why the hell do we even argue?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49318
Printed Date: April 07 2025 at 03:33 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: why the hell do we even argue?
Posted By: stonebeard
Subject: why the hell do we even argue?
Date Posted: June 09 2008 at 23:43
after all, here on prog archvies, all are arguments are sanitized of anything interesting and end up just being shouting matches of people with very different tastes.
"DREAM THEATER IS BY FAR THE MOST TECHNICALLY INTERESTING BAND!!!"
"MAGMA MAGMA (luz) (inaudible) KOBAIA ISS DE HUNDIN MAGMA MAGMA!!!!"
what the f**k is the point?
we all know the forum is stale. maybe noobies don't know, but if you've been here for more than 6 months, you know how it is. go on 4chan (wait, I take that back) and compare the amount of tentacle porn interesting posts on there in an hour compared to what's on PA in a year.
PA is a bore. I'm tire of hearing the same awful arguments about sh*t that should not be even argued. Dream Theater vs. Henry Cow threads are not lively, they're a breeding place to pick on Dream Theater fans. there's no possibility for lulz because any offensiveness is preempted by mods or more likely by peoples' pre-posting subliminal apprehensions.
the only fun stuff is in the DNRTM forum. why is this? prog music is boring to argue about and nobody has anything worthwhile to say.

Discus.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
|
Replies:
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 03:11
"prog music is boring to argue about and nobody has anything worthwhile to say." Other that that being a little harsh, I kinda agree with Stoney.
-------------
|
Posted By: laplace
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 03:22
lol stonebeard only listens to music that has already been discussed to death lol lol lol luz
------------- FREEDOM OF SPEECH GO TO HELL
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 03:24
^Ur so mean!:P
-------------
|
Posted By: GoldenSpiral
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 08:46
WE ARGUE BECAUSE THE ALMIGHTY INTERWEB COMMANDS US TO.
If people were'nt constantly arguing about stupid things, the entire internet would collapse.
Aside from that, we just want to know that someone out there cares about the same things we do, even if they disagree.
That said, ZOMG THIS DISCUSSION IS SO NOT PROG AT ALL.
------------- http://www.myspace.com/altaic" rel="nofollow - http://www.myspace.com/altaic
ALTAIC
"Oceans Down You'll Lie"
coming soon
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 08:56
We argue because we can?
 LOLZ< I DNT KNPW! Stonie needs a break.
-------------
|
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 08:59
^^ I agree... I mean, what is the point of trying to argue with MikeEnregalia that giving a 9.2 rating for Ayreon's 01011001 and only 8.9 for Lateralus is fundamentally flawed, and therefore undermines his whole rating scheme???....
...I'd just have my posts sensored by the Admin team (again).... 
[edit]
No you wouldn't 
------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson
|
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:17
Majestic_Mayhem wrote:
We argue because we can?
 LOLZ< I DNT KNPW! Stonie needs a break.
|
hey MM, who's the gormless bint??
------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson
|
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:18
fandango wrote:
^^ I agree... I mean, what is the point of trying to argue with MikeEnregalia that giving a 9.2 rating for Ayreon's 01011001 and only 8.9 for Lateralus is fundamentally flawed, and therefore undermines his whole rating scheme???....
...I'd just have my posts sensored by the Admin team (again).... 
[edit]
No you wouldn't  |
------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:41
fandango wrote:
^^ I agree... I mean, what is the point of trying to argue with MikeEnregalia that giving a 9.2 rating for Ayreon's 01011001 and only 8.9 for Lateralus is fundamentally flawed, and therefore undermines his whole rating scheme???.... |
to each his own ... I prefer the Ayreon album, and although some people think that Lateralus is one of the greatest albums ever conceived - and I even agree to a certain extent - listening to it is not as rewarding for me.
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls
Listened to:
|
Posted By: Leningrad
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:53
We wouldn't have such senseless debates if Magma wasn't so obviously superior to every other band.
