Since this is my Intro thread, I guess I have a bit more freedom as to what I write. 
It's come to my attention that some people are actually trying to learn things from this forum
rather than being here for any of a variety of other reasons.
A Guide to Reading
If you're new to Badminton Central and are seeking accurate information to help you improve your game you should beware the pitfalls of blindly accepting what people write on these forums. Much of what you will find discussing the techniques and technical aspects of the game is misinformation. Opposing and contradicting views can be found on many popular topics such as the biomechanics of power production and the optimality of racket stiffness-string tension combinations. It's not usually the case that people will deliberately attempt to mislead. It's only natural that since badminton is a highly technical sport, in which many of the finer points still are not well understood, there will be some misinformation out there. Even if 90% of posters seem to agree with a certain view, one should be cautious-- often people who are actually knowledgeable cannot be bothered or do not have the time to provide input into the multitude of topics that float around. This forum also contains a large clique of people in the dark who are good at perpetuating their own views and discouraging some users who are actually quite knowledgeable from challenging them. Right and wrong often becomes a matter of who speaks the loudest and most frequently.
Beware of the following when weighing the validity of the data you read on this forum:
1. People who try to come across as if they know everything or they know "the answer" to a particular question and you get this same impression after reading several of the threads that they've posted in. Usually these people have not sufficiently examined an issue in depth, and though they appear to be leaders, are probably just followers who have heard from others and would relay this as the truth.
2. People with high post counts. If they post on every thread available, they are either the most knowledgeable individual you'll ever meet or some of their posts are junk. If some of their posts are junk, there's no reason to believe the veracity of many of their posts on the finer points of the game.
3. People who will not give up an argument and always feel the need to continue posting in a thread. Some users consider this place to be their home and would never like to admit that they're wrong since they think would be losing face by doing so. These users think themselves bigger than they ought to. What it really shows is that they lack confidence in their viewpoint and must thus attempt to show to the world that they are correct and the other person is wrong. If an individual is really that stubborn about their views then even if their information was once correct, it is probably 20 years outdated-- yet they continue to hold on and on and on...
4. People who frequently make snide remarks, insult other users or denigrate threads. Though they may think themselves bright, intelligence is demonstrated by one's ability to coherently attack a view or topic; not one's ability to attack an individual. Better yet, if the topic is one that allows for open-mindedness, substitute the word "attack" with "discuss".
5. People who consistently just say "I agree." Perhaps for some topics, a majority vote is the way to go if it's a subjective topic. But usually there is little value added by such remarks. For topics that should have a more definitive answer, a consensus is not always the correct answer. A well-presented argument in which the "truth" has been correctly elucidated should stand on its own merits. Comments like "I agree" do not strengthen such arguments.
6. People who do not address the issues at hand. These users will often mis-quote or mis-interpret a person's point of view. They will discuss oranges when the initial post was about apples. If backed into a corner where their argument seems to be losing credibility, they will attempt to re-interpret things to make the discussion about bananas.
7. People who just regurgitate views. These users tend to repeat the exact same things someone else has said with a word or two being changed, or perhaps an extra comma here or there. Normally they will repeat what they've read, increasing the "truthfulness" of the view. So if user A says "I think .....xyz", user B will probably say "Clearly it must be the case .....xyz". These groupies are incapable of cognition on their own and will often defer to the "more respected and knowledgeable" users. If one's knowledge and understanding is true, one need not defer.
People I Would Read
There is useful information to be gained. The archives go back a long way and much of the good information is from the past (when there were fewer users on this forum and a larger proportion were interested in the technical aspects of the game). So rather then reading topics on page 1, then page 2, etc... I suggest doing a 'Search' and reading the threads that certain members have posted in. Below is a list, which I might update at a later date--I don't have the time to sift through threads, so I'm sure I'll be omitting some names.
