PDA

View Full Version : "Slash-and-run" posting



Vince Brennan
03-13-2015, 07:24 AM
Some thoughts on the practice of "slash and run" posting:

I was reading a post on removing Google+ and why you should/shouldn’t do it when I ran across a quote that, really stopped me short.


Google+ is a place where social posts are greeted with intelligent, often highly critical comments and interactions. Ain’t nobody got time for that! We in the media prefer the Twitter soap-box-and-megaphone model, over the Google+ symposium. We journalists slave over our copy all day.[1] The last thing we want at the end of the day is to wade into the deep end of serious, lengthy and passionate Google+ conversations to defend our ideas. It feels so much better to fire off a witty tweet, then ignore all the engagement on it, except from our peers in the media. (Mike Elgan: Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/netapp/2014/05/27/google-plus-for-business/))

If you think about it, it seems to be the meme used by a great number of the more rabid posters on the forum (throw a rock in the pond and then walk away…) and one which I have personally been guilty of using, more than once, in replies to some particularly egregious posting.

While not intended to be such, it is effectively the same thing as is lamented by the cited poster, and I apologize to all for my use of it.

It occurs that ALL posts, no matter how slaveringly rabid or insanely conceived (and we have a LOT of those) deserves a full reply, not a slash-and-run comment be it ever so witty.

It is unfortunate that we need put up with posters who are outright liars, who actively compose or seek to continue things which are obviously false-to-fact (Bush was a chimpanzee or Obama is not a US Citizen) but each one of them deserves the thorough discussion and excoriation to which they are entitled.

Your ideas on this may differ: Some may consider the repeated of ill-conceived and easily refutable facts as garnered from some hair-brained blogger as “conversation”, some may not even be able to use selective cognition to determine where the soapbox ends and defamation starts. Me, I think I’ve done my positions a disservice each time I’ve gotten distracted by life and NOT come back to the discussion to defend my points, and I will endeavour to do better in the future.

................................[1]: I think we can apply the same considerations to ourselves. We may not be journalists but may of us DO "slave" over our posts.

Jim Mahan
03-13-2015, 08:00 AM
I like the sort of 'dead letter' drop off aspect of posting here. Got a question? Something about your boat or paleoanthropology? Let it out, go do something useful for a while, and then come back and read answers and stuff. Sometimes you feel like you're sitting around the fire having a conversation with a perhaps large handful of perhaps strangers, composing while others are posting. Sometimes it seems more like throwing a stuffed bottle into the current to see where it will go. The internet is not so good for solypsists, maybe, but a decent question or point is likely to arouse a decent range of responses including some respectable ones. One of the things I appreciate about this forum, is that after attending for more than a decade, I have a good idea whose posts and threads are worthwhile, and where I can learn something when I'm out of my depth. I have done way more reading of other things, like books, after following a thread of interest, than from any other place like the evening news or topical magazine. Specifically, I have read half a dozen books suggested by Norman's posts, just in the last year. I'm wading through T. Piketty's book right now. And I know no one will ever catch me turning the pages of anything written by Bill O.

So thanks all you thoughtful posters, for my edification. And thanks all you others for the entertainment and the practice in holding my piece. So I can hold onto my peace.

There have been a few occasions when I thought I might post a screen capture of my ignore list. Maybe I should be thinking more in terms of posting evidence of the positive conributions to which I've been exposed on the ol WBF. Of course that would just look like me sucking up to the usual horde of liberals.

A shout out to the daily boat pic poster, too. Thanks again Mr. Pless.

bobbys
03-13-2015, 09:37 AM
A great Intellectual giant who name calls me with a "you are a booger" comment then runs now jumps up on a soapbox to complain..

I doubt he see's his own hypocrisy.

Peerie Maa
03-13-2015, 12:33 PM
A great Intellectual giant who name calls me with a "you are a booger" comment then runs now jumps up on a soapbox to complain..

I doubt he see's his own hypocrisy.
That your word of the month?

Osborne Russell
03-13-2015, 12:37 PM
A great Intellectual giant who name calls me with a "you are a booger" comment then runs now jumps up on a soapbox to complain..

I doubt he see's his own hypocrisy.

Anti-intellectualism invites ridicule. You make sure yours does, then you complain.

Vince Brennan
03-13-2015, 09:01 PM
A great Intellectual giant who name calls me with a "you are a booger" comment then runs now jumps up on a soapbox to complain..

Shoes and fittings, bobbys, shoes and fittings... If the foo...

But please tell me, exactly WHERE do you perceive a complaint in my post, and in reference to what? The post, if it signifies anything, signifies an apology for my having indulged in the non-intellectual habits of people like yourself; people unable to hew to an intellectual argument's line for want of a sufficiently discerning intelligence; people who cannot propose an argument without wavering almost immediately from the subject; people who seem unable to accept oft-proven positions and merely repeat the stupid and egregious rants they have gleaned from sources which have no provenance or relevance to the world-as-it-is.

It may be that you and your ilk are trying to be imitations of the poster we knew as Tyler Durden. His philosophy admitted only of being an agitator, no matter his actual beliefs and he delighted in getting a good screaming match going solely for the sake of that screaming match. It was a shame, as HE had a fine mind and could reason closely to a point, but wasted the talent in being only a provocateur and eventually getting banned after pissing off just about everyone.

(He also spell-checked his posts.)

2200EDT Time for taps.

seanz
03-13-2015, 10:18 PM
Anti-intellectualism invites ridicule. You make sure yours does, then you complain.

That's not how it always works, sometimes he complains about the ridicule before it occurs. Say what you want about bobbys, but his reflexes are amazing.

Vince Brennan
03-15-2015, 09:29 AM
That's not how it always works, sometimes he complains about the ridicule before it occurs. Say what you want about bobbys, but his reflexes are amazing.The Forum's equivalent to Thiotimoline?