posted
Mr. Card must be busy these days with his last forum post being LAST SUMMER ('07).. Hopefully this means progress on the new book and even more hopefully more progress on the movie. I'm glad it's taking so long to get everything just right for the movie, but MAN I sometimes wish I could just teleport to the future when it's done and watch it.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess you haven't been around that long, but the love and support* being shown on the J.K. Rowling thread is typical of why he left. [*sarcasm]
He continues to pay for this site existing despite the chronic threads about what a curmudgeon he is, FYI.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I should note for the benefit of some newbies that pooka's engaging in speculation, here. We have no evidence that any of OSC's occasional absences from the site are related to the love and support* he expects from the forum. My own observation is that his activities here correlate more strongly to book tours than anything else.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's probably busy writing and having an active life. The fact is that it's hard not to be annoyed about that constant impolite name calling from some of his articles. If he's going around calling someone an "evil-witch" then he's going to get someone blasting him about it. I'm not saying it's right to attack him, but it really can't be helped. It's annoyed me for quite a few years.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wait? Did you just pull in argumentation from ANOTHER thread to this one? Why justify posts on a different thread here? Justify them where they belong, in context so as not to confuse.
Your point however, is understandable, you say a mean thing, you get ridiculed. A + B = C.
But that doesn't mean that THAT is why he left. The point is not that people disagree, it's that, it seems, those who disagree and start the threads of dissent tend to not have fully developed there argumentation, leaving little reason for OSC to respect it, and even less reason for him to post.
quote:Originally posted by Ish: Wait? Did you just pull in argumentation from ANOTHER thread to this one? Why justify posts on a different thread here? Justify them where they belong, in context so as not to confuse.
This is not a formal argument; it's a series of overlapping conversations.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:The point is not that people disagree, it's that, it seems, those who disagree and start the threads of dissent tend to not have fully developed there argumentation, leaving little reason for OSC to respect it, and even less reason for him to post.
In all honesty, I'm not sure that his demonstrated respect for a given argument must necessarily correspond to the thoroughness of its development. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps you are right, but I suppose I can only relay how I would feel in his situation, and I normally don't like to debate with people who can't do their research first.
But thats me.
quote: This is not a formal argument; it's a series of overlapping conversations.
This is not a series of overlapping conversations. It is a discussion, review and debate on views, ideas that thoughts. It is neccessary to keep points of interest where they belong (in the place where that specific discussion originated) so as not to meld all the "conversations" into one scattered topic. If in essence you want to turn this particular thread into a furthering of the J.K. thread, I would not agree with it, since there is a perfectly good thread for that, and the example did not further this discussion any.
Thus, even IF it was a series of overlapping conversations here, you would not want to turn this thread into a mirror of another.
Posts: 44 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's not just about the JKL article either. There's been several other articles of his that have crawled under my skin and annoyed me so much, simply because they were so... impolite and somewhat misinformed about the larger picture. I've all but given up reading them. Only to regret clicking on those links. Even the review ones aren't safe anymore.
I should read something less frustrationg. I'm going crazy enough as it is. How does a person GET a column anyway? I want one.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ish: This is not a series of overlapping conversations. It is a discussion, review and debate on views, ideas that thoughts. It is neccessary to keep points of interest where they belong (in the place where that specific discussion originated) so as not to meld all the "conversations" into one scattered topic.
*amused at the cute newbie*
They're so serious when they're fresh off the vine!
I'm sure ScottR has already told you this, but: Welcome to Hatrack. You're worng.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I normally don't like to debate with people who can't do their research first.
But thats me.
Based on what I've seen of you so far, I'm going to call you on this one. You've demonstrated an eagerness to debate pretty much anyone; you simply reserve the right to criticize them for not meeting your personal standards. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of OSC being all contentious and junk, has anyone been to a signing that devolved into an intense argument between OSC and a "fan"? This happened at the last Greensboro signing I attended. As much as I sometimes disagree with the old man's stance on gay marriage, Dubya, and other things that matter very little, I thought this was incredibly buttlike, buttish, buttian, and other butt things on the fan's part. I really don't think an OSC book signing needs to be interrupted so two old fogeys can have a random argument over WMDs in Iraq. I fault the fan. I don't go to signings for this.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Did you just pull in argumentation from ANOTHER thread to this one?
You're using that word incorrectly. Argumentation means the process of constructing arguments. It's what goes into making arguments, but it does not refer to the content of what is said.
I think the word you're looking for is "arguments".
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, I think you're not looking at what I was refering to you.
Synesthesia said "the fact is" and then provided what the fact was and an analysis on the fact in relation to the situation at hand.
Thus deconstructing a statement, thus an argument, therefore was providing argumentation or analysis and rebuttal, on a point.
