Your approach seems to favor orthodoxy, as if science is unchanging, and those who want to discuss a different way of looking at things are malcontents.

Again, much of the piling on contains no content. Are you going to address that aspect or score it? What does piling on without content achieve?

Without much more effort, this forum could close in on itself with little disagreement within it's membership much like a political party or religion.

---

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.

For someone who is so hung up on "content" vs "piling on" it's continually astonishing how little effort you put into actually looking into the content that's available on the topics you present as if they're novel.


FWIW, the reason that I, at least, don't pretend to respond to you with content is that you've demonstrated many times over that the search function not only isn't something that interests you, but that it's irrelevant to your actual interest, which is best defined as confirming whatever thing you thought you believed prior to presenting whatever stalking horse you posed as a question.


http://www.slowtwitch.com/Training/Orthodoxy_6670.html

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

^^^^^ Yeah, read that. I've actually linkified it for you, because fredly, the snowflake that he is, apparently has trouble working the editor. :-D :-D

---

Citizen of the world, former drunkard. Resident Traumatic Brain Injury advocate.

I'm not sure where you are getting your "facts", the nature of this place really hasn't changed much since it started, and is going pretty strong.

I do fundamentally disagree with putting in a rating system, since I think such a system would detract from people's content. Posters with a higher rank may have their content viewed less critically, and lower rank may be unfairly dismissed.

No idea what your first paragraph means.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

Well said. This thought experiment would essentially be a demonstration of good faith in debate.

I find this to be a pretty good guide: https://www.reddit.com/...rguing_in_bad_faith/

---

Coach at TriForce Triathlon Team: https://www.triforceteam.com

Hello Slowman and All,

Slowman wrote in part: here is a thought experiment: you present the other side's argument, as if you were advocating for that argument. the other side then tells you whether you have it right. if you don't, then you revise the argument until you do have it right. invite the other side to do the same.


http://www.acmamootcourt.org/




And it can be quite entertaining .....

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

Here I was so expecting someone to chime in with one of the following comments...

1) Is she hot?
2) This will only work if she is smarter than Siri (because Siri is as dumb as they get--she'll give directions to the local Sears and you end up in the middle of a field with cows and horses).

Part of the reason science works is because it mostly favors orthodoxy. Not to the extreme though, science simply stands still, and rests upon the orthodoxy if you will, until very compelling evidence comes along to move it. Then it moves. Your (and H20 guy's) mistake is thinking that you are part of the very compelling evidence, when you more closely resemble a malcontent. So you get piled on.

Bully!

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

So how would you define a clique or any other level of association to start with? Give an example of a clique that you've observed to exist, and specifically list the evidence that illustrates its existence.

Again, show an example where someone that you'd characterize as "uninitiated" unwittingly posted something that caused others (in that identified clique!) to post in defence of the "target" clique member. I can't offhand think of such an example. Threads where an experienced poster put up what was effectively a straw man argument, and then got told "that's not how it works", do not count.

As an Internet based forum, where many folks post questions about triathlon, training, bike mechanical issues, etc. the "intellectual territory" that one occupies pretty much defines a person's footprint. We are pretty fortunate to have several dozen world class athletes, coaches, and technical contributors in various fields, active on the forum. Usually they respond fairly even-handedly, even to obviously naive queries. It's only when the original poster persists in defending their naive position that the responses become brusque, or sarcastic, and that the discussion becomes diluted with attempts at humour or ridicule.

A karma type system (go see Slashdot.org) or any other upvote/downvote system could be implemented with a bunch of work by Dan and others but, it has already been commented that such a system would probably only reinforce the disparity between longtime members and new posters. As it is, any new post is visible to everyone and can be judged on the merit of its content and whatever ideas it advances.

I have no idea how one would do that or what even characterizes a link between two forum members. As a personal example, I've been active on ST for about six years and I 'know' all of TWO other ST members. But I don't at all feel like an outsider or that my ideas are necessarily marginalized or ridiculed.

When you posted this (and previous times where you tried to make some argument and then wrote a veiled insult at the ST masses), you basically pulled yourself down to the bullies that you denigrate.

---

Less is more.

The beauty of thinking is that you can think anything you want. No facts required or in direct opposition to facts. In the organization that I work with the results have been higher organization function and greater job satisfaction across the board. A couple of bad apples / chronic disagreers / d**kheads either changed their behavior or moved on.
I wouldn't mind being rated on ST at all. In fact, my whole career with journal peer review and grant reviews is all about being rated. Plus, when I post on ST its mostly in an effort to provide research based info on aerodynamics and biomechanics. Maybe I would find out that no one wants to hear what I have to say but I'm happy to get feedback.
Cheers,
Jim

I think you are looking at the forum in the wrong way. It is not about being right and carrying the day it is about exchanging ideas and information. And a source of entertainment. Even if you had some sort of rating system who would do the rating? If everyone gets a vote its likely the cliques will vote together and you get the same result. In the end it is often best to realize that you seldom persuade many people with arguments anyway.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Don't worry, this is the same guy who thinks water boy is a genius with appreciable insight and contribution to this forum.