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:53
Chameleon wrote:
We wouldn't have such senseless debates if Magma Henry Cow wasn't so obviously superior to every other band. |
So true.
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 09:56
BTW, Stoney, I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I enjoy discussions of music I enjoy with like-minded people, because of this I tend to stick to appreciation threads and recommendation threads. Endless, mind-numbing polls and tedious arguments I can do without. I too am spending most of my time in General Discussions, and to be honest I've had some of my best conversations about prog there.
|
Posted By: The Pessimist
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 13:08
Arguments are boring full-stop IMHO. i don't like it personally. i'm good at it most of the time, but i still don't like it. discussion FTW.
also, at the end of the day (prog reference), nobody gives a sh*t who is the most technically impressive or the better musician, it's whether you enjoy it or not. PA should be a place to unite proggers and for us to share and relate to different tastes, maybe learn from them, let's be positive. 
------------- "Market value is irrelevant to intrinsic value."
Arnold Schoenberg
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 13:42
fandango wrote:
hey MM, who's the gormless bint??
|
Be careful calling her a gormless bint, she can blow you up real good, I tell you what.
http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/meet/meet_main.html - http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/meet/meet_main.html
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened...
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 14:17
I would like to know if there is ONE person here in PA that ever changed his mind about a band that he/she liked or hated because of comments by other forum members....
ONE.....
And no, I don't qualify. I think KAyo Dot's latest is a masterpiece but I still think the preceding album is utter garbage... I haven't changed my opinion...
So the question is, and I agree with Stonebeard here, what's the f**king point of saying "DT is better than your sh*t" or "Nobody has ever heard to this music therefore is good and better than your famous sh*t" or "He only listens to famous bands.. I don't therefore I know better" or "Millions like my band therefore is better than all your unknown sh*t"... What's the point?
There is a point: we're bored. And the forum helps us kill minutes in a day....
Unless you want to do something valuable like reading a great book or going with your girl/boyfriend or taking your child to the park or working your ass off or whatever has any more use than this, I guess this useless discussions in PA are still better than being glued to your TV or playing videogames... In a way, at least you're still INTERACTING with somebody... in a weird virtual way....
-------------
|
Posted By: mithrandir
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 14:38
this board definitely has some of the most inane topics Ive ever seen,
Whats the best rifff in Close to the Edge!?!?
Who wrote the best Song in July of 1973!!?!?!?
y'all 'zome crazy craka'z 'zometimez, 
|
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 14:43
mithrandir wrote:
this board definitely has some of the most inane topics Ive ever seen,
Whats the best rifff in Close to the Edge!?!?
Who wrote the best Song in July of 1973!!?!?!?
y'all 'zome crazy craka'z 'zometimez,  |
Indeed, it's certainly not the stuff of "Post pictures of yourself naked with weapons."
|
Posted By: TGM: Orb
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 14:51
The T wrote:
I would like to know if there is ONE person here in PA that ever changed his mind about a band that he/she liked or hated because of comments by other forum members....
ONE.....
|
Not a band per se, but I started not minding the lyrical content of Tales too much because of a clear and intelligent response to some attempted smartassery on my part.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 17:03
TGM: Orb wrote:
The T wrote:
I would like to know if there is ONE person here in PA that ever changed his mind about a band that he/she liked or hated because of comments by other forum members....
ONE.....
|
Not a band per se, but I started not minding the lyrical content of Tales too much because of a clear and intelligent response to some attempted smartassery on my part.
|
Well.. we don't change tastes... but yes, eventually we may learn things here... I learn to tolerate people that like different music... It's not a waste of time as I said...
-------------
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 17:12
WinterLight wrote:
mithrandir wrote:
this board definitely has some of the most inane topics Ive ever seen,
Whats the best rifff in Close to the Edge!?!?
