People I Would Read

[quisitor]

I always knew I was a fool, and Quisitor confirmed it.

Hey, hey!
It's cool to be a fool-- I labelled 99% of us in the "without a clue" category so it can't be all that bad.

As a result, this forum, I do believe, was created in that spirit. Certainly, having the right technique and understanding of badminton will most likely prevent unnecessary injuries and good health D), but it's not entirely necessary to play the game. Furthermore, by removing the idiots (Like me, 'cause I'm part of that everyone else list, trust me), you remove the fun. We are, after all, a WWF (World Wide Family), and within families, it is generally expected that there are going to be geniuses, idiots, hot-tempered fools, mistakes, etc. It's human nature.

I agree.

And yes, we do often read more like a world wrestling federation script.

 

[quisitor]

I don't think you should just read the posts of certain people to get the right "answers". Who knows if there is only one correct answer? I think the logic and quality of a post should be most important, not who write it.

I agree.

(I guess I should say more...)

The guide was intended for people who have started to actively learn about the science of badminton and for newer members. For a new member, often times they will come across conflicting views or oversimplified analyses, which may lead to a detriment in their game rather than an improvement. For members who have been here a while, they are more easily able to filter through the rubbish.

 

[quisitor]

i don't think quisitor is trying to say that whoever he do not recommend should disappear from the forum, but rather should be read with some caution and not to be treated as the true gospel of badminton.

I agree.

the categorization however, is rather subjective. everyone has the freedom to choose whom to read or not.

what i don't agree with is that any names should be pointed out. we have 20,000 members and 450,000+ posts afterall, unless if one has read all of them one should not be qualified to make such an exhaustive claim.

I agree. Which is likely why I posted this to my Intro thread:

People I Would Read

Also:

...I'm sure I'll be omitting some names

Searching for threads posted by a particular user is not uncommon. Some of the names I've suggested act as a primer. They merely give a newer member a place to begin their search for the truth and from the other posts in those threads, a member can find other users who they feel provide insight.

It is similar in that if one gives a recommendation on racket, string, shuttle, shoe, grip selection, one need not have extensively researched all of the ones available.

Obviously my opinion on who to read is no greater than another's:

The Ones Without a Clue (avoid reading these people)
- quisitor (only read for humour... if you have a very strange one...)

 

[quisitor]

i agree...lol
a warm welcome to bc
best regards

Thank you, thank you!

 

[quisitor]

by his account, you're damn right!! U had just proven his point vividly


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.

I disagree.

 

[quisitor]

maybe its not so easy to put people/posters into categories like knowledgable/somewhat knowledgable/no-clue...

I am sure most uf as have different background, education, experiences etc. And some know more about physics, some have a longer badminton-career and practical experience to rely on, some knows more about training-aspects, some about statistics, some about pros etc etc..

What I am trying to say is that some poster may be very knowledgable in one aspect or field, and totally uneducated in another.. So I think trying to "label" posters has little or no meaning..

The nice thiing about BF is that from many different peoples perspective and views expressed, you yorself can then draw your own conclusions, or seek information from other sources to confirm or refute resoning on the different topics discussed...

Excellent post and... I agree.
For some of the newer members who aren't quite committed to doing their own research, they would ideally like to be able to feel that what they're reading is correct-- so the intent of my post was merely to point out that there does exist a lot of misinformation here.

I am of the opinion that the following is the primary reason for a lot of misinformation still existing:

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

Perhaps you're one of them? Cheers!

 

[quisitor]

What about the purpose I come here is to relax and social, and just share some laughs and tears?

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.

My suggestion is, such "reading guide" is too objective, and a bit offensive (depend on each individual). You have your rights to create your own "reading filter", but please don't ask (or suggest) us to follow. Someone's meat is someone else's poison. You like something, does not mean everyone else should agree.

You probably meant too "subjective". I agree-- see Kwun's post.

I don't think anyone should take offense at not being on my list-- really, why should anyone care if they're not on my list? And if they do, have they taken a look at my list of reasons as to why I would be skeptical about certain posts/users? The only one who could possibly be offended is cooldoob6, who I've inferred has enough of a sense of humour to take it.

 

[quisitor]

Wow, one is glad to have made the list. Given the the number of anti-doo6, doo6-has-no-clue, and doo6-has-no-COG posts, one is both delighted and honoured to receive a mention.

Had to show some support.

Also, I don't necessarily agree with the views of the masses on certain topics. I don't always agree with your view but at least it keeps the discussion going so that one day ...

