Hatrack's greatest success has always been, at least since I started lurking and then posting, its cohesive yet inclusive atmosphere based on certain common features, combined with an inherent appreciation for life which allowed the community to celebrate each member's joys and mourn with each suffering. This stable community has been a safe island amid a sea of troubles, as we looked out on an often frightening world.
These virtues, however, have always come at the price of an unfortunate and persistent level of groupthink. Oh, we disagreed on countless issues, but a general outlook on life was shared among us.
Such a safe-haven could not but attract our jealous and paranoid fears that it would cease to be, like so many have before it, and this fear, I believe, led to a troubling out lash against the "other," we having previously dichotomized the world as is the human will.
When we saw that which was not us enter among us, we rejected it harshly. How many of us have left this communion and how many of been forced off?
I have always been vaguely aware of these problems, but I placed them in a dark and forgotten corner of my mind, as I believe many of us have. However, these thoughts came rushing back to me in a most painful manner as I began to feel myself being pushed out. It is not my desire to leave Hatrack, nothing could be further from my intention, I believe that we can make this community work, if we all agree to disagree in love and not in hatred and to hold certain levels of civility in our interactions.
quote: Come, my friends, 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world. Push off, and sitting well in order smite The sounding furrows; for my purpose holds To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths Of all the western stars, until I die. It may be that the gulfs will wash us down: It may be we shall touch the Happy Isles, And see the great Achilles, whom we knew.
Tho' much is taken, much abides; and tho' We are not now that strength which in the old days Moved earth and heaven; that which we are, we are; One equal-temper of heroic hearts, Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
And as for me,
quote:We shall live through this together, Excalibur! They, you, and I! And may God have mercy on us all!
—Camelot
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Oh, we disagreed on countless issues, but a general outlook on life was shared among us.
What outlook might that be?
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
An outlook based on humanism and, most especially, the value of the community, this community and communities in general.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Hold on? Am I missing some giant discord??
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
How can any community not believe in the value of communities?
"Fair?! What do you mean, fair?! You're nihilists!" -The Big Lebowski
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
quote:I am the eggman, they are the eggmen. I am the walrus, goo goo g'joob
(I don't know who you are; I'm arguably new here myself. But I couldn't resist that!)
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
The only people I've ever wanted to push out have been obnoxious people, who speak derisively of those with different opinions. I've certainly never held anybody's newness against him or her, nor even really seen it done by anyone else. On the contrary, over and over again I've seen intelligent, articulate newbies become the flavor of the month. Heck, I remember being that flavor myself.
I also think you're being way overdramatic.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Pel has egg all over his face, and despite numerous attempts to tel him WHY he is perceived as pompous and arrogant he is taking a swan dive from Hatrack.
All the while claiming to be forced out.
Get over yourself, Pel. You aren't even a blip on the screen let alone a divisive force splitting us apart.
Quote Ulysses all you want, it still doesn't make you more intelligent than others here at Hatrack, or make your posts easy to read.
And all the whining, couched in prose or not, won't change that.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Someone please help me understand... Pelegius feels a push to stop contributing because of previous views (and the manner in which they were) posted? And is now airing it out?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Some people don't like his posting because he used to call anybody who wasn't liberal, including Orson Scott Card, a bigoted idiot. I haven't seen him do that lately, but some people criticize his style because he attempts, with middling success, to sound like a sneering eighteenth century university professor, complete with extraneous phrases in other languages and references to long dead philosophers. So now he's playing the card that many people play when they aren't welcomed with open arms, the "you're mean to me because I'n new" card. (Never mind that he's been here over a year.) Now, the fact is that there are people who have been tolerant of his posting style and hoping to see him be a little less condescending, but he doesn't notice that. It is also quite easy to look through the first couple of pages of threads and see examples that Hatrackers are not unwelcoming to newbies. But everytime someone sounds the "oldbies are mean" trumpet, some people will charge out to distance themselves from that stereotype by agreeing that all newbies are victimized here. It happens every six months or so, and gets pretty tiresome.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
I might be chiming in on a subject I should stay away from... but...
I'm new. I've said a few things that people seemed to disagree with. (One that sticks out most is my 'writing style' - I like to use all lowercase - it was explained to me that it's appreciated to use proper grammar - I adapted) That's part of being in a community - it's a give and take learning process.
I didn't register to start a new forum. I registered because I like what was here before and wanted to become a part of it. If I hadn't liked it or had wanted to create something different, I would have started a new forum.
I don't mean to say Pelegius' feelings are or aren't valid. I don't really know much about the issue other than what I've just read. I just mean to point out how I feel as a 'new' member of Hatrack.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
I like cheesy poofs... you like cheesy poofs if we didn't like cheesy poofs we'd be lame.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I have noticed and appreciated the efforts at proper capitalization, cmc.
Just haven't mentioned it till now, though.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
cmc, It is not an issue of "newness," but one of difference and identity. Icarus, who brought "newness" into the discussion has admitted that I am not new, although he still paints my complaints as those of one who is.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Do you have some examples of what the difference is?
How do you mean identity?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: cmc, It is not an issue of "newness," but one of difference and identity. Icarus, who brought "newness" into the discussion has admitted that I am not new, although he still paints my complaints as those of one who is.
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: I am posting this here because these problems are more notable on this side.
The first and greatest problem is the degree of cruelty shown to new members by old ones, even after they have stayed for some time. This is, of course, not true of all members, but it is too prevalent to ignore.
The second is the tendency of some members to react immaturely and rudely to people whose views they disagree with. Calling someone a troll, a jackass, or anything similar neither impresses others with your rhetorical skills nor proves your point, quite the opposite in fact. [From the thread "Two Serious Problems with Hatrack," dated January 13th, 2006]
EDIT TO ADD: As was said to you then, people responded to your behavior, not to your newness or "differentness." As was noted then, the mean old established members of Hatrack don't agree on a blessed thing, so the charge of groupthink is absurd.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
quote:As was noted then, the mean old established members of Hatrack don't agree on a blessed thing
Yes we do!
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Groupthink, is it? What, have I missed any religious threads lately?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shigosei:
quote:As was noted then, the mean old established members of Hatrack don't agree on a blessed thing
Yes we do!
You're wrong! Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Icarus, YOU're wrong!
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
What do you agree on?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
We agree that the mean old established members of Hatrack might or might not agree on whether the mean old established members of Hatrack agree on a blessed thing.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Ahhhh - it's so clear now...
; )
Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
The only things I think Hatrackers agree on is that grammar and spelling and good writing is important, being mean is bad, and fluff is at least occaionally a good thing. People who can't discourse in an intelligent and civil manner, and who can't take a joke don't last here that long. In case you're wondering, Pel, you've come under fire for that "good writing and grammar" part.
Also, if you'd ever peeked into a religion, politics, homosexuality, or abortion thread, you'd realize that there are some wildly divergent views here about life, the universe, and everything.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Pel, do you really feel like we're not paying you enough attention?
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
There are no fewer than four of these whiney threads on the front page right now. I'm tired of them.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
That's usually the way this happens, though. It's a cry for help.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
Jhai, I am sorry that you feel that way, really. I do not, however, believe that my grammar is exceptionally poor.
Zeugma, there are indeed four threads started by me, two on the subject of youth, one on immigration and one on Hatrack. I would be the first to admit that that any thread started by me tends to quickly deviate from the intended topic, usually into a series of critiques and attacks on me. I can assure you that this is never my intent in starting threads and causes me as much annoyance as it does you.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Not responding to any comment in particular...
This is FUN for me. I enjoy it. It's a way to unwind. It's a way for me to converse with people on a level I haven't been able to find yet in the new place I've moved to.
Maybe sometimes if a critique or attack on you (Pelegius) comes up, speak your peace/piece and then let it alone. The topics seem to change a lot and if you don't perpetuate the replies posted, maybe the attacking sentiment will fade and Hatrack will be more enjoyable?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:usually into a series of critiques and attacks on me
So you decided to renew your series of critiques and attacks on us?
Posted by Jhai (Member # 5633) on :
Pel - see one of Orinco's posts on page 2 of your Prometheus thread for a very good example of some of the problems with your grammar. I don't think your grammar is "exceptionally poor," but in your haste to write five-line sentences, things often get a bit... confused.
Incidentally, you never replied to my comment on the inaccuracies on the initial post in that thread. If you'd like, we can try to get that conversation back on track, and debate the, well, many issues that your brought up.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Your grammar is not exceptionally poor. There are people on Hatrack with worse grammar. (It is also not good.) You certainly shouldn't be picked on for it. I think people mostly point it out because it is incongruous with the tone you tend to try to take. I do think you could be accepted and liked here; in fact, I think you have made strides in that direction for what it's worth.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Pelegius,
You can't even say "good bye" in under 200 words.
Criminy sakes, lad, get over yourself.
We like you just fine, but you are treating other people as if they are beneath you, and then you come whimpering around like a wounded puppy when people don't take a shine to you.
It's just too much of this and not enough of a real person to interact with.
If we're just an excercise for your over-wrought intellect, where's the fun for us?
First you tried to pass it off as we (and the world in general) just don't "get" young people. But the fact is we have had several young members here for years, they practically grew up here.
And we've had young members who acted like complete jerks and we struggled with them and (some of us) tried to help them become productive members. And one or two of them have done so.
You are obviously intelligent. We'd love to have real conversations with you.
But if you're going, just go. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
If you're staying. Stay. And be less of a pompous blowhard and more of a human being.
Take your pick.
Or just keep doing what your doing and more and more of us will just ignore you until finally, you realize you're just talking to yourself anyway.
People are still willing to invest in you. You seem interesting enough. Take it as a compliment. Feel good about yourself. And join in.
Be a part of the community. Sometimes you'll stand out. Sometimes you won't. Sometimes people will praise you or seek you out. Sometimes they'll think you don't have a lot to add on any particular topic.
it's all good.
We're all smart.
You're smart.
Now be smart.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Pel -
Maybe if you just relaxed a bit?
quote: Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends?
Sometimes I don't speak too bright but yet I know what I'm talking about
Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends? Why can't we be friends?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Hey, you managed to spell "its" without using an apostrophe. That's good grammar by Internet standards.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: And we've had young members who acted like complete jerks and we struggled with them and (some of us) tried to help them become productive members.
And one or two of them have done so.
I think I've come quite a long way, myself. At least, I stopped whining.
Edit:
This was probably not the best time for me to chime in. But I just wanted to clarify that the line "At least, I stopped whining," was not in reference to you, Pelegius, in anyway whatsoever.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Pelegius, on occasion I've posted serious topics that quickly dropped off page one and drifted away into oblivion. Oh well--I guess people just weren't interested in that topic. Most of what I've posted has been fluff, and I've been surprised at how often those silly fluff threads have gone on for pages.
