open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked Trebor's Complete Guide to Mud
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Courthouse
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.09 07:21:00 - [31]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
Originally by: Courthouse
Did I pick and choose my references? Sure ... because of the specific relevance to this ... mud being slung here ...


When you pick and choose, you are editing. As such, you are not presenting the "barest fact" but your own opinion in other's words.



If I had selectively quoted his posts or paraphrased, as you have, you would be right. Rather, I presented his posts in complete context.

You're bad at the trolling and only making the Trebor fanatics look more zealous and desperate.

If you want to discuss the veracity of my claims, I welcome the challenge, trolling, however is not what I'm doing here today.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.09 08:52:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Courthouse
If I had selectively quoted his posts or paraphrased, as you have, you would be right. Rather, I presented his posts in complete context.

For some definitions of 'complete'.

E.g. a link to a post and your interpretation of what it say does not equal to 'complete context', especially when that interpretation completely misses aspects such as context, irony and brainstorming.

Courthouse
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.09 09:03:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Courthouse
If I had selectively quoted his posts or paraphrased, as you have, you would be right. Rather, I presented his posts in complete context.

For some definitions of 'complete'.

E.g. a link to a post and your interpretation of what it say does not equal to 'complete context', especially when that interpretation completely misses aspects such as context, irony and brainstorming.


Is English your second language? I have to ask because your argument would make sense then, as English does tend to have rather bad adjectives for specificity.

Complete context in this instance refers to the presentation of Trebor's posts in their original form, with all preceding and following posts visible. I could have made screenshots of just his singular posts and referenced those, but not having the thread available would have been editorializing his context. I did not do that.

Okay, so context is taken care of.

Irony. The irony here is that I'm the only one making sound, logical arguments in this thread.

Irony, check.

Brainstorming... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82xwrCIpGpo



Remember kids, there's no bad ideas when you're brainstorming, just bad ideas when you're sharing them.

Killer Gandry
Caldari
Shadow of the Pain
Posted - 2011.03.09 10:35:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Courthouse

Remember kids, there's no bad ideas when you're brainstorming, just bad ideas when you're sharing them.


How typical.

And how typical for Goons to derail yet another thread into mudslinging.

Thout I do have to say in today's politics mudslinging seems to be a valid weapon it also indicates clearly that the side that does the slinging feels weak and as such needs to revert to this kind of tactics.
A lot of people will vote Trebor to spite Goons, Some will vote him because he got high credits from other CSM.

Fact is that Trebor contacted Helen and that way defused a volitile situation and helped clear things enough so they could reach the endgoal.

Exactly what I see in a chairman-woman.

Someone who leads / assists / meetings to help reach the endgoals.


Virtuozzo
The Collective
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2011.03.09 11:44:00 - [35]
 


Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.09 12:35:00 - [36]
 

Originally by: Courthouse
Is English your second language? I have to ask because your argument would make sense then, as English does tend to have rather bad adjectives for specificity.

Nope, English is actually my third language... And on topic; my fifth language, Japanese, has taught me quite a lot about the subject of 'context'.

Originally by: Courthouse
Complete context in this instance refers to the presentation of Trebor's posts in their original form, with all preceding and following posts visible. I could have made screenshots of just his singular posts and referenced those, but not having the thread available would have been editorializing his context. I did not do that.

First of all, linking to a thread does not infuse your interpretation of his post with context, let alone 'complete'. Your interpretation of his posts are necessarily the product of the context of _YOUR_ views, as those are what read, interpreted and produced the statements about Trebor's views. They are your views of his views, not his.

Why is this important? Well, because when _I_ read his posts my interpretation was wildly different from yours. That is because complete context is not just a thread full of text... It is also you.

So you could not possibly have the complete context by just posting a hyperlink.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.09 13:20:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Helen Highwater
Trebor contacted me privately to cool the situation down and as a result we were able to reach an agreement rather than continue to argue over semantics. I appreciated that even though I disagree with almost every opinion that he holds.

I have no problem with people honestly disagreeing with me; in fact, I appreciate it, for it challenges my positions and makes them better. And before anyone asks, I checked Dierdra Vaal's Vote Match, and all of the candidates who I mentioned in the OP have significant differences with my profile!

