posted
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?
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 9945 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 993 | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 1522 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
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 Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 1681 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 441 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 2926 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
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.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
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".
posted
You guys are all going to get sued by TSR (who Trademarked the term "Nazi" for their Indiana Jones game)
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
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
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.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"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.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"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.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
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...
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Stop insisting on and insinuating about and alluding to meaningful knowledge and rational argument capabilities and demonstrate them.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