In your case, you have posted topics that provoked a certain response--specifically, negative reactions to your posting style. Understandably, you got a bit defensive. But I've never seen any indication that you were asking, "gee, could there be anything about the way I write/post that is provoking this hostile response?"
Instead, you write further things like this:
quote: Such a safe-haven could not but attract our jealous and paranoid fears that it would cease to be, like so many have before it, and this fear, I believe, led to a troubling out lash against the "other," we having previously dichotomized the world as is the human will.
Just what is the "other"? You can say that you are posting a topic "about Hatrack," but it seems that most everyone here is interpreting it to be "Pelegius's feelings about his experience on Hatrack." Threads such as your "I give up" one, specifically addressing the criticisms you've received on your writing style, lend credence to this.
So, back to "the other." You seem to be saying that we are identifying you and/or your ideas as "the other" and are all turning against you. That you are the object of our paranoid and jealous fears. Well, phooey. You are being criticized because you are going on the offensive after feeling attacked, and because you've said things in a way that people find off-putting.
If people haven't engaged in the type of discussion you were trying to provoke, perhaps it would be better to ask what about your rhetorical style is lacking rather than drawing conclusions about the "groupthink" of the Hatrack community. Hint: this isn't a homogeneous group of shallow people incapable of considering issues from any other viewpoint than that of the "party line." Because there is no party line.
The fact that I'm even posting on this thread does not mean that I've joined the mass "dogpile Pelegius" groupthink message being beamed through cyberspace. There's no vast right- or left-wing conspiracy here. It means that I've read through several threads of you complaining about ill treatment and then going on the defensive and not really listening to anything anyone says in response--and there have been some really clear, well-meant, and helpful explanations that could do you some good. I suspect that there are arenas other than Hatrack where you're misunderstood. If you listen, you might start to understand why.
I, for one, don't want you to bid Hatrack adieu. You obviously spend a lot of time pondering weighty issues. I hope you stay and keep posting and, more importantly, reading. Don't expect us to bow down and admire your great wisdom and insights. Ask questions if you want to be a catalyst for interesting discussions, and make sure your readers understand the central point you want to discuss and the main question you are presenting for debate--don't let it get lost in a sea of words and ideas. (Tom Davidson gave you some great advice about this on the first page of your Prometheus Bound thread.)
And you know, if you don't get the reaction you expect from a post--just let it drop off the page, OK? It's not because Hatrackers are shallow or have something against you.
Edit: Bob Scopatz got to the heart of what I wanted to say, but much more clearly and concisely. He's a great example of how to communicate clearly on a forum.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
SteveRogers, fwiw, I don't remember you being anything but a fairly constructive discussant. Maybe 'cuz it's been more than 2 months and my memory is like Swiss cheese. But, anyway, I don't think of you as being any particular age, and I don't recall thinking that you were annoying or whiney at any point.
And I'm not going to use the search engine to find out if you were.
Who cares?
It's all good.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I wasn't...whiney. But I had a knack for being untruthful. Old habits die hard. But I haven't lied on here...in a long time. Not since the begining.
I'm much better.
Also, what does "fwiw," abbreviate? That's a new one for me, and I'm totally clueless.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
First you tried to pass it off as we (and the world in general) just don't "get" young people. But the fact is we have had several young members here for years, they practically grew up here.
I was seventeen when I joined. That was, goodness, four years ago. I've grown up here. I've largely grown up because of hatrack.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
For what its worth.
-Bok
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
For what it's worth.
Good song, by the way.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
for what it's worth
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
...that's kind of creepy.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
What - three at the same time at that time?
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
For what it's worth, I have a better memory than Bob and I think you've grown a lot, Steve.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Ha! Jinx!
No you and Jim both owe me a coke!
[Drat, I was linking to wkipedia for a non-expected definition of coke, but the forum hates parens in URLs, even if they are properly escaped!]
-Bok
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Ditto, dkw.
Posted by JenniK (Member # 3939) on :
The grammar thing I could care less about, but the writing style....do you actually talk to people like that? I think many people here on Hatrack would understand you more if you just said what you were thinking....just come right out with it, and don't dress it up in pretty words as if you were writing poetry.
Just talk.
Read what you have written out loud, then ask yourself if you would actually have a conversation with someone that sounds even remotely similar. My guess is your friends and the people you go to school with would look at you as if you had sprouted a second head that was day-glow orange with sky blue polka dots if you spoke to them the way you speak here. I think if you just make it simple, you will be more easily understood, and your interactions with other Hatrackers will be more enjoyable for them and for you.(IMHO)
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
I was truthfully thinking of replying the same - but was going to throw in 'milk' just for fun...
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
dkw & Dag- Thank you very much.
Edit:
Yay, a new page. Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
Oh, that is weird. I've always read it as "for whatever it's worth." Doesn't anyone else say the "ever" in their heads?
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Well, I dictate all my posts.
So no.
-Bok
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Bok, I didn't know you were a dictator.
Cool!
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
Ohh, Can I get a cushy government post?
Pretty please?
We go way back, after all.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted: Oh, that is weird. I've always read it as "for whatever it's worth." Doesn't anyone else say the "ever" in their heads?
Nope. You're completely alone in that. And now that you've shown us just how different you are, we're going to form a lynch mob and drive you from our midst.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I knew it.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Steve, You've gotten much better, and in more ways than just the telling stupid, transparent lies and then throwing a tantrum when called on them thing.
Pel, The problem is you.
Hatrack is far from perfect, but in this particular instance people don't have a problem with newcomers or with change or with xenophobia or with teenagers or whatever else. They have a problem with you.
Or rather, they have a problem with the way you act and the way you post. A lot of people have spent a lot of time trying to get across to you why this is and what you could do about it. This being Hatrack, they are likely to continue doing so for quite some time.
Myself, I don't think you're going to change until life gives you a good metaphorical kick in the nuts, so I don't really care if you leave. If you're going to stay though and you plan on actually integrating into the community, you're going to need to deal with the fact that, from the perspective of most people here, The Problem Is You.
If you're not going to acknowledge that or you're going to continue thinking that the problems you're having are everyone else's fault, you may as well just leave. This is true even if you are right and it really is everyone else's fault.
Posted by Javert (Member # 3076) on :
...anyone else notice how this thread essentially turned into "Yay Steve, boo Pel!". Just saying. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, Pel, honey, you are not a divisive force. Hatrack doesn't care nearly that much.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Hatrack doesn't care nearly that much.
:weeps softly, joyfully:
I knew this day, my day, would come.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Bok, I didn't know you were a dictator.
Cool!
One might even say I'm a Grammar Nazi...
-Bok
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
I think it's fair to say Pelegius has a legitimate complaint insofar as Hatrack seems to be reluctant to look past the style of self-importance he uses in order to fairly judge what he is saying.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
For my part, I don't take it as a given that Hatrack -- or any listener -- should be expected to do so.
If someone makes a valid point about progressive taxation while skinning a puppy alive, I don't feel compelled to acknowledge their point.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
That's not a legitimate complaint. This is leisure time. We have no duty to do work we don't want to do, nor does Pel have any claim to have his work read or judged.
Posted by Eduardo St. Elmo (Member # 9566) on :
I might be out of line, posting a reply on this specific topic, since i'm a very, very recent member, but here goes anyway.
Any opinion has value. Just as any person has value. Granted, some people just make us laugh or cry due to their lack of insight, but that has value as well. The merit of any particular statement isn't directly related to the person who utters it, but rather to their ability to support their opinions with logical arguments.
So in stead of bickering about so-called arrogance and grammatical errors (of which there plenty in this post alone, I'm sure), try reacting to the ideas behind the phrasing. To my mind, that's the way to conduct a productive discussion.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
You make it sound as if we're verbally abusing the guy for mistaking it's and its -- no one is doing that.
The issue is that phrasing is so obtuse that it totally obscures the ideas. Which is counterproductive, to say the least.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Javert, yeah.
I've gotten a little tired of everyone telling Pel what he's doing wrong and how he ought to write. He'll adapt or not. It almost seems like every post of his is taken apart and the writing style critically analyzed, instead of responded to (or ignored, if you want to do things that way).
But of course, it is Pelegius who keeps bringing it up - posting whole new threads about it, in fact. So what can we do? Pel, if you keep bringing up how you're being criticized, you're going to keep "Pelegius is the one we're supposed to criticize" in the forefront of everyone's brain.
I have noticed in the short time I've been here a few people who have managed to make themselves stand out in such a way that they soon seemed to be criticized for every thread and every post. Pel is one. Advent was one. The traits they shared are that they consistently started threads about themselves, or they would start a thread about something else and then get offended when it didn't go according to their plan. So maybe that's our "groupthink": we don't like people who try to draw all attention to themselves, making Hatrack be about "why doesn't everyone like me?", instead of contributing to the community and being willing to give AND take.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:That's not a legitimate complaint. This is leisure time. We have no duty to do work we don't want to do, nor does Pel have any claim to have his work read or judged.
If you spend your leisure time playing basketball with a friend, he has a legitimate complaint if you keep fouling him instead of playing real defense. Just because it is "leisure" time doesn't make it okay for you to foul him instead of playing for real. Similarly, if you spend your leisure time engaging in debate on an online forum with friends, they have a legitimate complaint if you are more concerned with how they are arguing rather than what they are arguing. That is because when discussing an issue with someone, there is an implication that you are both going to try to understand the content of what the other person is saying, and treat it as fairly as you can. Otherwise you are just talking past one another, rather than actually discussing.
If you don't want to do that, just don't spend your leisure time responding to Pelegius. I agree that you have no duty to respond to anything he says. But if you do respond, repeatedly, he has a reason to complain if the thing you keep responding to is the way he is writing and the attitude you think he holds, rather than what he is saying. Or if you write as if you are answering his point, but have not really fairly considered his argument for his point because of the pompous way it was put forth.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
I do feel obliged to point out that, although it has become generally assumed that I come from a background of ignorance, and unfortunate stereotype of both teenagers and Texans, my father is a retired professor of English and History and a Public Ivy and my teachers, who have been severely criticized when I ever brought up, were educated at such reputable schools as Princeton, Brown, St. Johns College, the University of London and the University of Bucharest. I must therefore dispel any rumors that I am not familiar with real academics and make plain that whatever faults of rhetoric I have are my own, and not the product of my environment. It is, however, true that have I never encountered such vehement disdain for my writing as here at Hatrack. It is thus hardly surprising that I have come to regard this as a certain communal bias, rather than indicative of western culture in general. Perhaps I am wrong and it is I who have lived in an atypical community, my State is indebted to the oratory of Sam Houston and my people to that Meagher, neither of whom would be well viewed today.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Most of us aren't assuming you haven't seen good academics (you've clearly read many of the things you've read, for instance, and I have no special reason to doubt your statements about background), but we have significant observational evidence you are not a good academic.