Originally by: "Killer Gandry"
Exactly what I see in a chairman-woman. Someone who leads / assists / meetings to help reach the endgoals.

One of the reasons Mynxee was such an extraordinarily effective CSM chair was that she was far more interested in getting stuff done than getting credit for getting stuff done. The next chair would be wise to follow her example.

Originally by: "Minerva Seraph"
Trebor, I can't ask you to stop people who genuinely agree with your stance and are fervent to express it, but in the interest of good faith, would you consider removing the billions-isk bounty?

The lottery was just something I did for fun, and you will note that not only is there no way for me to tell whether or not someone voted for me, but it is specifically designed so that people can scam and get extra entries (this is EVE, after all).

However, I cannot in good conscience stop the lottery, for one very good reason:

Given the number of Goons who have entered the lottery, if I shut it down, it is entirely likely that they would drag me into a bathroom at FanFest and give me a swirly.

Finally, with regard to questions about myself and my campaign, I refer you to my campaign page or thread. This thread is not about me; it is about the effects of the smear campaign directed at me upon other deserving candidates.

Trebor Daehdoow
Gallente
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.09 21:06:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
I came here expecting a 'Complete guide to MUD' and all you gave was some boring political ****. ;/

You've been my corpmate for how long, and you still expect drama?

Courthouse
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.09 22:48:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Courthouse
Is English your second language? I have to ask because your argument would make sense then, as English does tend to have rather bad adjectives for specificity.

Nope, English is actually my third language... And on topic; my fifth language, Japanese, has taught me quite a lot about the subject of 'context'.


You're wrong because I know 5 languages and understand what 'context' really is.

*doesn't provide a clear definition of context*


You set up your credentials just fine but didn't actually make an argument. The following paragraph that was separated by a quote as to suggest a reply to a different part of the post and thus, a different thought was barely a sophists case on interpretation, which was equally misaligned from what would commonly be called a 'logical argument' but I'll attempt to round the edges for you and hopefully your next reply will fill in the blanks.

Quote:
Originally by: Courthouse
Complete context in this instance refers to the presentation of Trebor's posts in their original form, with all preceding and following posts visible. I could have made screenshots of just his singular posts and referenced those, but not having the thread available would have been editorializing his context. I did not do that.

First of all, linking to a thread does not infuse your interpretation of his post with context, let alone 'complete'. Your interpretation of his posts are necessarily the product of the context of _YOUR_ views, as those are what read, interpreted and produced the statements about Trebor's views. They are your views of his views, not his.

Why is this important? Well, because when _I_ read his posts my interpretation was wildly different from yours. That is because complete context is not just a thread full of text... It is also you.

So you could not possibly have the complete context by just posting a hyperlink.


You're incorrect because you're arguing that context is the same as interpretation. It is not.

Context would refer to his words that were posted within the scope of the thread being discussed as the preferring comments and/or discussion would have prompted that particular reply.

Unless provided by the author there is no reasonable or rational expectation that a reader of a written piece will understand the personal interpretations of wither the author or other readers. This is the absolute philosophical core of the study of literature in historical context.

Trevor didn't provide an introspective footnote detailing his mental exercises he went through or how he hoped his piece would be taken in lieu of words that may be misinterpreted at a later time. The reasonable step for a reader is to take the words at face value in context of the thread (in this case) and discussion that was occurring around where he made his comments.

You brought up irony before and I'll address that a little more seriously here. I believe your claim may be that one or more of his suggestions were done as ironic asides, not necessarily as serious recommendations. If I were to accept that argument, how many 'ironic asides' are we allowing for these CSM reps to have? I detailed many badly thought up ideas that he has shared over the last few years. Most of those he posted about more than once, but there seemed little point in indexing his entire posting history. I, personally, don't believe that they were ironic at all. Off-the-cuff? Maybe. I'll grant that, but then he ran with them as if it were some holy whimsical writ.