Who wrote the best Song in July of 1973!!?!?!?
y'all 'zome crazy craka'z 'zometimez,  |
Indeed, it's certainly not the stuff of "Post pictures of yourself naked with weapons."
|
damnit.. I missed that thread...
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 17:16
good 
As for the rest of the thread. Yeah, I'm pretty sure the internet was made for petty arguments about things which people will never change their minds about but believe so wholly that they'll take on armies of (cyber) people to defend. The T is right though - has any post every changed anyone's mind about anything?
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 17:17
arguing and PA's... hmmm...
arguing taste is pointless.... and a waste of time... however all other forms can be fun as hell.
Remember as new member here... I got in an ELEVEN page argument with a member here about the release date of an album (care to take a guess who it was a hoot... didn't hurt I was right and the date was changed here on the site hahahha.
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 18:20
stonebeard wrote:
go on 4chan |
I suspected as much, /B/TARD! No, 4chan is much much worse than PA could ever be, and it makes me sad that you can even say that. 4chan is a goddamn hellhole, which is what they're going for, but they're still ruining the internet.
What's the point of talking about anything, then? It all comes down to talking about opinion and taste, pretty much. I agree that Dream Theater vs Symphony X polls are stupid, but there's more to it than that. I come here for music recommendations and to discuss music I like. People who come here for a fight about whoever are either trolling or really dumb. But we already knew that, didn't we?
Also, http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32554 - I was looking thorugh your past posts I found this. Funny, isn't it? ;-)
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
Posted By: KeleCableII
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 19:19
Hahaha, I remember that thread.
Anyway, it's just human nature to argue, I think. We feel like what we like is the best and want to try to argue for our case and to convert them to our side. Unfortunately, a lot of this argument does boil down to Dream Theater vs. Symphony X polls and does nothing for either side. However, there are a good amount of threads here on PA that are not like this and are actual debates with evidence backing each side's opinions.
Actually, it might not be in the threads where this occurs but I do often find myself reading reviews and getting that kind of feel. The forums here are just places to discuss these things.
I sometimes feel arguing is discouraged here on this forum but perhaps it's just because a lot of the arguments are "DREAM THEATER SUCKS" (usually more subtle than that) and aren't very intellectual. That's more of a fault of ourselves rather than the actual forums' fault. Every one of us is capable of writing arguments as to why we don't feel Dream Theater is that great of a band or why we think they are. It is possible to change people's minds and have thoughtful discussions that increase our understanding of prog as a whole; we just have to put in the effort.
For example, the Opeth - Watershed thread on the prog lounge is an example of what we DON'T need. That thread has the potential for an interesting and thoughtful discussion as to the progginess of Opeth (and of metal, in general), but it's basically fallen apart to people attacking each other for (not) liking the album. I'm actually interested in a debate of some kind as to the amount of prog in metal (because sometimes I feel like it's there, and other times I don't), but I feel it might be impossible if people don't make the effort to control their emotions and write up intelligent posts.
|
Posted By: mithrandir
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 20:45
WinterLight wrote:
mithrandir wrote:
this board definitely has some of the most inane topics Ive ever seen,
Whats the best rifff in Close to the Edge!?!?
Who wrote the best Song in July of 1973!!?!?!?
y'all 'zome crazy craka'z 'zometimez,  |
Indeed, it's certainly not the stuff of "Post pictures of yourself naked with weapons."
|
Ha! 
|
Posted By: heyitsthatguy
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 20:59
Henry Plainview wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
go on 4chan |
I suspected as much, /b/TARD! No, 4chan is much much worse than PA could ever be, and it makes me sad that you can even say that. 4chan is a goddamn hellhole, which is what they're going for, but they're still ruining the internet.
What's the point of talking about anything, then? It all comes down to talking about opinion and taste, pretty much. I agree that Dream Theater vs Symphony X polls are stupid, but there's more to it than that. I come here for music recommendations and to discuss music I like. People who come here for a fight about whoever are either trolling or really dumb. But we already knew that, didn't we?