 

[cooler]

I disagree.

u sure talk from both sides of your mouth

 

[quisitor]

Thus far, your posts have seemed to be on controversial subjects that are bound to incite a large response.

1. Discussion is a basis for learning. Any free society and its constituents should encourage rather than discourage responses.

2. The subjects are not controversial to me. Topics that have been examined are not controversial to a person. Topics that have yet to be examined are often controversial to the individual.

I am hoping that this is simply a coincidence.

And if it is not?

 

[FEND.]

yada yada yada... yes yes nice attention seeking post? Are we all happy now? All nice and fuzzy that we are recognised now? Good for you.

Welcome to the forum <--- ? If that was what you were after, an intro about yourself would be appropriate, rather than a rant equivelent to political speeches of how the country or rather in this case the forums should be run. No hang on we're talking about what people should do?

No wait I'm confused..... mmmmm.....

I'm calling your bluff sir on your fullhouse of kings full of aces.

 

[ctjcad]

Hehe, looks like..

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.

..after reading thru quisitor's last few replies, we might see the most "I agree"(w/ 1 "I disagree") responses, so far and all in 1 thread, coming from quisitor him/herself..hehe

 

[myself.]

..after reading thru quisitor's last few replies, we might see the most "I agree"(w/ 1 "I disagree") responses, so far and all in 1 thread, coming from quisitor him/herself..hehe

i agree

quisitor is real good!

 

[hiroisuke]

i agree

quisitor is real good!

I most strongly AGREE! Quisitor has garnered quite a bit of attention, and I can't recall any intro which has attracted so many long posts in such a short time. Quite the popular one, now, eh?

Anyways, I am still a fool, and I wish to be separated from those other 99%, because it just wouldn't do to have 99% of the world be fools, now, would it?

we do often read more like a world wrestling federation script.

Indeed. Except that we're even more entertaining.

yada yada yada... yes yes nice attention seeking post? Are we all happy now? All nice and fuzzy that we are recognised now? Good for you.

Welcome to the forum <--- ? If that was what you were after, an intro about yourself would be appropriate, rather than a rant equivelent to political speeches of how the country or rather in this case the forums should be run. No hang on we're talking about what people should do?

No wait I'm confused..... mmmmm.....

I'm calling your bluff sir on your fullhouse of kings full of aces.

Yes, we are nice and fuzzy, now Sir Fend, quite enjoyable, like these attachments that come with this message. Quite confusing and clever, isn't he?

Lemmings? Are those what are used to make lemonade?

Not quite...If Lemmings (those little foolish rodents ) were used to make lemon-ade, Power-ade would be made using power, And Gator-ade would be made using... You know what I mean.

Btw, i'm sure Mr. Q(as i like to call quisitor) can feel the "warmth" of this forum. Just look at how many members who've replied to his intro. & welcomed him already..

Indeed, quite warm. Hopefully not heated, eh?


Anyways, I'll be watching this thread for a while, see how far we go with this discussion. Oh, and Mr. Q (Quisitor, that is), if you didn't mind, perhaps you could give us your background info and perhaps the story of your life. Based on this conversation so far, I'm quite sure that it'd be interesting to no end. We promise not to stalk you.

 

[LazyBuddy]

I don't think anyone should take offense at not being on my list-- really, why should anyone care if they're not on my list? And if they do, have they taken a look at my list of reasons as to why I would be skeptical about certain posts/users?

Maybe I am taking angry pills or something? How come I feel even more being offended by this statement???

Let me make it clear, I do NOT care whether I am on someone's "honor list" or "black list" or what so ever. I've been around here for several years, as with my "big mouth" nature, talked a lot everyday. I don't really care ppl support my ideas, or against my ideas. I am sure once a while, my post might make certain individuals feel un-comfortable, but I am also glad that I made a lot of friends here, and learned many things from ppl. If some of my crazy stories can provide some information to others, or simply make ppl laugh a bit and feel better, I of course feel good.

I know that you did stated your reason within your list, and I respect your choices. However, the thing I feel very uncomfortable is (as also in my previous post) is, I feel somehow, your original thread have the intention (or, unintentional but still served the purpose of) "dividing up the community". And some of your reasons, like others (e.g. Cooler) also pointed out, is too subjective. Yeah, you have your rights to speak out, but somehow, I feel this thread has the potential to be "destructive" to the existing friendly environment, rather than being "constructive".