In the end, they're bad ideas that would be bad for EVE. Trebor's abject refusal to address serous concerns regarding past posting made by him in light of his having spent the last year on the CSM where he may have learned something important or had an experience that changed his mind on X, Y or Z issue, where his previous posts would no longer be relevant because of A, B or C reasons is a deafening silence.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.03.10 01:32:00 - [40]
 

Edited by: Rakshasa Taisab on 10/03/2011 01:49:49
Originally by: Courthouse
You're incorrect because you're arguing that context is the same as interpretation. It is not.

I am arguing that you cannot provide 'complete context' despite linking the thread since your interpretation necessarily modifies the context, in addition to not actually being complete.

That is to say, even if one were to say that the reader who somehow encounters that thread would be able to achieve the complete context... By prefacing it with your interpretation you are modifying the context in which the reader reads the text.

Originally by: Courthouse
Context would refer to his words that were posted within the scope of the thread being discussed as the preferring comments and/or discussion would have prompted that particular reply.

Unless provided by the author there is no reasonable or rational expectation that a reader of a written piece will understand the personal interpretations of wither the author or other readers. This is the absolute philosophical core of the study of literature in historical context.

It is, however, not the complete context. If you wish to define complete context to only cover the text, well that's your prerogative however not everyone shares that same view. I don't know what kind of soft philosophical classes you were exposed to while studying law (hi mittens-alt), however on my side completeness is a term used carefully.

I'd go so far as to say that the complete context is not possible to recreate, not even for the author when he later rereads his own text.

Oh, and vote Trebor!

Mane Frehm
Posted - 2011.03.10 02:11:00 - [41]
 

Edited by: Mane Frehm on 10/03/2011 02:12:05
Oh....my....god. Walls of text and vitriol flying everywhere. You'd almost think that the US Presidential election was underway.

I see some folks acting like grownups (well like grownups are supposed to act), and others doing their best to tear things down. Hmmmm - lets see, who to support?

Answer - I'll go with the rational grownup Trebor, regardless of whether he knows it all. He doeesn't, and doesn't pretend to either from what I've seen.

Good luck, and please keep all these forums and posts going. I have lots of popcorn left.

Courthouse
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.03.10 05:39:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Edited by: Rakshasa Taisab on 10/03/2011 01:49:49
Originally by: Courthouse
You're incorrect because you're arguing that context is the same as interpretation. It is not.

I am arguing that you cannot provide 'complete context' despite linking the thread since your interpretation necessarily modifies the context, in addition to not actually being complete.

That is to say, even if one were to say that the reader who somehow encounters that thread would be able to achieve the complete context... By prefacing it with your interpretation you are modifying the context in which the reader reads the text.


That's a pejorative argument for the exact philosophical reasons you detail below and I offered previously.

Originally by: Courthouse
Context would refer to his words that were posted within the scope of the thread being discussed as the preferring comments and/or discussion would have prompted that particular reply.

Unless provided by the author there is no reasonable or rational expectation that a reader of a written piece will understand the personal interpretations of wither the author or other readers. This is the absolute philosophical core of the study of literature in historical context.

It is, however, not the complete context. If you wish to define complete context to only cover the text, well that's your prerogative however not everyone shares that same view. I don't know what kind of soft philosophical classes you were exposed to while studying law (hi mittens-alt), however on my side completeness is a term used carefully.

I'd go so far as to say that the complete context is not possible to recreate, not even for the author when he later rereads his own text.



I have never claimed to be a lawyer, and in fact am not. I've addressed the mittens' alt accusations as well. You aren't helping your case any by resorting to those tactics either.

The end result is that this is a discussion of political, and not philosophical matters. Given the tendencies for political punditry to focus on key phrases or buzzwords as opposed to contextual quotations, I'd say that what I provided was as complete as one can reasonably expect to be.

That said, the koolaid runs deep in this one, likely for the same reason that I'm bellied up to the Mittens/VR/Krutoj bar and enjoying my nullsecbloc flavored grape drank as well.

You're welcome, as always, to try and address the issues raised, and encouraged to pester Trebor to actually answer to the accusation, as I believe I've shown myself to be of reasonable demeanor and capable of rational conversation. I'd love to see Trebor respond to these and I'm sure many of the unsure voters would benefit from the exercise.


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only