Also, http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32554 - I was looking thorugh your past posts I found this. Funny, isn't it? ;-) |
fixed
and I love this place, and there are usually good interesting arguments, you just gotta look for them and if there aren't any then you make one or make fun of one
also they're not ruining the internet, they ARE the internet. The good, the bad, all of it
-------------
|
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 21:06
The T wrote:
TGM: Orb wrote:
The T wrote:
I would like to know if there is ONE person here in PA that ever changed his mind about a band that he/she liked or hated because of comments by other forum members....
ONE.....
| Not a band per se, but I started not minding the lyrical content of Tales too much because of a clear and intelligent response to some attempted smartassery on my part. |
Well.. we don't change tastes... but yes, eventually we may learn things here... I learn to tolerate people that like different music... It's not a waste of time as I said... |
So do I have to tolerate my friends calling MY(70's) music is THE BAD MUSIC and their having: verse-chorus-verse-chorus-tiny sh*tty solo that I can do it(even though not being a guitarist) and their all the same.
Of course they wouldn't be my friends if they were telling it seriously
|
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 21:09
micky wrote:
arguing and PA's... hmmm... arguing taste is pointless.... and a waste of time... however all other forms can be fun as hell.Remember as new member here... I got in an ELEVEN page argument with a member here about the release date of an album (care to take a guess who it was a hoot... didn't hurt I was right and the date was changed here on the site hahahha.
|
well how about mine: I was recently new and it was you(of an amount) that started bashing me to hell! h¿ On the CSNY to Prog Related.
Well guys, I've learnt my lesson. I didn't have to include CSNY it was just CSN, I'll make a new thread now!
|
Posted By: Man With Hat
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 22:29
Woo apathy to things.
I share the view for the most part, though perhaps more universally.
------------- Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 22:40
cacho wrote:
well how about mine: I was recently new and it was you(of an amount) that started bashing me to hell! |
I did my fair share. Can't join the fraternity unless you get the paddle. 
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 22:53
Henry Plainview wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
go on 4chan |
I suspected as much, /B/TARD! No, 4chan is much much worse than PA could ever be, and it makes me sad that you can even say that. 4chan is a goddamn hellhole, which is what they're going for, but they're still ruining the internet.
What's the point of talking about anything, then? It all comes down to talking about opinion and taste, pretty much. I agree that Dream Theater vs Symphony X polls are stupid, but there's more to it than that. I come here for music recommendations and to discuss music I like. People who come here for a fight about whoever are either trolling or really dumb. But we already knew that, didn't we?
Also, http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32554 - I was looking thorugh your past posts I found this. Funny, isn't it? ;-) |
/b/ is more f**ked up than not, but it's tons more interesting than PA....
and I have my fair share of useless and not-useless threads. that one was fun
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
|
Posted By: Avantgardehead
Date Posted: June 10 2008 at 23:41
From that poll awhile back, there are a bunch of youngsters here and youngsters love to argue on the Internet about things that really don't matter (like the asinine details of music -especially prog).
But yes, arguing is pointless. No one but myself has the power to change my views and opinions about music. I don't read reviews or pay any attention to lists because I know it will differ from what I perceive.
And that's something else, you can only talk about the 70's for so long before there's nothing of interest to discuss anymore. Modern prog? Pah. I don't even believe in modern prog, so prog discussion is pretty dismal. That's why I hang around here so that other things that interest me can be discussed.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Avantgardian
|
Posted By: KeleCableII
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 00:20
Avantgardehead wrote:
But yes, arguing is pointless. No one but myself has the power to change my views and opinions about music. I don't read reviews or pay any attention to lists because I know it will differ from what I perceive.
|
Really? I've read plenty of reviews that have caused me to look at a piece of music in a different way which usually causes me to appreciate it more. I'd like to be able to notice every little thing in a song by myself but that's unrealistic, I think. I would have a much much lower opinion of Scarsick (for example) if I hadn't read a couple reviews discussing the concept.
|
Posted By: Drew
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 00:27
We love you Stoney!

