I am curious if your the same IMOG (must be) that wrote this article about your use of a rubber band to hold a fan on your HS? http://www.overclockers.com/articles1124/

Do you think that article is good information or bad information? How many people reading that are now going to use a rubber band to hold their fan on their CPU? Confused as to why such an article would be allowed to be posted on the front page of OC? What purpose was it meant to serve? :shrug:

A tech writer he isnt

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.p...wpost&t=336837

few care

I don't believe Pro/Cooling will ever experience the problems that OCForums has simply due to the fact that Pro/Cooling is too technical for the average overclocker (the new lower average), and also because Pro/Cooling is for the "obessive and rude" and rampant ignorance most likely won't be tolerated. A lot of times OCForums mods act like bitches *cough*ONI*cough*, whereas here, I don't even know if there are any mods aside from pHaestus and Joe and they run the place.

But most importantly Bill scares the noobs away before they even sign up.

Interesting that there's an almost three month gap in the postings in this thread. Somebody must be a little behind in reading (or takes a while to formulate a comeback)... :)

Oh - and yes, I agree that Bill fulfills an important function here, but IMHO it's not so much scaring off the noobs as keeping the rest of us in line.

I kinda wondered how 9 pages just appeared out of nowhere.

But to be honest I only read the first couple pages.

You take that back; I don't moderate this place :)

So what's your official title, other than Big Player?

I just wish you'd change your avatar back.
I get used to telling who wrote what by avatar,t hen you go and change it.
Not that your new one isn't cool and all....

where's the avatar mod ?
oh yea, that IMOG piece was stupid beyond description,
written for that audience I presume

Theres only one, just me (you can breath a sigh of relief now).

That article was not written for the frontpage. I wrote it on OCF two months ago and sent it to Joe to see if he might get a laugh out of it also. The last article I wrote for the frontpage, was posted within 36 hours if memory serves me correctly. Clearly, these sorts of things imply a level of quality and utility they see in an article.

To answer your questions directly:

1) The article isn't information at all - its a comical piece. Anyone reading it could take from it that, yeah, big suprise, using a rubberband to attach your fan to your HS isn't a great idea... If that wasn't obvious already. Many people correctly interpreted it, and got a chuckle from its over-dramaticism and sarcasm. More than a few people mentioned they got a laugh out of it - mission accomplished.

2) I really don't care if someone else is careless enough to use a rubber band to hold a fan on their heatsink. If they don't already realize why its a bad idea, (increased airflow, heat) they should see its a bad idea now. If they still do not, great - more power to survival of the fittest... Those not wise enough to know better will be off their PC and the internet. Don't see anything negative about that. :) Once again, I see a sentiment here that expresses a need to protect the pathetically ignorant... Misfounded if you ask me. It is amusing how at the same time Pro/C can be rude to those who are incorrect, it fights a battle to protect the ignorant. It often makes for an interesting combination. :)

3) I can only imagine that they didn't have much going on that day and this was something to fill a gap. I was suprised as anyone when I got a link to the article in email, along with the words "cute article". Obviously though, I cannot answer this question - I really sent the email to give Joe a laugh, and only he could explain why it aactually got posted. I think Joe's answer might be interesting if you want to ask him.

Basically, looking at the article its a few things from my perspective - first and foremost - overstated, overdramatic, and sarcastic. Secondly, it was a testament to the fact that people sometimes worry way too much about temps and cooling failure - you see this in water and air cooling. It was lightly patronizing/mocking that line of thought. A properly configured system, won't die when a pump or fan fails and there isn't anything to be so afraid of if you have things set up well.


If you want to "wax technical", lets take turns choosing topics. ;)

Otherwise, one would be wise to keep one's thoughts to oneself, lest he prove himself narrow-minded.

I write technical papers all the time, its not something I do as a hobby however.

Thanks Bill. It was meant to be stupid and comical - one out of two ain't all bad. :dome:

When there isn't much exciting people with new hardware, and I'd rather someone kick me in the face than force me to read another 2500m overclocking piece... A little variety on the frontpage isn't something bad IMO.

I try not to be rude - but I fail to see the contradiction that you seem to. IMHO being incorrect, particularly being willfully incorrect, is quite different from being ignorant.
Or is this more comedy?

If your incorrect your're in fact ignorant. Ignorant means "not knowing". If you are incorrect you most certainly do not know and are ignorant.