Many of us have advanced university study, including in areas involving much writing. Some of us (not including myself) have taught university classes involving much writing. Between these two overlapping groups (not to mention people with other qualifications to make the same assessments) there are ample people here extraordinarily qualified to evaluate your writing.
Coincidentally, your inability to recognize these things gives us significant observational evidence about your reading comprehension. You tend read what you want to read, not what has actually been written.
edit: I feel I should add I have taught lab sections of university courses, just not ones involving much writing. For the sake of completeness Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:If you spend your leisure time playing basketball with a friend, he has a legitimate complaint if you keep fouling him instead of playing real defense. Just because it is "leisure" time doesn't make it okay for you to foul him instead of playing for real. Similarly, if you spend your leisure time engaging in debate on an online forum with friends, they have a legitimate complaint if you are more concerned with how they are arguing rather than what they are arguing.
The word "similarly" is misused here. Those aren't similar. If I play basketball with someone who continually fouls me, it is OK to not play with him any more, even if I still play at that playground. It is also OK to tell them why, and they have no legitimate complaint if I do so. Similarly, if someone's posts take too much effort to wring meaning from, it is OK to not debate with them any more, even if I still choose to debate with others on the playground. Further, it is OK to tell them why, especially when asked or when accusations are made about it.
quote:That is because when discussing an issue with someone, there is an implication that you are both going to try to understand the content of what the other person is saying, and treat it as fairly as you can. Otherwise you are just talking past one another, rather than actually discussing.
There is also an implication that one is going to try to make one's communication understandable.
quote:If you don't want to do that, just don't spend your leisure time responding to Pelegius. I agree that you have no duty to respond to anything he says. But if you do respond, repeatedly, he has a reason to complain if the thing you keep responding to is the way he is writing and the attitude you think he holds, rather than what he is saying.
No more than the person fouling in basketball has reason to complain for being whistled for it.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Aha. So Tresopax thinks Hatrackers are committing the fouls against Pelegius, but Dag insists it's Pel committing the fouls. Hmm.
It's taking a while to get my brain around these analogies. I'm going to the playground.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Yeeesh. By your logic, Pel, my Ivy League degree grants me your respect. So I'm telling you, as your academic superior, to either cut the crap and treat the people here with respect... or just leave already.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: I do feel obliged to point out that, although it has become generally assumed that I come from a background of ignorance, and unfortunate stereotype of both teenagers and Texans, my father is a retired professor of English and History and a Public Ivy and my teachers, who have been severely criticized when I ever brought up, were educated at such reputable schools as Princeton, Brown, St. Johns College, the University of London and the University of Bucharest. I must therefore dispel any rumors that I am not familiar with real academics and make plain that whatever faults of rhetoric I have are my own, and not the product of my environment. It is, however, true that have I never encountered such vehement disdain for my writing as here at Hatrack. It is thus hardly surprising that I have come to regard this as a certain communal bias, rather than indicative of western culture in general. Perhaps I am wrong and it is I who have lived in an atypical community, my State is indebted to the oratory of Sam Houston and my people to that Meagher, neither of whom would be well viewed today.
This doesn't prove anything to us. For all we know, you could be making all of this stuff up.
Posted by Angiomorphism (Member # 8184) on :
I don't know, I've never doubted his claims about his education. He does seem to know alot about typical western litterature and philosophy, and some of his points do have a hint of learned-ness in them. I just think that he's been horribly taugh in regards to writing style. He has said in the past that his teachers think he writes well, and that his style of writing is derived from the way his teachers write and speak, and some of the books he's read.
I personally think he's just going through that stage that any private school kid goes through when they think they are smarter than anyone else, and this stage is expressing itself particularly strong in his writing. He will (presumably) get to univeristy, and he will (most certainly) fail his first writen assignment. That should snap him out of it pretty effectively.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I find him impossible to read because I start skimming over his obnoxious, overwritten, flowery language and never find his a point.
That and, sorry kid, but you're a total drama queen.
Pel, you need to calm down and come to your points more quickly.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
quote:I have noticed in the short time I've been here a few people who have managed to make themselves stand out in such a way that they soon seemed to be criticized for every thread and every post. Pel is one. Advent was one. The traits they shared are that they consistently started threads about themselves, or they would start a thread about something else and then get offended when it didn't go according to their plan. So maybe that's our "groupthink": we don't like people who try to draw all attention to themselves, making Hatrack be about "why doesn't everyone like me?", instead of contributing to the community and being willing to give AND take.
quote:Aha. So Tresopax thinks Hatrackers are committing the fouls against Pelegius, but Dag insists it's Pel committing the fouls. Hmm.
I think these are two of the most interesting things said in this thread so far. Thanks, Jenna.
I haven't followed the Pelegius saga over the past several weeks, but from the summary in this thread the issue seems to be one of (perceived) attention seeking and the implicit distate most Hatrack users have for it (particularly the crotchety oldsters who've seen so much of it over the years).
Is there a set of implicit Rules of Dialogue on Hatrack? People mentioned good grammer, inoffensiveness, etc. Are there others? Is one, "Thou shalt not allow personal writing style to promote personal identity at the expense of clarity of exposition of ideas (i.e. the center-of-attention rule)?" I know the posters I've reacted negatively to in the past have all had posting styles that, rather than merely being unique, tended to obscure the points the posters were trying to make.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Tres:
quote:If you spend your leisure time playing basketball with a friend, he has a legitimate complaint if you keep fouling him instead of playing real defense.
If everyone's playing and having a good time, calling legitimate fouls and respecting a certin set of court rules, and a new person comes in and starts calling really ticky-tack fouls... that person will be the subject of scorn from the other players.
Or maybe you don't play street basketball.
Pel:
quote:I do feel obliged to point out that, although it has become generally assumed that I come from a background of ignorance, and unfortunate stereotype of both teenagers and Texans, my father is a retired professor of English and History and a Public Ivy and my teachers, who have been severely criticized when I ever brought up, were educated at such reputable schools as Princeton, Brown, St. Johns College, the University of London and the University of Bucharest.
First, I'd just like to say I never assumed you came from a background of ignorance. I surely assumed you came from a background of overeducation and overvalue on all things academic to the exclusion of vernacular and the methodology one uses to engage with lay people.
Second, I'd like to say that quote was a single sentence that had a total of 78 words, 8 commas, and 3 dependent clauses. Such a sentence draws attention.
quote:It is, however, true that have I never encountered such vehement disdain for my writing as here at Hatrack.
Not to sound dismissive, but how many years have you been actively engaging in written correspondence with other human beings? I'm 29 and have had similar criticism of my own writing and speaking style, totally apart from hatrack, on more than one occasion.
If this is the first time you have encountered people who have chafed at your writing style you have either a) been elitely selective of those you've chosen to speak with, b) been ignored completely, or c) did not have an audience that cared enough to voice criticism.
Further, if you continue to maintain that your style is beyond reproach and fail to maintain an audience elitely selected for their academic-mindedness, you will undoubtedly discover others in the world who find your style offputting.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
just my two cents as a relatively new guy to the board, and not one of the "seasoned veterans" or what have you.
I've tried reading at least a handful of your not-as-self-centered posts and have to agree with 'everyone' else. My problem with your language, other than the flowriness that makes it very tedious to read, is that it absolutely obscures whatever points you're trying to make.
Most of your discussion topics have been about as incomprehensible as something posted by Robin (though for completely different reasons, I doubt yours are as drug related). If you were writing an in-depth phd thesis on some philosophical subject your writing style MIGHT be appropriate, or at least accepted. However, this is a discussion board, where we are expected to communicate more or less as if we were having a face-to-face discussion.
I'm curious who you think is accusing you of being uneducated or ignorant, as you make quite inescapably clear that you have at least some classical education.
As for your teachers being apparently impressed by your writing consider these things: 1) your writing assignments are almost certainly closer to literary analysis, research papers etc, which generally do have a very different style than plain speech. 2) many highschool teachers are just overjoyed to have a student that even knows what rhetoric and atypical mean, and so may overlook some of your flaws in favor of encouraging your literacy.
I would suggest taking some college-level writing classes, perhaps at a local community college or the like, and see what people's reactions are to 5-line sentences etc.
Finally, if you cannot accept the repeated clear and respectful criticisms that have been offered to you regarding your lack of general acceptance on the board I'll borrow a line from Farscape and say: "The imperfection is yours." Many members have been very clear in their statements of what it is about your writing that puts most of us off and detracts from any real points you have to make, but you seem to refuse to accept that as anything legitimate. let's just say that sometimes when 99% of a community says the same thing it's not the man trying to get you down, it's actually that you have a fault.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Oh, I figure Pel wants attention and he uses the tools he has in his pack to get it: words, faux-modesty, and martyrdom. It's working kind of well, so I can't imagine that he'll stop anytime soon. He'll probably stop when he starts getting unqualified approval for something else. I have no idea what or when that might be, though.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Is there a set of implicit Rules of Dialogue on Hatrack?
I'm certainly still new enough not to be an expert on this, but the only times I've seen anyone's writing be criticised is when it was bad enough to totally distract or hinder the reader. No one's been jumped for minor usage or syntax errors, or even poor word choice.
I have seen about a dozen posters in the last two years or so be advised to conform to the standards of basic writing competency (which hatrackers assume everyone who's smart enough to register for an online message board has) or get used to being ignored. As Dag and others have stated, it's not our job to break your post into readable chunks -- it's yours.
Basically, the things that people will probably correct you on are: (1) using all caps, or all lowercase, (2) l33t speak (or any other similarly impenetrable spelling problems), or (3) severely bad grammar and syntax (severely, as in atrocious). Also, to a lesser extent (as it's not technically a writing issue as much as a content and courtesy thing), (4) shameless and incessant attention-whoring will not win you any fans. In other words, using Hatrack as your personal playground.
Pelegius comes under fire mainly for (3) and (4), but more than that because after asking for advice he has repeatedly failed to heed it.
Posted by SenojRetep (Member # 8614) on :
I think there are other rules of discussion, not related necessarily to your four (4).
For instance, (5) dishonesty. Steve mentioned this about himself and I know Advent got shouted down for it frequently.
(6) Editing posts without ascribing, or ex post facto content deletions.
(7) Calling out individuals (I remember one, "let's fight" thread, where it was asserted that wasn't in the spirit of Hatrack).
Others?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I don't think that there is a lot of necessity for a formal rule against that. It would just be cumbersome and hard to enforce.
I love how people always assume it is the "old elite" that has a problem with this stuff, too. I appreciate hearing that others have the same problems with his writing. I am hard pressed to find anything that the "old elite" agrees on other than using reasonable grammar and sentence structure, though.
If you think we are some sort of coherent group with a similar hidden agenda you haven't read very many threads here lately.