-------------
|
Posted By: soundsweird
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 01:55
Hey, thanks for recommending the "DNRTM"; I've been here for years and never even bothered going there!! Nothing interesting the first couple of pages, but the potential's there.
Stoney (can I call you Stoney?), you might want to head over to PE (Progressive Ears) for a visit. A lot of members of PA are members of PE as well. Yes, you'll find inane arguments going on there, too, but I'd have to say the intelligence level may be just a wee bit higher. And most folks there have a good command of the English language, which is a plus in my book. I visit both sites every day, and I'm not trying to denigrate PA in any way (it's a great site!). Just a suggestion...
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 02:17
soundsweird wrote:
Hey, thanks for recommending the "DNRTM"; I've been here for years and never even bothered going there!! Nothing interesting the first couple of pages, but the potential's there. |
soundsweird wrote:
Stoney (can I call you Stoney?), |
soundsweird wrote:
ou might want to head over to PE (Progressive Ears) for a visit. A lot of members of PA are members of PE as well. Yes, you'll find inane arguments going on there, too, but I'd have to say the intelligence level may be just a wee bit higher. And most folks there have a good command of the English language, which is a plus in my book. I visit both sites every day, and I'm not trying to denigrate PA in any way (it's a great site!). Just a suggestion... |
I might do that.  ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 02:50
Just wondering, if it's so boring here these days, how come people still turn up and post?
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 03:32
To kill the boredom, which in turn makes it even more boring.
-------------
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 03:34
Slartibartfast wrote:
fandango wrote:
hey MM, who's the gormless bint??
|
Be careful calling her a gormless bint, she can blow you up real good, I tell you what.
http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/meet/meet_main.html - http://dsc.discovery.com/fansites/mythbusters/meet/meet_main.html
|
She's our lovely Kari Byron, of the Mythbusters.
-------------
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 03:42
I never argue, I merely partake in reasoned and sometimes heated debate...
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 05:03
Isn't that called arguing?
-------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 05:14
Hey! Lets have a heated debate about the definition of 'arguing' That would probably go on for about ten pages, and descend into an 'argument'
Someone will post a link to a Wikipedia page, describing the origins of 'debate' and 'argument' Someone else will then point out that Wikipedia is is subjective, and therefore not to be trusted as an information source. Someone will then post an online dictionary definition, causing someone to storm out, leaving a trail of anti ELP and Dream Theater ranting in their wake.
Maybe I've been here too long..
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 05:24
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate
Your turn.
-------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 05:26
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 07:38
Majestic_Mayhem wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate Your turn.
|
"A deductive argument asserts that the truth of the conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises; an inductive argument asserts that the truth of the conclusion is supported by the premises"
Really? Sounds like this Wiki-contributor swallowed a Rush album..
A argument is a bloody good row over a Dream Theater album, and nothing more.
Oh yeah, and Wikipedia is just someones point of view. So it doesn't count as a reliable information source..There! I said it..
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 07:42
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity - Subjectivity..wiki doo dah
"Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief"
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 08:00
Majestic_Mayhem wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate
Your turn.
|
...as I said, I NEVER argue... 
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 08:02
Posted By: Jared
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 08:22
Blacksword wrote:
Maybe I've been here too long..  |
hey, could we start a heated debate over whether Mr Robinson's been here too long??
------------- Music has always been a matter of energy to me. On some nights I believe that a car with the needle on empty can run 50 more miles if you have the right music very loud on the radio. Hunter S Thompson
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 08:28
I'd rather have an 'argument' if it's all the same to you, Jared..
I've been mass debating all morning...
|
Posted By: MikeEnRegalia
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 08:38
Certif1ed wrote:
I never argue, I merely partake in reasoned and sometimes heated debate... |
your style can be misunderstood ... you're very straight forward in pointing out things you don't agree with, and often you add cynicism to the mix - or at least some tongue in cheek remarks which - together with the hefty criticism - can easily start an argument.