Posts: 44 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So, if I'm reading you correctly, you are saying that you meant that Syn was bringing in a way of making arguments from another thread that shouldn't be done here. You weren't objecting to people to bringing in the matter from the other thread, but rather that you felt that the way they constructed arguments in that other thread didn't belong in this one.
I must be reading you wrong, because that doesn't seem to make a lick of sense.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by pooka: I guess you haven't been around that long, but the love and support* being shown on the J.K. Rowling thread is typical of why he left. [*sarcasm]
He continues to pay for this site existing despite the chronic threads about what a curmudgeon he is, FYI.
Which is to say, we DO know why he left. And he's a nice guy for continuing to pay for a place for creeps to rip on him. Either that, or he's a glutton for e-punishment.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: This is not a formal argument; it's a series of overlapping conversations.
This is not a series of overlapping conversations. It is a discussion, review and debate on views, ideas that thoughts.
I think that it's fairly likely that someone who's made almost twenty six thousand posts on this forum has a better grasp of the nature of discourse here than someone who has made thirty five.
quote:It is neccessary to keep points of interest where they belong (in the place where that specific discussion originated) so as not to meld all the "conversations" into one scattered topic. If in essence you want to turn this particular thread into a furthering of the J.K. thread, I would not agree with it, since there is a perfectly good thread for that, and the example did not further this discussion any.
As you become better acquainted with Hatrack, you'll discover that the type of thread drift that you say you would disagree with happens almost without fail. It's occasionally frustrating, especially if there was a particular topic that you were actively hoping to explore with everybody, but it's also resulted in a lot of interesting conversations over the years.
I can understand why that might bother you, but be forewarned that it happens, and that railing against it is approximately as effective as trying to stop the tides.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: This is not a formal argument; it's a series of overlapping conversations.
This is not a series of overlapping conversations. It is a discussion, review and debate on views, ideas that thoughts.
I think that it's fairly likely that someone who's made almost twenty six thousand posts on this forum has a better grasp of the nature of discourse here than someone who has made thirty five.
Or else I'm just really, REALLY wrong! Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
True, but I am usually pretty good at telling who's who based on the way they write, regardless of screen name. I don't think he's around here anymore. I could be wrong, but I am pretty certain that I'm correct.
Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You misunderstand. I don't think he's posting under another screenname, necessarily. I'm saying that as a registrant in June of 2006 -- which was the peak of his posting activity since 2001, when it sharply declined -- you might not have a good benchmark of what it looks like when OSC has "left." Posting less often than he posted in 2006 is not a reliable yardstick.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, it's the only yardstick I have, so I'm using it to define my own experiences here on Hatrack. Posts: 1006 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Getting poked on your own forums - one of the nasties of being a publicly popular figure. OSC himself doesn't seem to be exempt from the human (and very American) pass-time of harboring jealousy or ill will for others who make it big, and folks in general make a hobby of it.
But I hope he also reads the overwhelming respect posted on these forums. The fact that both are present are more a function of the "family" nature of discussions here than this being a place to hold academic debates.
Families always stir their love with spoons dipped in the spice of the day, and sometimes it can be a not-so-tasty end dish, and other days magic.
Posts: 49 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personally, I would take a long absence from OSC to be a good thing. I know with many writers they tend to be grabbed by their stories in such a way that it's hard enough to remember to eat, let alone post in a forum.
Just starting to write my stories down, instead of telling them to myself in my head, I've finally felt this pull. It's kind of like a snowball started at the top of a daily snowed upon mountain. Just like the flakes and the rolling, one idea leads to another and another and the excitement builds and next thing you know only a major disaster could stop it.
I'm quite sure we don't want him showing back up because of a disaster happening with his work. Then again, though, I'm just speculating. He may be able to walk away and come back to normal everyday life easily. Either way though, I'm just kinda glad I finally found my way here.
Posts: 115 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by GodSpoken: Getting poked on your own forums - one of the nasties of being a publicly popular figure. OSC himself doesn't seem to be exempt from the human (and very American) pass-time of harboring jealousy or ill will for others who make it big, and folks in general make a hobby of it.
I haven't observed that in any of the Uncle Orson columns. In fact, quite the opposite.
I should point out that, while some Americans are jealous of success, that's nothing compared to the people of Saskatchewan. Good news of someone's success is often greeted with "must be nice" in a sarcastic tone as if the person had done something wrong.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
True, but I am usually pretty good at telling who's who based on the way they write, regardless of screen name. I don't think he's around here anymore. I could be wrong, but I am pretty certain that I'm correct.
It was said that it shall be LT....and so it shall be LT...lol.
Now ya just gotta hope I can't remember how to spell Loo ten ent.....sorry....I gotta a military sense of humor. Posts: 115 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