I am tired of the attention-whoring myself. Tresopax can say what he likes, but the fact of the matter is these threads were started by Pel, not us, and the topics speak for themselves.
As my wife (JenniK) said earlier, I doubt Pel talks this way IRL. I am not saying he is dumb or ignorant, or that he should or shouldn't leave Hatrack....that is his choice.
What I AM saying is that if he wants a different response to his posts he should try changing his own style a little and see if that works.
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is the very definition of insanity.
Kat, I think you hit it dead on as well. He IS getting an expected response, and as long as he continues to get it he will keep this crap up. With that in mind, I doubt i will continue to respond any further. He has shown he isn't ready to listen to the very critiques he asked for, and continues to push the blame off on everyone else.
Kwea
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: One might even say I'm a Grammar Nazi...
-Bok
Dude, everyone knows that "grammar nazi" is lowercased.
*shakes head sadly*
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy:
quote:Originally posted by Bokonon: One might even say I'm a Grammar Nazi...
-Bok
Dude, everyone knows that "grammar nazi" is lowercased.
*shakes head sadly*
True, nazi isn't really a proper noun imo unless you are talking about the actual Nazi party.
So you are correct unless one happens to be an actual member of the Nazi party, who also happens to be a stickler for good grammar. In which case they'd be a "grammar Nazi".
[ July 17, 2006, 04:02 PM: Message edited by: ricree101 ]
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I hope that you're spelling "grammar" wrong to be subtly ironic or something.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Nazi as a descriptive term and not a member of the actual Nazi party can be capitalized or not: both are correct.
You guys are all going to get sued by TSR (who Trademarked the term "Nazi" for their Indiana Jones game)
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
Dude, that's like my actual title: "Grammar Nazi". It's like "Beloved Leader", only snazzier.
The capitals are correct.
-Bok
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
quote:The Problem Is You.
quote:you are not a good academic.
quote: he [which is to say me] will (most certainly) fail [at the university level]
Can I truly be blamed for an ever-increasing sense of persecution on this board?
I must point out that I have never said anything about any other user which even begins to approach the level of disdain heaped routinely on me, and yet it is I who am accused of “sneering at my readers.” If I am guilty of this offense, which would be great indeed, how much more guilty are the rest? I am not an Augustian Christian, but there seems enough guilt here to justify the proposition of original sin. Or perhaps it is society that has ruined us, so that we may no longer function in society. I cannot explain this troubling aspect of humanity, nor do I believe that I would be listened to if I did, being only myself.
And just to prove that, even here on Hatrack, I am not universally condemned for my writing
quote:each individual piece seems well-written. Some of your asides, as I said, are unsupported given their weight, but overall it's to your credit.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Pelegius, you put each of those opinions in play by attempting to refute criticisms of your writing by claiming to be writing as an academic.
Also, your understanding of original sin is fundamentally flawed, but that's neither here nor there.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I hope that you're spelling "grammar" wrong to be subtly ironic or something.
Er... yes that's it. Definitely not accidental misspellings.
*whistles innocently and sneaks away*
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
BTW, Pel, I find your disdain for your fellow Texans obnoxious as well. Perhaps you shouldn't tear down your neighbor to prop yourself up.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
...aaaand I'm out.
This right here *rubs hands together* is me, washing my hands of you. Good luck with martrydom.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"Also, your understanding of original sin is fundamentally flawed, but that's neither here nor there." I have just taken a year's worth of college-level theology, but this is hardly the time or the place to discuss the differences between the Augustinian-Calvinist, the Pelagian, the semi-Pelagian and the Lutheran ideas of sin and salvation.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"Pel, I find your disdain for your fellow Texans obnoxious as well. " I have said nothing disdainful of Texans, seeing as I and most of my friends are Texans. Indeed, what I said was that is an "unfortunate stereotype of both teenagers and Texans" that assumes that either group is inherently ignorant, and, by extension, teenagers from Texas are the most ignorant of all.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Too bad that hasn't stopped you from doing so, huh?
Your MUST be right. It is all those other intelligent people who are wrong for not bowing down to worship a pompous, arrogant git such as yourself.
A year, huh? College level theology classes at the ripe age of 15-16?
Whatever.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Its no use.
He asks for explanation of why he is focused upon, then cries persecution when people provide such explanation.
He wants to fit in, then makes no effort to address any of the reasons people have noted which obstruct him from that goal.
He is given reasons why people dislike his posts (style and tone), then makes up his own reasons why he thinks people dislike his posts (youth and "newbie status").
He only hears the bad and cannot see the honest efforts at explaining why he has received some of the reactions he dislikes.
He ignores posts that encourage and identify strengths, and obsesses over those that criticize and point out flaws.
I give up.
Pelegius, after this post, you will no longer hear me make any mention of your posting style - that is because I will no longer be reading your posts. I don't care to read the heavily overconstructed erudition of a pedant, and you apparently see no reason to adjust or modify that style at any point in the near future.
***
Now, if I could just rein in my compulsive need to disagree with and respond to Tres...
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Stop insisting on and insinuating about and alluding to meaningful knowledge and rational argument capabilities and demonstrate them.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Nazi as a descriptive term and not a member of the actual Nazi party can be capitalized or not: both are correct.
Okay, so I'll take back my statement about lowercasing "nazi." Some style guides would lowercase it, but that's by no means a universal rule.
I don't get the web comic link, though.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:"Also, your understanding of original sin is fundamentally flawed, but that's neither here nor there." I have just taken a year's worth of college-level theology, but this is hardly the time or the place to discuss the differences between the Augustinian-Calvinist, the Pelagian, the semi-Pelagian and the Lutheran ideas of sin and salvation.
Immediate appeal to authority - not very persuasive.
The guilt you are referring to is contemporary guilt - guilt allegedly associated with actions we on Hatrack have taken.
The presence of contemporary guilt (and the actions which create the state of guilt) are not proof of original sin. In fact, original sin is not based on anything we do, whether one subscribes to the inherited guilt theory or not.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Pel, once more before I go and catch a drink with El JT de Spang. People here have given you the benefit of the doubt; they have offered helpful suggestions. None of this seems to be making any impact on you.
If you really want to be part of this community, ask yourself, really ask yourself, why you used this sentence:
quote:I am not an Augustian Christian, but there seems enough guilt here to justify the proposition of original sin.
You pepper your writing with allusions that you have to stretch to make relevent. It doesn't help your point. All it does is show off that you have heard of Augustus. If that is what you are trying to do, stop it. If you are doing it unintentionally, stop it. It doesn't make you sound smarter. Nobody is impressed.
I get that you were probably the smartest kid you knew. So were we all. Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
oh pelegius, it's not that you write poorly or in a largely confusing and distancing manner. It's just that the rest of us are but poor peasants scared and intimidated by such lofty and learned figures such as yourself. /end sarcasm
"I must point out that I have never said anything about any other user which even begins to approach the level of disdain heaped routinely on me, and yet it is I who am accused of “sneering at my readers.” If I am guilty of this offense, which would be great indeed, how much more guilty are the rest?"
There is a night-and-day difference between sneering, what you typically do with your overly-done-up prose, and straightforward criticism. Just as there is a difference between a snooty aristocrat making off-hand comments about someone's dress and a regular joe explaining that those particular combat boots don't go that well with the frilly sun-dress, and do little to accentuate beauty.
None of us who are criticising you are hiding it, we are more than forthright with exactly what we are doing, and as such there is little-to-no guilt, though apparently you think we should feel guilty.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"A year, huh? College level theology classes at the ripe age of 15-16?
Whatever." Yes, this is so and shall remain so no matter how vigorously you deny it or wish that it were not. My professor studied with Charles E. Curran, and yet I am to be assumed as ignorant for no other reason than that you dislike me. There are many whom I dislike but whose education and intelligence, even, on occasion, genius, I acknowledge. I have never asked to "be worshiped." I have asked, and shall continue to ask, or rather, demand, the respect due to a human being. I accord a respect to all humanity, regardless of age, ethnicity, religion etc. that has seldom been accorded me. Yes, I am young and yes, I have been known to disagree with many older than I and some perhaps wiser than I, but I have never treated another human being, on this forum or elsewhere, in the same manner in which I am being treated.
The greatness of humanity rests upon the ability of humanity to recognize its own genius, which can only be achieved by recognizing the dignity of all humans. This, and nothing more, has been message which I have tried to pass own and which I still strive to pass on.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:I have never treated another human being, on this forum or elsewhere, in the same manner in which I am being treated.
You justed treated me this way. I posted a response to an allusion. You disagreed and the only support provided was your one year of theology. The clear implication: I am right and you are wrong because I took this class.
That's no different than someone saying, "You are wrong and I am right because I am twice your age." Especially considering that you have no idea what theology I've studied in my day.
If you'd like to share something from your class, that's one thing. But to simply assert your superiority on the subject is precisely what you have accused others of doing.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
" In fact, original sin is not based on anything we do, whether one subscribes to the inherited guilt theory or not." Original sin is based on the theory that, as we are born into Adam's sin, we cannot but sin like him. It is an essentially anti-free will argument, as opposed to the Pelagian and semi-Pelagian arguments which are rooted in free will. Augustine, Erasmus and Calvin allowed for some measure of limited free will while Luther allowed for none.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Original sin is based on the theory that, as we are born into Adam's sin, we cannot but sin like him.
Yes.
quote:It is an essentially anti-free will argument
No, it is not. In fact, it rather depends on free will as a necessary premise. You are merely repeating the charges Pelegius aimed at the doctrine.
Further, none of what you listed here begins to explain why this is appropriate. Pelegius never denied that people sin. Therefore, the existence of current sin (which is what you referred to with "enough guilt here") does nothing to prove one side of the discussion or the other.
Posted by TheGrimace (Member # 9178) on :
kmbboots, can you give me the address of the bar where you and El JT de Spang are? I'm thinking of stopping over there too =p
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
Dagonee, you did not disagree per se, you said I was wrong without saying why I was wrong. The latter is disagreeing, the former is pure criticism, although I was probably still unfair to you. It is just that I grow increasingly distressed with my critics, who, no longer content to criticize my ideas or even the style in which they are presented, feel obliged to begin a ceaseless stream of ad hominem attacks.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"Pelegius never denied that people sin." Absolutley. He did, however, deny that people were inherently pre-programed to sin, as it were, claiming that they were equaly likely to do good and evil. That is the basis against which I wrote, although it may well be flawed (I would argue that none know living know exactly what Pelagius meant, myself least of all.)
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Anybody who has take graduate level theology courses raise your hand. (Does so)
And there are several posters here that know way more than I do about theology.
I'm just making the point that nobody is likely to be impressed by your credentials.
As Icarus said, "Welcome to the big pond."
Stop trying to impress us and it is possible that you will.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Pelegius, I'm going to ask you what you think is causing so many people to grow terribly frustrated with you.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*reminisces* I remember when other people posted "Why Is No One Listening to Me" threads. The poignant ones were those which were sincere; they were a plaintive cry of How come no wants to play with me? I smell nice, and I'm so smart.
*looks into crowd* Yes, I see you squirming. I am talking about yours.
Anyway, I don't think this thread is one of them. This is I am going to start thread after thread about MEEEE. It's all about MEEEEEEEEEE!! Talk about MEEEEE!! Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:"Pelegius never denied that people sin." Absolutley. He did, however, deny that people were inherently pre-programed to sin, as it were, claiming that they were equaly likely to do good and evil. That is the basis against which I wrote, although it may well be flawed (I would argue that none know living know exactly what Pelagius meant, myself least of all.)
No, I think that that's as accurate as a one line summary of his thoughts on this issue can really be. But, again, the presence of sin now does not provide evidence to support either Augustine or Pelegius's view. That's my point.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
kmboots, I have never claimed to be Hatrack's resident expert on theology and I have no doubt that many other posters are better informed than I. I have, however, claimed to understand some basic theological principles, a claim which I am now defending.
Samprimary, I think that there are many causes, the two most major being a fear of “the other” and being viewed as an impudent upstart.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Hatrack is not a formal writing society, and your posts, Pel, need not be exerpts from a MLA essay. If you want fit in more, loosen up. If you don't, then continue your strait-jacketed prose, and whine about it repeatedly.
Pel, you write so stiffly your prose creaks and thumps painfully across the monitors of your beloved Hatrack. Your run-on sentences and iterative comma splices are just sad, because you could develop some skill in writing if you weren't so insistant about demonstrating your erudition through loooong sentence structures. The most important part of writing is consideration of your target audience. Us, in this case, and we are not amused.
One last example: "rôles"? Are you friggin' serious? The circumflex is not needed in English, which is the language you're writing in. I quote google (hardly the authority on English, yet it draws from many dictionaries):"No definitions of rôles were found in English." The ONLY reason you included that circumflex was to appear learned. You failed, and instead looked pompous.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Morbo, that's "learnèd."
Philistine.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
So why the reference to Augustine in the first place?
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
His writing is definitely not excerpted from MLA essays. They tend to have focus, coherence, and strong arguments.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's only two weeks away.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
It's only two weeks away.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Morbo, that's "learnèd." Philistine.
I thought of that at the last minute, but was afraid of appearing pompous. A fear you overcame long ago, Dag. Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Samprimary, I think that there are many causes, the two most major being a fear of “the other” and being viewed as an impudent upstart.
Pel, the main reason most of us come the Hatrack is to find "the other" -- to be exposed to viewpoints we don't encounter often enough in our day to day lives. At its best, this forum is a delightful conglomeration of opinions and thoughts from around the globe. And impudent upstarts are welcomed, they keep things interesting. Try again.
Posted by Bokonon (Member # 480) on :
So you ARE saying people criticized your ideas/style first? Since I haven't seen much change or humility from you, I can only assume you turned a deaf ear to it, whether by outright dismissal, or simply ignoring it. So you are saying that the bulk of your critics are correct when they say you are having a one-way conversation here; you speak, we listen.
Or to put in a way you may find more suitable: You cast pearls before swine, and just like those multitudes of monkeys furiously punching, should the hogs happen to make a noise approximating language, it is to be dismissed as a lucky break. Or, if you prefer to keep with the zoological metaphors, that every dog, in fact, has its 24-hour period.
-Bok
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo:
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Morbo, that's "learnèd." Philistine.
I thought of that at the last minute, but was afraid of appearing pompous. A fear you overcame long ago, Dag.
I eschew pomposity and thus experience no phobic tendencies, pomposity-wise.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
"I eschew pomposity and thus experience no phobic tendencies, pomposity-wise." A pleonasmic anti-tautology. Touche.
Posted by narrativium (Member # 3230) on :
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: His writing is definitely not excerpted from MLA essays. They tend to have focus, coherence, and strong arguments.
Not to mention proper sentence structure.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
quote: I must point out that I have never said anything about any other user which even begins to approach the level of disdain
I think you need to understand the difference between constructive criticism and disdain.
quote: I have asked, and shall continue to ask, or rather, demand, the respect due to a human being.
Constructive criticism, which you have abundantly received, is one of the higher forms of respect.
I too bow out. It is not worth it to me. You can't force maturity. The good advice has been written. Pel must be (and is) free to discover that on his own.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: and yet I am to be assumed as ignorant for no other reason than that you dislike me. There are many whom I dislike but whose education and intelligence, even, on occasion, genius, I acknowledge. I have never asked to "be worshiped." I have asked, and shall continue to ask, or rather, demand, the respect due to a human being. I accord a respect to all humanity, regardless of age, ethnicity, religion etc. that has seldom been accorded me.
Are you on drugs boy?
We treat you like you're ignorant because YOU SOUND IGNORANT MOST OF THE TIME!!!!!! GAHH!!!!!!
You couldn't give an ounce of respect or devote one SECOND of your time to contributing to a single discussion about anyone else here, and we've all given you something like 5 threads that were ALL ABOUT YOU. You pompous little napoleon complex. Dear God. I am finished with you.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Pel, I don't assume you are ignorant, nor do I dislike you. From your Hatrack/wikipedia profile, you seem like a great kid that I might like to get to know. You just have toweringly pompous writing style that begs to be criticised and parodied, and a lack of humility.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
I ask you, the royal "you," if I could have asked for a better post then Orincoro's entry below my response?
I don't think so! Of course being accused of not respecting or liking someone after spending time to read, evaluate, and criticize their work would make me angry too.
Having someone have so little respect as to respond in kind to my attempts at dialogue could certainly repeatedly press my agitation button if I didn't walk away.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Samprimary, I think that there are many causes, the two most major being a fear of “the other” and being viewed as an impudent upstart.
The "fear of the other" part is completely incorrect, and borders on persecution complex.
Really, there's two major parts, and I'm dead serious about these.
The writing. You are not a good writer, nor an effective communicator, and there's many problematic themes in your use of language.
Your use of language -- Pelegese, we'll call it -- has two primary features:
-It's overly esoteric, pompous, and circumlocutious. -It's mired in wobbly, confusing grammar and terrible syntax.
It is terrible. It does not transmit well. It does not grok. It is inherently difficult to read. It features the first case of systemically pointless circumflex that I have personally witnessed. It comes off, unfailingly, as pretentious verbal posturing. It will always -- always -- put people off.
The 'tude. This part's been discussed at length. In utter simplicity, it's that your own attitude is causing these issues. Fault rests with thyself, yadda yadda. I won't hash you on it.
Hatrack, as a community, is about as nice as you will ever have it ever ever on the interwebs, for the purpose of the things you try to discuss. It's got a (mostly) classy and educated userbase. Subjects are discussed at length. There's a high signal to noise ratio. It's a pretty learned environment. It has slow discussion atrophy, and things stay on topic for an abnormally long time. There are no significant problems with self-referentially elite structures (oldbies, royals, d00dz with high postcount, etc).
And even here, you are wearing people down to a position of "shut up and go away." Elsewhere, given the same behavior, it would have happened faster and meaner. If you continue to post like you post and act like you act, it'll always end up that way. You come off as being stuffy and obnoxious. You probably are. I can't possibly say it in a nice way, but it's really seriously true, and the inevitable effects of this mien are going to be fairly consistent.
Those are my positions, anyway, and they sure don't stem from any mob-mentality or elitist judgement. It has nothing to do with you being from Texas, it has nothing to do with however many classes I think you have taken or not taken, it has nothing to do with how 'fresh' I think you are as a 'dude' in the 'crew.' It's all really just my independent analysis based on reading your posts and interactions.
It's also not so much a value judgement as it is an assessment. If you don't believe me, that's fine. It's just my prediction.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
quote: Your use of language -- Pelegese, we'll call it -- has two primary features:
-It's overly esoteric, pompous, and circumlocutious. -It's mired in wobbly, confusing grammar and terrible syntax.
Pelegese is also laughably shibbolithic.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
MAN!!! I read this and get irritated and tell myself I'm not going back and then all of a sudden there's a little yellow folder next to it and I am drawn by some (what must be) evil force to read. And then I reread posts I've read already. And my opinion doesn't change.
Pelegius - seriously, man, you need to chill out. Have you ever tried to post when you didn't think about it so hard? Or re-read and edit more than once? Cut yourself some slack. So you're smart - as someone pointed out, we all are. Obviously if you're on a college course level when you’re 15-16 you've got a brain in your head that's working at least on par with the rest of society. How are your social skills? Does your way of writing echo your way of speaking? I'm just wondering.
Like I said, maybe just chill out a little and stop worrying about your next post being the one that everyone reads and LOVES you for. Just be yourself a little more - and if you are being yourself, think about what Hatrack is really doing for you. Maybe there's a more elitist forum out there that would appreciate your writing style more.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Whereas Morboese is folksy yet intellectually stimulating, populist yet elitist, and (of course), accessable.
No wonder I'm so beloved here. And, uh, humble.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
Lem-ese sounds like a race and not a way of speaking. But if it where a language type, it would certainly have more conjunctions starting sentences, like but, however, as, because, and and or. Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
That must be the language I speak!
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Pel, it's not easy being a bright but young person. I'll grant you that. There are just some things that no matter how much time you've spent thinking about them, or reading about them, you are going to look to people older than you as if you lack perspective on the issue. We may make false assumptions about your level of experience in life, for example.
Feel free to correct us if we do that. Really. Nobody's perfect and assuming something about another person on a web-board is kind of an occupational hazard.
May I ask how you would like to be treated? You mention "fear of the other" as a problem we have in relating to you. Yet, I sense that you don't want to be treated like everyone else. That's just an example. It got me thinking, though, that I don't really know how you wish to be treated.
I know how I wish all new members to act, in rather broad strokes. You don't act the way I would hope, but you also aren't nasty or mean. I suspect that part of the reason people keep posting in your threads is that you show such great potential as a possible member of this community.
Seriously, if you were mean or obviously ill-educated, or just plain aggressively stupid, people would've given up on you earlier and in greater numbers.
This is my last post to you for awhile. I fear that my friendly advice and concern is being lost in the background and you are feeling far to put upon to really take it in any but a negative spirit. I understand. Been there, done that.
But I would be interested in you giving some details as to how you wish to be treated. Since this is my last post to you for awhile, I'll add my obvious follow-up now. That is another question:
Is there anything that you can change in your posting henceforth that would encourage others to treat you the way you wish to be treated?
bye.
Good luck.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
I beg that even those who have sworn forever to ignore me read this post in its entirety, even if it is their last.
There is no fear of the other, this has been said so many times that I fear it is becoming a creed which all Hatrackers must sign daily. And yet, the primary complaint against me, which has dominated every thread I have created in the past week, much to my dismay and horror, is that I write differently, that my writing is indicative of the other, even that I placed a circumflex in a strange manner.
I believe in a vibrant Hatrack with many styles of writing, as many as there are posters.
The second complaint about me, which would be valid if only it were true, is that I start many threads about myself. I confess to having started two that fit this description, both of which I would delete if I thought it would undo the damage. However, neither of my threads about youth in society were intended to be about me, although I used examples from my life in both. My thread about immigration should never even have brought about discussion of me, and yet that became the sole topic.
I apologize for what mistakes I have made, although I hold still that the reactions far outweighed the grievances, however real.
I realize that it is now perhaps to late for me, and that, in the eyes of many here, I have been damned. I shall, however, remain here, whatever the opposition and I shall continue to post, even if only the newest members read what I say, even, indeed, if I am left whispering to the wind I shall remain, on the off chance that the wind may blow some of my words to the ears of those who will not consciously listen.
Hatrack brings me joy no longer, but I cannot abandon it for that reason, and thus I remain, rather in Purgatory, striving towards the goal of salvation, or in Limbo, reaching for an unreachable star.
SAALAM.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
Those are comparatively readable paragraphs of entirely reasonable length. Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Have you been listening to anyone? It's not too late for you. Everyone wants you to become a valued member of the community, and thinks you can, or would not have bothered giving you advice.
The problem isn't that you write differently, it's that many of your posts take too long to wade through because they don't make any sense. This last post was straight forward and easy to read, if heavy on the melodrama. Take it easy on creating new threads for awhile, talk WITH people instead of AT people, and you'll be fine.
Now, this is the last post I'm going to make about your writing style. If you keep talking about how you're persecuted, I'll ignore you, too. But I would be more than happy to carry on a conversation with you in any of the other threads available. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Yup. Much better. Keep at it. Most of us think that you are redeemable. And worth the effort.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:And yet, the primary complaint against me, which has dominated every thread I have created in the past week, much to my dismay and horror, is that I write differently...
No. The primary complaint against you, as I understand it, is that you're a bit of a stubborn, self-centered prat. That hardly makes you unique.
Exhibit A:
quote:I realize that it is now perhaps to late for me, and that, in the eyes of many here, I have been damned. I shall, however, remain here, whatever the opposition and I shall continue to post, even if only the newest members read what I say, even, indeed, if I am left whispering to the wind I shall remain, on the off chance that the wind may blow some of my words to the ears of those who will not consciously listen.
Can you imagine how horrible it would have been for Tom Joad if he'd busted into some camp and nobody had been beating anybody else, and no one particularly cared whether he was there or not?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Pel: Its moderately ironic that with this post you follow more closely the guidelines that so many have asked you to follow when posting. Your post was not difficult to understand, and the ideas (although in my opinion, towards the end boarder on melodramatic) are presented effectively.
I sincerely hope you will cease to see yourself as victim within this community and start to view yourself as an equal, open to: criticisms, jokes, and praise.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
quote: Hatrack brings me joy no longer, but I cannot abandon it for that reason, and thus I remain, rather in Purgatory, striving towards the goal of salvation, or in Limbo, reaching for an unreachable star.
When "Hatrack: The Movie!" comes out, I vote Pel get played by William Shattner.
Pix
Posted by ssasse (Member # 9516) on :
Thanks for the clearer post, Peleguius. I'll keep reading. *smile
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
BlackBlade nailed what I was just thinking and getting ready to post.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: When "Hatrack: The Movie!" comes out, I vote Pel get played by William Shattner.
Oh oh oh! I want Julia Ormond to play me.
Posted by ssasse (Member # 9516) on :
quote:Originally posted by lem: BlackBlade nailed what I was just thinking and getting ready to post.
*grin
The Pixiest just nailed mine, so I was content on that score.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I've been told I look like Beck, so he can play me.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
You're tearing me apart! Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
Jenine Garaffalo can play me. Partly because she looks a little like me (only cuter), Partly because I want to hear her say things I know she would violently disagree with, but mostly because I want to see her in Pixie Wings.
Pix
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
I'm pretty sure I'd be played by John Goodman.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Alyson Hannigan or Melissa Joan Hart.
-pH
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
I actualy nominate Rollo Weeks, who looks much more like me than William Shattner.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Your not THAT funny, Tom. Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:And yet, the primary complaint against me, which has dominated every thread I have created in the past week, much to my dismay and horror, is that I write differently, that my writing is indicative of the other, even that I placed a circumflex in a strange manner.
Still haven't got it.
If all different usage of the English language was equally readable, you'd have a point worth working on. However it doesn't even remotely work this way. The idea that "oh, you guys are just ganging up on me because my writing style is different" is as bunk as it would be if you were writing in leetspeak or pig latin.
e.g., It's not that your writing is "indicative of the other," it's that your writing is "so bad that people don't know what the hell you are talking about."
Plus, this seems to be a peripheral issue. People are more concerned, apparently, with my point #2, involving stuffiness and obnoxiousness.
In fact, it's starting to mute into a point #3: Your dramatics are so overblown and ridiculous that it's fairly comical. You can't even post without managing to sound like a caricature of an obsessive dramatic.
Like with this:
quote:I realize that it is now perhaps to late for me, and that, in the eyes of many here, I have been damned. I shall, however, remain here, whatever the opposition and I shall continue to post, even if only the newest members read what I say, even, indeed, if I am left whispering to the wind I shall remain, on the off chance that the wind may blow some of my words to the ears of those who will not consciously listen.
Even when ignoring the terrible sentence structure, it's still ridiculous. Yea, woe, I be damned, woe, resolute I stand in my ignominy to hope that my brilliant views might be seen by people who aren't yet nauseated by my posts, such is my selfless generosity to my unkind public. Woe, woe.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
I think it would be presumptuous of me to claim a monopoly on obnoxiousness, Samprimary.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
To be honest if I was told to act like myself in a scene you would probably get some slight variations every time the scene was run.
I think at 24 year old Johnny Depp would do a good job being me. Not that I look like him in any particular way, but I think he could adapt to capture my personality.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: I think it would be presumptuous of me to claim a monopoly on obnoxiousness, Samprimary.
*Blammo!*
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:I think it would be presumptuous of me to claim a monopoly on obnoxiousness, Samprimary.
Then it's probably a good thing that I've never stated anything to the effect that you should!
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
After all, you are reaching levels of obnoxiousness I could never hope to achieve.
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: And yet, the primary complaint against me, which has dominated every thread I have created in the past week, much to my dismay and horror, is that I write differently, that my writing is indicative of the other, even that I placed a circumflex in a strange manner.
I believe in a vibrant Hatrack with many styles of writing, as many as there are posters.
The circumflex was there, IMO, because of a consciously pretentious and pompous style. This is not strange, but all too common in young, intelligent writers.I chose to comment on it because it seems emblematic of your style problems. AFAIK, it is not in commom usage in modern English.
I also believe in a lively Hatrack with many styles of writing. And I'll criticise/parody some of those styles. That's a small but significant part of the Hatrack Experience™.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: After all, you are reaching levels of obnoxiousness I could never hope to achieve.
Wrong again.
He is just doing it for better reasons. With fewer words.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:After all, you are reaching levels of obnoxiousness I could never hope to achieve.
Then hey, don't worry about me or anything I've said. I absolutely think you've got a persecution thing going on. I actually don't think you can read this situation at all. If my trying to point this out is nothing but sheer obnoxiousness to you, then, there you go. Forget about me. You are absolutely welcome to continue acting exactly the way you act.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
From now on, I'm only going to read the Pelegious posts which sound like a soliloquy. As long as there's damnation and purgatory, and it sounds like an angsty Jr. High goth kid trying out for drama class, you've got my ear.
Heck, you've got my bow!
P.S. Gene Wilder can play me.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote:My professor studied with Charles E. Curran
The Who-now?
Well, my professors studied with, with, Einstein! and Charles Dickens and Aristotle.
We are the only university with a time-travel device.
Posted by Demonstrocity (Member # 9579) on :
I was planning on holding off posting for certain significant-post-count reasons, but this is enough for me to re-register.
Pelegius, what Sam (and really, almost everyone in this damn thread) is doing amounts to surgery; it's sharp, it's direct, it hurts, and you need it if you hope to survive, here or in the real world.
People before me have summarized what I want to say at least as well as I can, so I'm just going to ask questions that I can't recall you answering.
1) Do you talk like this in real life?
2) In your real life, is your worth as a human being determined by how well educated you are, how well educated your teachers were, what academic credentials you have, etc.?
3) Do you judge whether other people are worthy of talking to based on the aforementioned criteria?
It's true that a lot of people here either dislike you or find you hard to swallow because of the way you present yourself here, but rather than wallowing in the misery and attempting to justify yourself, why not just try thinking about what people have said? When opinion is this universal, it generally means something.
To quote Asimov (who, admittedly, isn't the best of writers, but bear with me):
quote:The robot said, "I have been trying, friend Julius, to understand some remarks Elijah made to me earlier. Perhaps I am beginning to, for it suddenly seems to me that the destruction of what should not be, that is, the destruction of what you people call evil, is less just and desirable than the conversion of this evil into what you call good."
He hesitated, then, almost as though he were surprised at his own words, he said, "Go, and sin no more!"
Posted by Gwen (Member # 9551) on :
quote:In fact, it's starting to mute into a point #3: Your dramatics are so overblown and ridiculous that it's fairly comical. You can't even post without managing to sound like a caricature of an obsessive dramatic.
Like with this:
quote:I realize that it is now perhaps to late for me, and that, in the eyes of many here, I have been damned. I shall, however, remain here, whatever the opposition and I shall continue to post, even if only the newest members read what I say, even, indeed, if I am left whispering to the wind I shall remain, on the off chance that the wind may blow some of my words to the ears of those who will not consciously listen.
Even when ignoring the terrible sentence structure, it's still ridiculous. Yea, woe, I be damned, woe, resolute I stand in my ignominy to hope that my brilliant views might be seen by people who aren't yet nauseated by my posts, such is my selfless generosity to my unkind public. Woe, woe.
But you have to admit that it's hilarious.
quote:Well, my professors studied with, with, Einstein! and Charles Dickens and Aristotle.
We are the only university with a time-travel device.
St. Cedd's?
Posted by Destineer (Member # 821) on :
Am I alone in finding this whole dialogue completely pointless, and having little sympathy for either Pelegius or his critics?
Pelegius, why don't you just return to the serious threads and make yourself heard? If people respond with insults to your writing style, demand that they address your arguments and if they don't, point out that they're conceding the real issue to you.
That said, I know you're an admirer of the analytic tradition in philosophy. (Glad to have another one on the board, btw.) Why not look again (or for the first time, if you haven't read it) at Naming and Necessity. See how clear Kripke is, how he avoids flowery locutions and how it improves his ability to get his point across. The great philosophers of our time try to write in plain language. Why not emulate them?
And to the rest of Hatrack: I've said my piece about Pelegius's writing, phrased as a suggestion and not an insult, and I see no need to mention it ever again. I can't understand why you all don't adopt the same attitude.
Why be mean about it?
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
My first thought to play me was Michael Wincott, but he's looking a bit old these days. Perhaps Crispin Glover with a wig?
--Enigmatic
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Destineer - I don't think everyone's being mean about it.
And I have no idea who'd play me... Actually - can I play myself??
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
I would assume Jim Belushi for me as people are constantly telling me I look like him (which I assume is a pleasant way of saying "overweight and balding").
And people who continue to say "hatrack, you're so MEAN" are welcome to find other fora, as far as I'm concerned. Hatrack is an enormously kind place as far as net stuff goes. In fact, I'm of the opinion a large portion of the problem with hatrack is that the main of the population here is entirely too nice and too tolerant of people who play the martyr card. Largely because of this, hypersensitive nonsense like (and often worse than) this thread has a tendency to crop up from time to time.
There were times when people would kill each other over insults. Modern day gang members still do. Part of being an adult is being able to hear "you suck", both when warranted and not, and get on with your life. Before I sound too high and mighty about this, I'll freely admit that I only started learning to in the last couple of years, myself.
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
Pel, I was thinking about this thread today, and about Hatrack in general. I'm actually a great deal like you. I'm 17 (turning 18 on Wednesday! woohoo!). I have a great love for classical stuff. I even wax eloquent like you sometimes, though I will say not nearly to the same extent as you, at least not in writing. Also, (and I'm assuming a bit about you here, but oh well), I'm used to being one of the smartest, most well-read, most intellectual, most eloquent people in the room. And therein lies the beauty of Hatrack, at least for me. They make me feel stupid . And I know, that's an extreme way of putting it, and not strictly true. The people on here, they are very smart (most of them), and most of them are very well thought out, and articulate. Much more so than me. They humble me. This is, for me, the safest place for me to go where I am not looked at as someone smart. I come here and people aren't suprised when I don't know something or when I have nothing to say. It's wonderful. There are no expectations on me.
I was going to say something else, but I'll leave it at that.
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
Well put.
Posted by ssasse (Member # 9516) on :
I call dibs on Dame Judi Dench! And there must be a headdress.
----
Edited to add: Picture of me. A little frown, some squint of the eye -- yeah, she could do it. Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
(Pelegius, I didn't want to derail it, but your three posts in the "maternal feelings" thread were much better. They sounded more "real".)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Camryn Manheim for me. But she'll have to lose the extra earrings.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Jon Stewart could do me justice. Even though he doesn't look a thing like me.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Kathy Bates, younger and sassier, for me. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: I beg that even those who have sworn forever to ignore me read this post in its entirety, even if it is their last.
SAALAM.
I still didn't make past the first paragraph. But I am weak. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
I haven't sworn to ignore him completely, but I probably will. Or, maybe, you know, skim his posts until my eyes glaze over and then give up. Which essentially amounts to the same thing.
Eh, whatever. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius:
There is no fear of the other, this has been said so many times that I fear it is becoming a creed which all Hatrackers must sign daily. And yet, the primary complaint against me, which has dominated every thread I have created in the past week, much to my dismay and horror, is that I write differently, that my writing is indicative of the other, even that I placed a circumflex in a strange manner.
I did read this paragraph. So I MUST respond. I cannot tear myself from this thing.
If you REALLY think this is the main complaint against you, then you are just not qualified to dress yourself. The complaints have been myriad and confusing, yes, but I think the grievous complaint, the real stinker, is not how you write.
We can HELP you write well. I can tell you what is wrong with your writing and you can work on it; you can learn. This is not so much a tragic flaw as a constant annoyance to everyone, this innability of yours to be clear in your writing. This is the clearest you've been, and I like that. See? Things can get better for you.
These are the complaints as I see them in no particular order:
1. Your tone. The first thing people notice after the writing style, is the tone you use, which is highly effected. Aristotle wrote (and I believe him) that people naturally become aware of falseness in speach; that it becomes self-evident over time. It doesn't take very long for your tone to start grating on the reader.
2. Your ideas. This is the BIG ONE. Though hinting at some things which are essentiall discoveries for everyone in their own time, your ideas most often lack clarity, weight, precision, or import. You merely declare things and you believe that if you couch them properly, they will SOUND correct. This goes to your tone, but you forget that you must be willing and able to think about things critically and show your thought process. Go back and read some Platonic dialogues, and marvel at the simplicity of them, the clarity and the progression. Plato makes it look so simple.
Horace is oft-quoted saying that "Poetry [apply this to all the arts], must instruct and delight." Your prose make people wretch, your ideas make people do a :facepalm: in embarassment on your behalf. While I don't mean to embarrass you yet further, you must be made aware of how foolish you look to me at least, and I surmise, to others as well.
3. Your presentation. You consistently offer, out of the blue, a poorly polished thought or idea which is clouded in a bunch of quotations no one ever heard before, and which are made to seem important, but may not be. Regardless of their import, they are far too broad to be meaningfully applied to the scant contribution you usually try to make. Your tone is involved in this too, because you treat your pithy thoughts with such weight. When I post pithy thoughts, I write them in a pithy post, so that those who are not interested in general pithosity may avoid them.
4. Your style. This I have handled a little above. Your style is effected and ridiculous, and you don't have the gravitas or the understanding to back it up. It is out of place, unintelligable, and just generally embarrassing.
5. Your attitude. Also going to tone and style. Every conversation begins with your contribution, which as I have repeatedly said, is ussually a manipulation into a discussion about YOU. If you aren't manipulating things this way, then you are naturally the most selfish most self-centered person I have ever heard of. You constantly whine and complain, and you mock everyone else for anything and everything we do wrong, but you don't dane to accept the slightest blame for a bad idea or an ill-planned remark.
These items are all part of the same general cloud that surrounds you here. You are a charicature of a debater, and your essays frankly read like attempts at comedy. I see myself beginning to get vindictive, so I must force myself to stop for now. Please take this to heart if you can, and think over these things instead of inferring some jealousy or ideology which I have against you.
Any Hatracker that knows me knows that I too feel strongly about things, and can go overboard, make mistakes, hurt feelings, as we all can sometimes. But I think that also most will say that I have the ability to recieve a little perspective and think things through to the other side of the equation. My responses are mostly in view of what needs to be adressed, and there is progress in the discussions (fanfic not-withstanding, we all really felt strongly about that one). There is no progression in your threads, you don't seem to want to learn or teach anything in your discourse, and that frankly sucks.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
quote:
P.S. Gene Wilder can play me.
Is he still alive, even?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I call Tom Hanks.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Really? He got so old-looking all of a sudden.
(Ok, that came out wrong. Translation: Ic, you look way better than he currently does!)
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Giovana Ribisi, but he would have to wear lifts and bulk up for the role.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Rivka: Hehe. I don't think he looks like me. I think he would portray me well.
[ July 18, 2006, 11:22 AM: Message edited by: Icarus ]
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
I have absolutely no idea who would play me.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Slappy the Squirrel Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Hehe. I don't think he looks like me. I think he would portray me well.
I meant for me... Self centered anyone?
I love QUIZNOS SUBS!!! That I can buy with coupons... and stuff... La la la
Posted by Demonstrocity (Member # 9579) on :
quote: Any Hatracker that knows me knows that I too feel strongly about things, and can go overboard, make mistakes, hurt feelings, as we all can sometimes. But I think that also most will say that I have the ability to recieve a little perspective and think things through to the other side of the equation. My responses are mostly in view of what needs to be adressed, and there is progress in the discussions (fanfic not-withstanding, we all really felt strongly about that one). There is no progression in your threads, you don't seem to want to learn or teach anything in your discourse, and that frankly sucks.
This is much to your credit; you've definitely evolved into a much more tolerable human being in your duration here.
Pel, take notes. I'm not kidding.
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
I want Summer Glau to play me!
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
I'm sorry, but that name always sounds like a mood disorder to me.
"While everyone else enjoyed the vacation, Sydney always felt vaguely stressed out. Maybe it was the lack of structure, or the heat, or maybe just that she felt more challenged during the school year, but whatever the cause she definitely suffered from summer glau."
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
I'm with ya, KarlEd.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
I've been pretty busy since I posted last. Did we have our Greatest Moment while I was away, or is it still before us?
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
We had it...It turned out the be the "Al Capone's vault" of greatest moments.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shigosei: I want Summer Glau to play me!
That seems like a natural choice for you, Shigosei.
I have no idea who would play me. Could I just vote for "not Tom Hanks"? 'Cause we don't look anything a like, and he's got that whole manic freaky thing going on.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: We had it...It turned out the be the "Al Capone's vault" of greatest moments.
Bu...but...I thought it was our Rendezvous with Destiny!
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
People can change. I didn't much care for Orincoro when he first arrived here. I thought he already had his mind made up on every issue, including those where he had little knowledge on which to base his opinions. A couple months ago, however, he and I had an incredibly constructive conversation which completely changed my opinion.
When I started at Hatrack my freshman year in college, I made 5 or 6 disastrous mistakes in the first few months of participation. If people still remember them, they no longer bring them into the conversation. I hope that is because I have grown up in the last 4 years. Take the advice people give you, keep trying, and you will find yourself thriving here in no time.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I think Paul Giamatti would make an excellent Noemon.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"The complaints have been myriad and confusing, yes, but I think the grievous complaint, the real stinker, is not how you write." You then go on to list a long series of complaints about how I write.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
*snicker* I can't help it; I keep getting sucked in!
Now how you write. What you sound like when you write. There's a difference between how you write - your grammar and word choice - and the tone you use, your inability to accept any suggestions, your attitude of always being right.
Of course, it may seem to you like a criticism of your writing, since the only interface we have with you is your writing; but it's really a criticism of your thinking and the way you deal with people who disagree with you. Also a criticism that you don't know your audience - we are neither imbeciles to be talked down to, nor your teachers to be impressed with long words, nor people who come here to read lengthy footnoted articles. We're fairly intelligent members of a discussion board, who like to discuss things, not be lectured at.
Yes, all those things come across in your writing, because that's how you interact with us; but as surely you can see by now, it's not a criticism of your writing so much as your thinking.
(What am I doing defending Orincoro?!)
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
"It's not a criticism of your writing so much as your thinking."
Which is, clearly, infinitely preferable.
" [we are not] people who come here to read lengthy footnoted articles." I can cite sources or I can not, but I most do one, although both attract criticism. Of course, no one has to read the footnotes.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Your posts in the "Axis of evil" thread were great.