I know first hand ... 
------------- https://awesomeprog.com/release-polls/pa" rel="nofollow - Release Polls
Listened to:
|
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 09:27
Blacksword wrote:
I'd rather have an 'argument' if it's all the same to you, Jared..
I've been mass debating all morning...
|
Oh damn, someone beat me to that joke!
-------------
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:20
HughesJB4 wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
I'd rather have an 'argument' if it's all the same to you, Jared..
I've been mass debating all morning...
| Oh damn, someone beat me to that joke! |
I'm surpised it took three pages to be honest... But it was bound to come up eventually.
|
Posted By: DJPuffyLemon
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:34
The T wrote:
I would like to know if there is ONE person here in PA that ever changed his mind about a band that he/she liked or hated because of comments by other forum members....
ONE..... | well i did, I was prompted to listen to Selling England by the Pound again. My opinion has changed, its better than I gave it credit for (but still worse than others give it credit for).
I like this forum, becasue it lets me talk about music I like with people who are interested in the same stuff. Other than here, I have like one friend who likes the same music and he refered me here.
I agree though that this is a boring forum, but that's because you guys are too strict with rules and the like. You have to ALLOW natural conversation, even if that includes cursing, belittling, etc, otherwise, well it becomes a sterile forum with ppl being all respectful, ew.
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:35
Blacksword wrote:
HughesJB4 wrote:
Blacksword wrote:
I'd rather have an 'argument' if it's all the same to you, Jared..
I've been mass debating all morning...
| Oh damn, someone beat me to that joke! |
I'm surpised it took three pages to be honest... But it was bound to come up eventually.  |
I'm just surprised anyone noticed when it did come up 
-------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
Posted By: DJPuffyLemon
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:35
although, yeah the amount of useless topics "Sigur ros vs Close to the edge" has got to be stopped
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:36
DJPuffyLemon wrote:
although, yeah the amount of useless topics "Sigur ros vs Close to the edge" has got to be stopped |
You do know that whole poll was a big joke, right?
|
Posted By: DJPuffyLemon
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:45
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26903 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=26903
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49256 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49256
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49236 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49236
I was going to add this too, but it actually promotes good discussion on who is the best frontman, although, the actual discussion was pretty bad, at least for the first few posts i read....
http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49036 - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=49036
i guess my point is, theres' not enough to talk about so ppl bring up archane issues, i've been guilty of this too but whatever great forum guys keep at it i'm too lazy to make a difference
|
Posted By: heyitsthatguy
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 14:48
Prog Archives: We debate about arguments and argue about debates
-------------
|
Posted By: zappaholic
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 20:13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3HaRFBSq9k
/too obvious?
------------- "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." -- H.L. Mencken
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 11 2008 at 20:39
stonebeard wrote:
Henry Plainview wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
go on 4chan |
I suspected as much, /B/TARD! No, 4chan is much much worse than PA could ever be, and it makes me sad that you can even say that. 4chan is a goddamn hellhole, which is what they're going for, but they're still ruining the internet.
What's the point of talking about anything, then? It all comes down to talking about opinion and taste, pretty much. I agree that Dream Theater vs Symphony X polls are stupid, but there's more to it than that. I come here for music recommendations and to discuss music I like. People who come here for a fight about whoever are either trolling or really dumb. But we already knew that, didn't we?
Also, http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=32554 - I was looking thorugh your past posts I found this. Funny, isn't it? ;-) |
/b/ is more f**ked up than not, but it's tons more interesting than PA....
and I have my fair share of useless and not-useless threads. that one was fun
|
If you find painfully stupid and unfunny memes repeated endlessly interesting, then I guess so. I suppose horrible pictures are interesting in their own way, but from what I've heard that's happening less with all the obnoxious newfgts. But even diluted by Digg and all the other large communitys' userbases, it's still a worthless hellhole.
