15-11-2016, 12:27 AM
Discussions in general and Positions we can agree upon
Most new discussions I do not read anymore because the positioned statement is
formulated such a way that any discussion towards a good position is extremely difficult.
A good statement in my opinion:
1) holds a positive statement (and not a negation, or a double negation)
Good example: the figures in the manuscript are for 95% female with breast
Bad example: most figures are female but of those that are not female we can not say what they are.
2) is simple, plain, straightforward (and not complex, made of of subcategories etc.)
Good example: the manuscript is handwritten in black ink
Bad example: the manuscript is made from vellum, handwritten, from north Italian region and is bound and rebound more than once.
3) open for a reasonable discussion
If a person want to bring up something entirely off the chart, this should be taken seriously.
4) replies should be short
This is almost the longest post I've ever made on a forum,
and I know I will only read it, because of the clear bulleted points,
otherwise I would only scan the lines, which will give me at a glance what it is about.
Suggestion:
Rating system per posting and not per person.
Here, replies can be rude towards one person and surprisingly kind towards another.
For example: when you say 'thank you' to one poster and ignore another poster, by not mentioning his name, but mention your "friends" in your reply or thanking them.
In many discussions there are standard replies from the major "discussion leaders" with no real contents, just air.
It would be nice if those could be removed or marked as invaluable: One writes that he already investigated that before, but has no exact knowledge which and when. Someone else will come up with a exact link and paper of research, from somewhere between the year -2000 till +2000, which is so old it has been discussed already a million times, and it does not add anything new to the table.
A voting/rating system such as on stackexchange.com is highly recommended where there is a real voting system per posting + or -.
The positive aspect of it is, that we ourselves can learn from it: what is received as positive response and what not?
Most new discussions I do not read anymore because the positioned statement is
formulated such a way that any discussion towards a good position is extremely difficult.
A good statement in my opinion:
1) holds a positive statement (and not a negation, or a double negation)
Good example: the figures in the manuscript are for 95% female with breast
Bad example: most figures are female but of those that are not female we can not say what they are.
2) is simple, plain, straightforward (and not complex, made of of subcategories etc.)
Good example: the manuscript is handwritten in black ink
Bad example: the manuscript is made from vellum, handwritten, from north Italian region and is bound and rebound more than once.
3) open for a reasonable discussion
If a person want to bring up something entirely off the chart, this should be taken seriously.
4) replies should be short
This is almost the longest post I've ever made on a forum,
and I know I will only read it, because of the clear bulleted points,
otherwise I would only scan the lines, which will give me at a glance what it is about.
Suggestion:
Rating system per posting and not per person.
Here, replies can be rude towards one person and surprisingly kind towards another.
For example: when you say 'thank you' to one poster and ignore another poster, by not mentioning his name, but mention your "friends" in your reply or thanking them.
In many discussions there are standard replies from the major "discussion leaders" with no real contents, just air.
It would be nice if those could be removed or marked as invaluable: One writes that he already investigated that before, but has no exact knowledge which and when. Someone else will come up with a exact link and paper of research, from somewhere between the year -2000 till +2000, which is so old it has been discussed already a million times, and it does not add anything new to the table.
A voting/rating system such as on stackexchange.com is highly recommended where there is a real voting system per posting + or -.
The positive aspect of it is, that we ourselves can learn from it: what is received as positive response and what not?