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: "It's not a criticism of your writing so much as your thinking."
Which is, clearly, infinitely preferable.
Yes, well? Would you like to defend the utter arrogance of your thoughts, or are you going to crawl into a shell and say "I yam what I yam"?
quote:" [we are not] people who come here to read lengthy footnoted articles." I can cite sources or I can not, but I most do one, although both attract criticism. Of course, no one has to read the footnotes.
The objection was to lengthy articles, not the footnotes.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
<applause>
You did it! You managed to learn nothing from my post too! I am in awe.
... Well, not really in awe, as that would imply that I am so good at writing that everyone should be enlightened by my posts, and you managed to do the impossible. That would be arrogant.
Let me just slink away into oblivion, as obviously my points are as blunt as a pancake.
(Did you really think my objection was to you citing your sources? Boy, I've gotten bad at this.)
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
quote:Originally posted by Icarus: Hehe. I don't think he looks like me. I think he would portray me well.
I meant for me... Self centered anyone?
Actually, I was replying to rivka, so . . . right back atcha! Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Check out the "Axis of Evil" posts.
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
Actualy, I thin that Liam Aiken, who is younger and shorter than I am, and Rollo Weeks, who is older and still shorter, both look like me and could play me very well. Liam Aiken looks more like me, but Rollo Weeks is probably the better actor.
Pel, to be honest, nobody wants to hear about how one of your teachers once played chess with Plato, and therefore extra special knowledge has been passed to you.
That's been my biggest issue in this whole thread.
-pH
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: We had it...It turned out the be the "Al Capone's vault" of greatest moments.
LOL
Pel, if a movie was made about Hatrack, you probably wouldn't even be in it to be honest. That may not be true in the future, but as of right now I know that for a fact.
Whiny doesn't go over well on the big screen either, and we have enough ham on our plate with Icky and Bob. Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Man. That seems needlessly harsh, Kwea.
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
Especially since it's been established that William Shatner will play Pelegius. Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Woody Allen has been whiny in most of his films.
Also, who died and made you director, Kwea? Just for that, you're on the cutting room floor. *snip*
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
No, no, Shatner is needed to play Hatrack's own James Tiberious Kirk, of course.
I see James Woods as Pelegius--touchy, scenery-chewing, and able to pull off the hammy lines without rolling his eyes.
Posted by Fyfe (Member # 937) on :
Although I think Pelegius' writing style is pompous (you make me giggle), and although I think this thread is attention-seeking, can I just say that I write the word "role" with the circumflex. (When I know how to do it, as is not the case here online.) I think it is pretty! But stupid Microsoft Word says DEATH TO THE CIRCUMFLEX and does an AutoCorrect every time I try to do this.
So I love your pretty circumflexes, Pelegius! Bring back the circumflexed (imagine a wee accent mark over the final E in that word!) "role"! And double superlatives like most unkindest!
(I am not pretentious. Just aesthetically pleased by pretty circumflexes.)
Jen
Edit: Having read most of this thread, it makes me a little concerned that Pel is really someone totally different than what he claims and he is sitting at home with his friends laughing his a$$ off at how a little pomposity can get people riled up. Pel, darling, are you having us on?
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I've been told once-upon-a-time I look a bit like Anne Hathaway and she's about my age. I'd be that pretend "geek" character (who inevitably suffers from a lack of not actually truly being geeky at all- does that bug anyone else?) she always plays at the beginning of films before she becomes ridiculously cool, confident and successful.
However, given the choice, I probably wouldn't want to be played by her. She's far too... floofy. I'm not that floofy.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
<removed due to lack of ongoing necessity>
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by JennaDean: Especially since it's been established that William Shatner will play Pelegius.
Christopher Walken. Only actor alive who could handle the lines required. All that alliteration.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
<What Dag Said>
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I will say that Pel's threads get a better class of Google ads at the bottom. Sort of raises the tone around here...
(or maybe they're suggestion that some here need writing lessons?)
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Wow. I never noticed that. True though, I suppose my threads generate alot of Sheetmusicplus adds, and ads for adult diapers...
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
You know, considered as prose, Pel's posts aren't that bad. Sheer bollocks for communicating meaning, and horribly self-dramatizing (then again, which of us wasn't guilty of this in our teenage years), but sort of pretty if you just sit back and let them flow.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Without bothering to actually understand them, sure.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by King of Men: sit back and let them flow.
Yes... this is reminiscient of his threads. Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: No, no, Shatner is needed to play Hatrack's own James Tiberious Kirk, of course.
<snicker> He'd have to shed some years. And get a tan.
--j_k
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think Scarlett Johannson or Cate Blanchett for me. In my daydreaming, anyway.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
I'd prefer Cate Blanchett for you, kat. Scarlett seems too airheady for how I perceive you, whereas Cate comes across as very intelligent while mysterious with lots of layers. Not that you're necessarily mysterious with lots of layers, but I could see her doing a good job with you. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I love Cate Blanchett - she sang Total Eclipse of the Heart a cappella in a movie once.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Huh. Didn't know that.
I just love her choice of movies. Or, well, the ones I've seen anyway. Let me see... Elizabeth. LotR (of course). A psychic in, um, The Gift. The Shipping News. Ooh, ooooh... An Ideal Husband. Really, I don't think I've ever not liked her in a role. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
She did it in Bandits, which movie also stars my shameful Hollywood crush, Billy Bob Thornton. I know he's skeezy (I used to get my hair cut by the makeup artist in charge of The Alamo) and not cute and usually plays the weirdo, but there's something magnetic about him, like Owen Meany.
Bandits is a great movie if you're ready to accept that world. It's not hard to accept, and it added to my wish that I had red hair.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
I have red hair. By choice, of course.
Oh, yeah, Bandits! I remember that one - a little quirky.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: I'd prefer Cate Blanchett for you, kat. Scarlett seems too airheady for how I perceive you, whereas Cate comes across as very intelligent while mysterious with lots of layers. Not that you're necessarily mysterious with lots of layers, but I could see her doing a good job with you.
Kate Blanchett would be good, but if I were casting someone to play kat it would definitely be Scarlett Johannson, as she looked in Lost in Translation. The way she looks in that film is frighteningly close to being exactly as I'd conceived of kat as looking before I'd actually seen a picture of her.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Would I be in the Hatrack movie? *sniffles*
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
If you have to ask, the answer is no.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: Woody Allen has been whiny in most of his films.
Also, who died and made you director, Kwea? Just for that, you're on the cutting room floor. *snip*
Morbo, when i said "My people will call your people." what I meant was "Go away, you are out!". Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: Man. That seems needlessly harsh, Kwea.
Since I would probaby be just a cameo myself I stand by what I said. He just hasn't made that much of an impact, you know.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Given my .. um, extremely limited interactions with the forum (mostly sark and one-liners), I guess I should be played by that guy who does Dr. Cox from Scrubs.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Damn! This really sucks.
WHY?!
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: No, no, Shatner is needed to play Hatrack's own James Tiberious Kirk, of course.
Huh. I thought Ben Affleck had that all sewn up.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Icky- be careful or I will cast a "latin sensation" to play your role melodramatically, going into the anals of bad movie-acting done by self-centered musicians.
It could be Iglesias, that would be rather sad. You don't want that, do you? You'll only get Antonio Banderes if you play nice... otherwise you get Emilio Estevez... and NO ONE wants that for you.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
quote:going into the anals of bad movie-acting
Going where now?
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Orincoro: [qb] Icky- be careful or I will cast a "latin sensation" to play your role melodramatically, going into the anals of bad movie-acting done by self-centered musicians.
It could be Iglesias, that would be rather sad. You don't want that, do you? You'll only get Antonio Banderes if you play nice... otherwise you get Emilio Estevez... and NO ONE wants that for you.
You cast anyone into Icky's anals and his wife will kill you.
Unless Icky does it first.
Ori.....if I am only a walk on, you won't even get to sweep the cutting room floor let alone cast anyone as anything. Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
I thought directors were SUPPOSED to be dangerously underqualified!!!
I have been misled.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
lol
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: Slappy the Squirrel
Careful, or I'll hit you with my umbrella.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Crap, two people beat me to the easy joke!
-o-
I see you made it home safely, Kwea! You missed out on some good chili!
[ July 20, 2006, 03:01 AM: Message edited by: Icarus ]
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Originally posted by imogen:
quote:Originally posted by quidscribis: Slappy the Squirrel
Careful, or I'll hit you with my umbrella.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I was working until 11. Oh well. I love chili, too. Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Sadly, Marlon Brando is deceased, and he could never grow a beard to save his life. I guess I will have to be played by Jack Nicholson. He's not really right for the part, but we need the box office.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'd like to call dibs on Tim Roth to play me.
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
I'd give a stirring rendition of Bob the Lawyer. The natural ease I'd give the part, as if I well and truly understood the character, would rocket me into stardom. Don't worry, I won't forget you when I'm on the top.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Well, Kwea, if you guys want to come over later tonight for dessert, drinks, and games, just give me a call. We're getting a bit cabin-feverish.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
*bump*
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Joe....get on AIM, will ya? Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Sadly, Marlon Brando is deceased, and he could never grow a beard to save his life. I guess I will have to be played by Jack Nicholson. He's not really right for the part, but we need the box office.
I was thinking more of Jack Black to play you, Bob. Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
quote:I'd give a stirring rendition of Bob the Lawyer. The natural ease I'd give the part, as if I well and truly understood the character, would rocket me into stardom. Don't worry, I won't forget you when I'm on the top.
quote:Well, I'll bet you I'm gonna be a big star might win an Oscar you can never tell the movies gonna make me a big star 'Cause I can play the part so well
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Jack Black wouldn't be bad...Hmm...
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
Viggo Mortenson could do it. He'd have to gain a little weight, but we know he can do the stubbly beard and the hair to pull it off. Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Wow....love IS blind.
Good thing too, or I probably wouldn't be married myself. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: Wow....love IS blind.
Good thing too, or I probably wouldn't be married myself.
I hear ya. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Oh, and Naveen Andrews (Sayid from Lost) can play Fahim. I'd so drool... Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kwea:
I was thinking more of Jack Black to play you, Bob. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Jack Black is reserved for a bit part in the end as the older, wiser me. Besides, he and I have exactly the same voice. Exactly.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Orincoro, I guess you can have Jack Black.
I'll be busy giving Viggo some pointers.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Pointers? Or donuts? Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Or pointed donuts?
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Ori, all you have is a bit part, and that ends up on the cutting room floor.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
The circumflex is not needed in English, which is the language you're writing in. I quote google (hardly the authority on English, yet it draws from many dictionaries):"No definitions of rôles were found in English." The ONLY reason you included that circumflex was to appear learned. You failed, and instead looked pompous.
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)