Quote:
|
Originally Posted by msv
Yeah, I bet You´re right Jaeydee.
If You called me an idiot I would ask You WTF You´re meaning. As gentlemen (pistols, not flamethrowers) we would settle the thing out and be happy afterwards. 
Being accused for an idiot doesn´t mean You have to act as one, but many people get pissed off by such an accusation, and pissed off people can behave like idiots without being idiots.
Of course, idiots are even more prone to behave like idiots.
I gave this thread a good thought before going to bed yesterday.
There´s a standard argument from the less enlighted sites with the dubious reviews:
"Our readers are not so technically experienced, so we can´t throw them a lot of scientific stuff."
The review flaming on this site never has questioned the competens of any sites *readers*, only the competens of some sites editors.
Back in first grade, primary school, I simply assumed that even if I wasn´t very good at reading that wouldn´t excuse an analfabet for a teacher. My low competens in a certain topic doesn´t mean it´s OK to teach me rubbish.
What´s worse:
1. A first class, primary school, teacher saying: "Yes, 'dog' is spelled d-o-u-g-h, very good."
or
2. Another person brutally slapping the same teacher in his/her neck and shouting into his/her ear: "No, godammit! 'Dog' is spelled d-o-g, You imbecill moron!"
regards
Mikael S. |
I like your school analogy...that is very illustrative of the Procooling dilemna. But it also shows the easy answer: be nice and let hypothetical bad speller learn how to spell dog without screaming in their ear. Their response to that initial good-will is the metric that determines idiocy. If they say "Right on, now I know more than I did." Or even: "No, I think I'm still right, and here is why" says a lot about their seriousness in this business. Either they are glad to learn, or they think they know, and want a intellectual debate based on facts etc.
But then there is my favourite example...Liquid3D. Guy was talking out of every orifice on him barring the mouth about the TDX waterblock. When the review in question was brought up here...this guy showed up and got hostile. Lampooning ensued...dude started flaming phaestus in other forums, and dug a deeper and deeper hole for himself intellectually. Bona fide 100% USDA slice of fool right there. Guy should get into astrology, UFOlogy, cults, or some other pseudoscience, where facts rather than beliefs don't matter.
Idiots should be treated as such, once exposed through their own idiocy. But we shouldn't egg people on one way or the other to figure that out by name-calling/flaming first. Let their actions speak as the evidence without "tampering" with the experiment. That is the scientific method after all, and we all seem to dig and understand that here.