Well, maybe to others don't know me well, it seems that I bring up the whole issue, simply because I am "not being listed" (be it a good or a bad or a joking way). But seriously, hey, I have 7,000+ posts, and I talk a lot. I don't really need anyone to approve or dis-approve my point of view, and my intention is to talk and laugh and share, whether whatever categories I belong to, I do NOT care...

 

[ctjcad]

We hear you LazyBuddy...

Maybe I am taking angry pills or something? How come I feel even more being offended by this statement???

(rest of reply snipped for brevity)...
hehe, i think you've gotten quisitor's attention now...hehe

Anyways, boy, i've learned something new from this thread. That is, if one wants ATTENTION real quick, all one needs to do is just stir/make up a controversial comments and speech and for sure all BC's will break lose...
I think this Intro. thread might be, arguably, the "best" Intro. BC ever had..
And boy, next yr if quisitor hangs around and posts more, indra might have another competition as being "BC's most controversial member"...what fun BC will be, come Jan. 1st, 2007...hehe

 

[Jinryu]

Welcome to the forums quisitor!

It's good to see someone concerned about critical analysis and really treating BC with the respect it deserves for it's educational potential.

One thought though, and this is just a general statement... I think a lot of time there is way too much emphasis on objectivity. We can't really aim for pure objectivity, because that's pure 'knowledge' without application.

The fact of the mater is that even at the highest levels, despite 'objective' similarities between the techniques and styles of the top players, they each have their own subjective "way of badminton" and I think that this is what BC forums reflect... that there are many subjective truths to badminton. How you handle your preference of racket, and how you handle your particular physiology, for example.

Naturally people also have different methods of learning, different techniques that work for them, different points of view about the best way to go about things. BC brings this all under one roof at the same time. All from people of varying level of enthusiasm and expertise. It's nobody's job to tell someone 'you are wrong' but rather to encourage them to find a better subjective truth for themself. And I mean this in the sense that though we can give pointers, ultimately that person has to find his way of badminton for himself beyond model of 'perfect badminton'. In fact, the model of perfect badminton probably doesn't fit anyone, because none of us is perfect enough to use it!

All i'm saying is that the emphasis on general objectivity is important, but lets not dismiss the subjective.

Your idea of watching what people are really saying is an important one-- but don't dismiss anyone's advice or opinions, no matter how redundant or 'useless' or groundless their opinion... see if you you can discuss it with them.

While it is true that a lot of people just post for the sake of posting, as a member of BC it's everyone's responsability to push the sport forward, and that means accepting people with 'nothing better to say' and helping them forward if we think we are 'better'. After all, that's what BC is... a community right? Thick and thin, communities grow together.

Looking forward to readin your posts!

 

[LazyBuddy]

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.

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.


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.

Here're some of my takes on your "categories":

2. Junks... How you define junks? No technical contents? Not a pro player him/herself? Not perfect english written? Or, simply something YOUSELF not interested? If you are not interested, why that must be junks??? Personally, I might never post much in "Market Place" or "Place to play - XXX or YYY region". Should I consider the information over there are junks, as they serve no purpose of "MY NEED"???

5. From when "I agree" become a fault? If you read a debate, is your responsibility to filter our how much evidence each side can hold. Some ppl did not provide enough reason, as this is not a court. They might don't want to or can't provide reason, but go with their feelings. It might be right, might be wrong, but what's wrong to show support?

7. Everything anyone talk about here, are not brand new inventions. Maybe we learned from class, maybe heard on the street, maybe read from a newspaper. However, they all come from "somewhere". Put this way, say, I make a post of "MP99 is US$150 in XXX store". Several days later, ppl forward my message in another thread say, "3 days ago, MP99 is US$150 in XXX store". What's wrong with that??? S/he did not add any new "meat", but why should s/he do so? Information can't be reached to ppl, if no one "spread" them. It's not like we copy/paste a 500 pages nobel prize winner's document here, but a lot of posts are more like a "hyperlink" or "forwarded message". They did not create anything new, but helped ppl significantly.

 

[Pete LSD]

Okay, this must be my lucky break from a stressful week. Who cares !

 

[LazyBuddy]

That is, if one wants ATTENTION real quick, all one needs to do is just stir/make up a controversial comments and speech and for sure all BC's will break lose...

Draw attention is fine, but if the cost is to "offend others" or "stiring up the dust", I wonder if we should support such behavior.

To me, any individual (regardless ages, experiences, wealth, rankings, etc) is welcome, as long as s/he behave in a constructive way to the community. Any destructive behavior to "gain fame" is un-welcome, at least from me.

Did I just make another enemy (in Mr. Q?) in the world again???