---

2018 Races: IM Santa Rosa, Vineman Monte Rio, Lake Tahoe 70.3

Maybe just a "Like" button like on other social media sites and some forums would be sufficient if anything and not make it too difficult to program?
I like ST just like it is so having a rating system is not a big deal to me, but I see posts now and then that I really like. It is not a bad thing to give that person some simple but decent feedback and positive reinforcement for sharing.

I think a "like" button and a way to easily find the most "liked" posts / threads would be a nice feature. There are a number of posts that would be nice if they were added to over time, rather than rehashed over and over.

---

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly

I largely agree.

I'll always prefer that posts are judged on their merit. If a good argument is made, it doesn't (usually) matter so much who made it. To a large extent this already happens on the forum.

IT seems to think that this does not already happen. I disagree. Where he sees bullying, I for the most part, see consensus that specific posts do not have merit and are potentially damaging if not addressed robustly. These posts lack merit because they do not make a valid, and/or they are not sincere. There are a small number of specific posters who regularly generate poor quality, confused, disingenuous, biased, trolling, and/or self serving content. The first time you read one of these "contributions" it's forgivable to wonder why a bunch of regulars seem somewhat over-zealous in rebutting the post and asking the OP to desist. But it happens because this sort of content is, understandably I think, considered by others to be damaging if not addressed.

I'm starting to think that in the absence of bans, it's best to just ignore the worst offenders. But I don't think responding with rebuttals to erroneous assertions constitutes bullying. Especially when supposed victims court such exchanges and are typically quick to throw insults and sow confusion and misinformation.


A rating system risks actually creating the environment that IT (mistakenly IMO) thinks already exists.

A "Like" button on posts, as Felt-Rider suggests, might be a better option but could likewise have unintentional and unwanted consequences with respect to what gets posted.

A social network map showing who tends to respond to whose posts could be informative as a reader, though would probably have most use to the slowtwitch admins. For all we know they may already analyze such things regularly - the programs to make them are freely available and the souce data would be gettable from the logs - how easily gettable I couldn't say.

Overall, I think I have missed a big event or subtext that precedes this thread, much of it has my head scratching.

What have I in common with them ? I have hardly anything in common with myself, and should stand very quietly in a corner, content that I can breathe.
- Kafka (who was a strong swimmer)

Hello Slowman and All,

As you might suspect ..... there is an App for most everything:

https://techcrunch.com/...ontroversial-issues/



Excerpt:

"Debating is at the core of a robust society — as are online social networks. When combined, they transmute each other into a minefield of negativity, abuse and destruction. With products today, we are either living in an echo chamber of like-minded people who agree with us all the time, or we’re duking it out in trench warfare format for little gain and few opinions changed.

Micgoat is hoping to change that. The product, which officially launched its debate platform app on the App Store today, uses short presidential debate-style videos to elevate the discussion around controversial topics. Users of Micgoat can propose topics such as “will bitcoin crash” or “we should have universal basic income,” and then make a short, one-minute video about the topic. Users who watch the video can then reply with their own 30-second videos.

The idea is that it is too easy to troll on traditional social networks, not to mention that bot networks can quickly devolve interesting debates. By emphasizing video in its product, Micgoat’s goal is to persuade people to talk to one another in a more human way, reducing the disinhibition effect that comes from posting text online." [emphasis added]

Or ......

We can just muddle along as we are which seems to be working fine.




[Did you note the capital letters IT on the hat?]

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

Hi. I love your company.

I agree and why I first wrote that I prefer ST like it is. The TT forum has a like button, but this community is a bit different and has a lot more activity. This forum seems to thrive and stay active daily, whereas, more regulated and moderated forums may see one post a day on a training thread. Some good forums have become overregulated/moderated and become so stiff by some senior members who are extremely intolerant of "noise" that they pile on anyone that posts a similar question. Here we see multitudes of the same questions through the year and yet that doesn't bother me in the least. I like the constant activity on ST even if much of it is repetitive, rude at times and with some members that are frustrating at times that too makes this place interesting. Who knows I may frustrate a good number of people with my posts.

IMO - the way Dan has this forum set up makes it one of the best to attend daily. I am not even a triathlete and I camp out here more than anywhere else. Regulating this forum could potentially ruin that experience for many. It may not, but it may.

But wait, the big unanswered question is: did Kafka have flexible, floppy ankles??? Alas, the answer is probably lost to history, since he preceded ST by about 80 years. :)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Ya, I've been thinking the same thing. Maybe we just haven't followed IT's threads and posts enough to know why he feels kind of beat up by this forum.

FWIW, I like the forum just as it is, without any need for a "like" button, or a "rating system", social network map, or whatever.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."