It's come to my attention that some people are actually trying to learn things from this forum
rather than being here for any of a variety of other reasons.A Guide to Reading
If you're new to Badminton Central and are seeking accurate information to help you improve your game you should beware the pitfalls of blindly accepting what people write on these forums. Much of what you will find discussing the techniques and technical aspects of the game is misinformation. Opposing and contradicting views can be found on many popular topics such as the biomechanics of power production and the optimality of racket stiffness-string tension combinations. It's not usually the case that people will deliberately attempt to mislead. It's only natural that since badminton is a highly technical sport, in which many of the finer points still are not well understood, there will be some misinformation out there. Even if 90% of posters seem to agree with a certain view, one should be cautious-- often people who are actually knowledgeable cannot be bothered or do not have the time to provide input into the multitude of topics that float around. This forum also contains a large clique of people in the dark who are good at perpetuating their own views and discouraging some users who are actually quite knowledgeable from challenging them. Right and wrong often becomes a matter of who speaks the loudest and most frequently.
Beware of the following when weighing the validity of the data you read on this forum:
1. People who try to come across as if they know everything or they know "the answer" to a particular question and you get this same impression after reading several of the threads that they've posted in. Usually these people have not sufficiently examined an issue in depth, and though they appear to be leaders, are probably just followers who have heard from others and would relay this as the truth.
2. People with high post counts. If they post on every thread available, they are either the most knowledgeable individual you'll ever meet or some of their posts are junk. If some of their posts are junk, there's no reason to believe the veracity of many of their posts on the finer points of the game.
3. People who will not give up an argument and always feel the need to continue posting in a thread. Some users consider this place to be their home and would never like to admit that they're wrong since they think would be losing face by doing so. These users think themselves bigger than they ought to. What it really shows is that they lack confidence in their viewpoint and must thus attempt to show to the world that they are correct and the other person is wrong. If an individual is really that stubborn about their views then even if their information was once correct, it is probably 20 years outdated-- yet they continue to hold on and on and on...
4. People who frequently make snide remarks, insult other users or denigrate threads. Though they may think themselves bright, intelligence is demonstrated by one's ability to coherently attack a view or topic; not one's ability to attack an individual. Better yet, if the topic is one that allows for open-mindedness, substitute the word "attack" with "discuss".
5. People who consistently just say "I agree." Perhaps for some topics, a majority vote is the way to go if it's a subjective topic. But usually there is little value added by such remarks. For topics that should have a more definitive answer, a consensus is not always the correct answer. A well-presented argument in which the "truth" has been correctly elucidated should stand on its own merits. Comments like "I agree" do not strengthen such arguments.
6. People who do not address the issues at hand. These users will often mis-quote or mis-interpret a person's point of view. They will discuss oranges when the initial post was about apples. If backed into a corner where their argument seems to be losing credibility, they will attempt to re-interpret things to make the discussion about bananas.
7. People who just regurgitate views. These users tend to repeat the exact same things someone else has said with a word or two being changed, or perhaps an extra comma here or there. Normally they will repeat what they've read, increasing the "truthfulness" of the view. So if user A says "I think .....xyz", user B will probably say "Clearly it must be the case .....xyz". These groupies are incapable of cognition on their own and will often defer to the "more respected and knowledgeable" users. If one's knowledge and understanding is true, one need not defer.
People I Would Read
There is useful information to be gained. The archives go back a long way and much of the good information is from the past (when there were fewer users on this forum and a larger proportion were interested in the technical aspects of the game). So rather then reading topics on page 1, then page 2, etc... I suggest doing a 'Search' and reading the threads that certain members have posted in. Below is a list, which I might update at a later date--I don't have the time to sift through threads, so I'm sure I'll be omitting some names.
The Knowledgeable Ones (high information:misinformation ratio)
- jamesd20
- cheongsa
The Pretty Knowledgeable Ones (ranked from straight shooters to twisted wording/humour)
- Neil Nicholls
- taneepak
- stumblingfeet
- cheung
The Sort-of-Knowledgeable-but-not-really Ones That I would Read for Their Wit
- cooldoob6
The Ones Without a Clue (avoid reading these people)
- quisitor (only read for humour... if you have a very strange one...)
- everyone else
I lost count on the number of instance where I stomp on their proposal, reasoning, and claims. High N/S ratio indeed.
) but I typically don't reply to views that I feel have no merit and views that I agree with (since I agree with them), which as a whole constitute about 90% of posts.