IMOG, wasn't trying to bash you or anything. Just wasn't understanding the reason for such an article to be posted on OC.

P.S. I also used this thread because IMOG posted in it before and may not see a new thread. What is the punishment for reviving a semi old thread? :dome: :p

Thanks for drawing that out JD, you caught the drift while I think bob took the wrong spin on it.

BTW, I didn't take offense to anything you said so its cool. Though I do think scooter talks about things he has little knowledge of. I would also like to know what the rationale is for choosing articles to be posted... Found this tidbit, which may give a little insight.

So, someone who doesn't know something is exactly the same as someone who knows something that happens to be wrong?
I would put forward that there's quite a difference - particularly if the person who's wrong is quite unwilling to even consider the fact that he/she is wrong.
BillA calls this "willful wrong-headedness" (good phrase - I like it)
Josh Billings says "it ain't what a man don't know that makes him a fool; it's the things he does know, that ain't so." (John Kenneth Galbraith often gets credited for this one as well).
This is probably my favorite quote - mostly because I work in software - and every 5 or 10 years, a lot of what I "know" becomes "ain't so" - so I have to stay open to my being wrong about things I know are true.
Of course, I'm open to being wrong about this one, as well... :)

Another way to think of it is that the information on the forum is like water - only it's not gone if someone else drinks it. However - it can be poisoned...

I see no difference here.

EDIT: I get what your saying though. I guess your opinion is the person is either ignorant (just donsn't know the facts) or an ignorant fool (someone who doesn;t know the facts but seems to think he does). Either way they are still ignorant because they don't know the facts. An ignorant fool can boarder on stupid though if the correct facts are there but ignored.

Then you are pretty obtuse.
sorry, didn't see your edit.
:dome:

I guess, read my edit.

Ah yes, a lesson in the straw man argument, always fun.

Exhibit A, The birth of the straw man:

Note how the offender restates the supposed position, however it does not directly reflect the original sentiment. We can call this an attempt at lingual contorsion - one cannot win the point in hand, so he offers up this falsely constructed viewpoint and attempts to replace the original with it.

Exhibit B, It's alive, the straw man is ALIVE:

Note how he proceeds to drive his "rightness" home with a painfully obvious, true statement. Correct? Inarguably so. Pertaining to the original point which was expressed? Nope... But hopefully it was well enough disguised so that no one would notice this slight of hand.

Exhibit C, The straw man is no more, he hath been lit a fire and left for dead:

Refer to preceding statements by IMOG.

BobOkoure, I don't see what you are on about. It would appear that you didn't understand my point, then made up your own, and proceeded to believe that people disagreed with the obvious dull points you raised.

except...it's not. First off, you assume the original sentiment is yours (when in fact bob was responding to JD, NOT YOU). This invalidates your entire post, as the first opening lines about the restated position not directly reflecting the original sentiments is wrong, because it does reflect the sentiments JD said, that bob replied to.

in addition to that, regardless, they do accurately reflect YOUR stated original statements....

Bob asks:
Jaydee responds:
You say:
And then bob responds to JD, NOT YOU.

His re-statement of the position DOES, in fact, directly reflect the original sentiment, as I have established (bob says "incorrect is different than ignorant", JD says "no its not", you say "JD is correct, that is what i meant".)
Seems pretty clear cut to me.

Yup, was a response to JD.

No attempt to put the wrong words in someone's mouth - but I do often restate something back to someone, just to see if they are saying what I think they are or if I misunderstood. You get an opportunity right then to tell me I got it wrong.

Now, IMOG, please go back and look at who I was quoting. That was certainly a long response for someone who didn't even appear to have read the post he was responding to - or are you perhaps feeling a bit over-defensive over the fact that we all now know that you hold heat sinks on with rubber bands... :)

Now, I fully support Pro/Cooling being for the obessive and rude, but this has gone from a discussion to a few guys acting like jerkoffs debating about nothing. Just stupid bullshit and mincing words.

:rolleyes:
The epitome of useful, eh?
Sorry, I just had to debunk IMOG's stupid strawman claims - they were untrue, which pissed me off.
Don't like it?
If so, stop reading the thread - the world does not revolve around you and your opinions, so we can be as obsessive as we want.

rofl.


you guys are funny. whew. makes me glad I drink.

No shit :rolleyes: