle humility goes a long way.

Let's say I agree with you as far as the posting end and the responsibilty to present well.

But the focus in this thread is on the responsibility of the listener/reader - an area rarely considered. Intell is here to shine a bright light in that direction.

Quote:

I'm not sure what you asking is productive,

Is it productive to the learning process to respond on the basis of presentation? How do you advise a child who tells you his poor grades is due to the fact that he doesn't get along with his teacher?

And, as far as humility is concerned, I think when a person is hungry enough, the plate design, table setting, and garnish doesn't matter that much.

I guess the question is: How hungry is the reader to know? It takes a measure of I-know-enough-ness (not a word, but hey, "contentment" didn't seem appropriate. ) to start filtering out info on the basis of presentation imho. Wouldn't you say?

intell wrote:

So you 3 only give serious consideration to information presented a certain way (tone).

Not presented a certain way, but excluding one certain way.

intell wrote:

How productive is it really?

How productive is calling people with a differing opinion blind, deluded, stupid etc.?

Quote:

Not presented a certain way, but excluding one certain way.

There are many ways that are "wrong" to an individual.

Quote:

How productive is calling people with a differing opinion blind, deluded, stupid etc.?

SEE my previous post on this thread.

intell wrote:

I guess the question is: How hungry is the reader to know? It takes a measure of I-know-enough-ness (not a word, but hey, "contentment" didn't seem appropriate. ) to start filtering out info on the basis of presentation imho. Wouldn't you say?

So you are suggesting that we could not filter out on the basis of presentation because we have a lack of even basic "I-know-enoug-ness"?

CaptPostMod wrote:

intell wrote: I guess the question is: How hungry is the reader to know? It takes a measure of I-know-enough-ness (not a word, but hey, "contentment" didn't seem appropriate. ) to start filtering out info on the basis of presentation imho. Wouldn't you say? So you are suggesting that we could not filter out on the basis of presentation because we have a lack of even basic "I-know-enoug-ness"?

No, Capt. what I'm saying is that it takes a measure of the same quality ("know-it-all" or arrogance) to turn a deaf ear to any information regardless of the reason you do it.

You're essentially saying, "I don't really need to consider what you're saying but if you serve it with enough garnish and violins and the wine at the right temperature, I might do you a favor by responding favorably.

Ever thought about it from that angle?

So why do you reject everything I say and tell me off for having said it almost every time?

Why did Gina Rink immediately and dismissively reject our originally honest attempts to ask "viewpoint questions" Without answering them?

Quote:

So why do you reject everything I say and tell me off for having said it almost every time? Why did Gina Rink immediately and dismissively reject our originally honest attempts to ask "viewpoint questions" Without answering them?

Speaking for myself, and in harmony with what I have been saying for a while now, you should know that my rejection is based mostly on what you say, have said, or are saying and whether you really know what you're talking about and the disappointment at discovering that you, in fact, don't.

As for gina rink, you will have to ask gina rink.

intell wrote:

Speaking for myself, and in harmony with what I have been saying for a while now, you should know that my rejection is based mostly on what you say, have said, or are saying and whether you really know what you're talking about and the disappointment at discovering that you, in fact, don't.

And how do you arrive at the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about (which I very well may not)? By asking me "viewpoint questions," as we all did with Gina.

You've been spoiled by me, though. I let you ask your questions about my viewpoints until we're blue in the face. You insult and degrade me, and I'll often insult back, but I'll still keep trying to answer until either I get my viewpoint explained fully (as on the God thread) or change my viewpoint completely (as on the Architect thread).

Gina wasn't so nice. She is most likely wrong. Our initial viewpoint questions confirmed this, and she refused to answer follow up questions, calling us simply stupid instead of offering anything regarding the issue at hand.

And we responded to her no differently than you usually respond to me. The only difference is that she stopped even trying to answer and just started telling us to stop picking on her.

intell wrote:

As for gina rink, you will have to ask gina rink.

It wouldn't shock me if I was.

intell wrote:

Let's say I agree with you as far as the posting end and the responsibilty to present well. But the focus in this thread is on the responsibility of the listener/reader - an area rarely considered. Intell is here to shine a bright light in that direction.

Love the third person

The listener/reader has the opportunity (not responsibility) to read the post and reply if they want to. I've read lots of crazy post that were of the nature that I describe above and chose not to repond or maybe did respond.

My point is: I don't turn a deaf ear on the post, because I do read them. But to consider them worth my time to respond I, as the reader, would appriciate clarity, respect and patience. Not everyone's going to understand what i post ever time. Thus the clarity. I should respect the readers enough not to berade them w/ insults and have patience to explain myself if needed.

Intel wrote:

Quote: I'm not sure what you asking is productive, Is it productive to the learning process to respond on the basis of presentation? How do you advise a child who tells you his poor grades is due to the fact that he doesn't get along with his teacher? And, as far as humility is concerned, I think when a person is hungry enough, the plate design, table setting, and garnish doesn't matter that much.

Yes, it is productive to the learning process to conprehend/repsond on basis of presentation.
Here's why:
If somebody has something to say or a point they should present their ideas clearly w/ respect to the reader.

If they don't care enough to present them in a clear, non-abrasive way, then why should the reader care either?

You don't have to serve it w/ wine, but maybe some cheap beer or something. Tact, man, tact.

I don't consider humility a garnish. I see it as the plate. In a learning enviornment if the kid doesn't get along w/ the teacher, its either because the kid (thread author) is a brat or the teacher doesn't care about the student and consider's the students feelings a moot point. (thus the teacher lacks humility)

Intel wrote:

I guess the question is: How hungry is the reader to know? It takes a measure of I-know-enough-ness (not a word, but hey, "contentment" didn't seem appropriate. ) to start filtering out info on the basis of presentation imho. Wouldn't you say?

I see what you're saying, but no one here will reveal life to me through their matrix interpretations, thus I guess I'm not that hungry. I don't look for that here.

I don't filter out the post, I just don respond or put thought into a post thats unclear, rude, or sounds like a smart-ass. But what I do look for are some buddies to discuss all the crazy and fun issues the Matrix movies stir up.

I look forward to it.

ps- still love this icon

captpostmod wrote:

And how do you arrive at the idea that I don't know what I'm talking about (which I very well may not)? By asking me "viewpoint questions," as we all did with Gina.

I arrived at this conclusion from reading your posts and weighing out what you say is supposed to be true. Viewpoint questions are just to get the ball rollin'

captpostmod wrote:

Gina wasn't so nice. She is most likely wrong. Our initial viewpoint questions confirmed this, and she refused to answer follow up questions, calling us simply stupid instead of offering anything regarding the issue at hand.

I would be interested in you posting on the 7/7 future thread support for the statements I highlighted.

captpostmod wrote:

It wouldn't shock me if I was.

If you're saying what it looks like you're saying, that's the best compliment I've heard in quite a while. I wish I had that kind of exposure/experience.

aquin wrote:

I should respect the readers enough not to berade them w/ insults and have patience to explain myself if needed... If somebody has something to say or a point they should present their ideas clearly w/ respect to the reader. If they don't care enough to present them in a clear, non-abrasive way, then why should the reader care either? You don't have to serve it w/ wine, but maybe some cheap beer or something. Tact, man, tact.

I understand but my focus is still on what the reader should do. People differ in style of delivery. But how we take things is solely our "responsibility".

aquin wrote:

]I see what you're saying, but no one here will reveal life to me through their matrix interpretations, thus I guess I'm not that hungry. I don't look for that here.

That's right, you know-enough about it.

intell wrote:

aquin wrote: I see what you're saying, but no one here will reveal life to me through their matrix interpretations, thus I guess I'm not that hungry. I don't look for that here. That's right, you know-enough about it.

I'm not sure what you think I know enough about. I'm just saying that I don't take this board seriously enough to truely be 'hungry' for any answers to life. Like I said, I dont search for that here. (If you wouldn't put words in my mouth, it would be cool. Just because I don't take this board as seriously as you doesn't mean I think I know any more than you do.)

Positive means moving forward
Negative means moving away

If we want to have a positive conversation, we talk about what is there. If we want to move forward, we either prove it or disprove it as it is.

On the other side, is the negative stance.

For instance, you say, this isn't about the Bardo(s). Afterwards, I tell you things that you ignore. I take this to mean ignore-ance. It isn't because I'm ignoring you or I think you're stupid. Very simple. You ignored what I said so you could make your point. At which point, I'm done.

Another instance, a question like "How does the Architect fit?" If I answer this question, this means not only don't you understand who or what the Architect is but now you question my veracity based upon what you don't understand.

In both cases, the queries were threads of their own. Capt seemed to get the point. It wasn't that I ignored you. It was that you seemed to convinced you were correct without supporting you were.