Fair enough. I just found it funny when I saw it and in the context of this thread. Especially since I love "jamming razors down my ears".
heyitsthatguy wrote:
also they're not ruining the internet, they ARE the internet. The good, the bad, all of it
|
I see you have swallowed whole their egocentric self-aggrandizing propoganda. Well there's no point in discussing this further, because if you don't see why that's wrong then it's something you have to realize on your own.
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
Posted By: JayDee
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 02:21
Blacksword wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjectivity - Subjectivity..wiki doo dah
"Subjectivity refers to a subject's perspective, particularly feelings, beliefs, and desires. It is often used casually to refer to unjustified personal opinions, in contrast to knowledge and justified belief" |
You missed the ELP bit.
-------------
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 02:53
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
Certif1ed wrote:
I never argue, I merely partake in reasoned and sometimes heated debate... |
your style can be misunderstood ... you're very straight forward in pointing out things you don't agree with, and often you add cynicism to the mix - or at least some tongue in cheek remarks which - together with the hefty criticism - can easily start an argument.
I know first hand ... 
|
Anyone can be misunderstood - that's why questions are so important.
If everyone asked more questions, there would be less arguing.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 11:40
"Oh, excuse me, is this the five minute argument or the full half hour"? (John Cleese in the Monty Python's "Argument Clinic" sketch)
-------------

BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 12:18
I get really irritated at those (usually) prolific correpondents here who have this proclavity to argue because they are full of so-called facts they have read, which contradict those facts coming from those with first hand experience, been eye witnesses or whatever. If you have noticed I stopped correponding/arguing on certain subjects, it is often because I feel I've hit a brickwall of intransigence. I wish people would listen or read and have the good grace to acknowledge somebody may know better. Whilst I can overwhelm with data both correct and less reliable, I'm more than willing to listen to those who are experienced and learn. What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about. I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts.
------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.
|
Posted By: Jim Garten
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 12:26
Dick Heath wrote:
I get really irritated at those (usually) prolific correpondents here who have this proclavity to argue because they are full of so-called facts they have read, which contradict those facts coming from those with first hand experience, been eye witnesses or whatever. If you have noticed I stopped correponding/arguing on certain subjects, it is often because I feel I've hit a brickwall of intransigence. I wish people would listen or read and have the good grace to acknowledge somebody may know better. Whilst I can overwhelm with data both correct and less reliable, I'm more than willing to listen to those who are experienced and learn. What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about. I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts. |
      
Dick, you've just defined the expression "hit the nail on the head", and I salute you; I've said it on this site often before, there is a big difference between holding a strong opinion and being self opinionated.
Personally, I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, as let's face it, when you're proven wrong, you learn something.
There are those who instead of searching Google or Wikipedia should instead check the dictionary definitions of the words 'Courtesy' and 'Humility'
Nice one Dick.
-------------
Jon Lord 1941 - 2012
|
Posted By: WinterLight
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 13:15
Dick Heath wrote:
I get really irritated at those (usually) prolific correpondents here who have this proclavity to argue because they are full of so-called facts they have read, which contradict those facts coming from those with first hand experience, been eye witnesses or whatever.
Yet it's well-understood that eyewitness testimony is not completely reliable; in particular, it should be corroborated by other testimony or previously established (i.e., accepted) results or facts. For example, if someone claims to have witnessed an occurrence which is physically or logically impossible, then of course I'm going to be skeptical, if not dismissive, of their assertion.
If you have noticed I stopped correponding/arguing on certain subjects, it is often because I feel I've hit a brickwall of intransigence. I wish people would listen or read and have the good grace to acknowledge somebody may know better. Whilst I can overwhelm with data both correct and less reliable, I'm more than willing to listen to those who are experienced and learn. What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about.
I think that you mean "critical" rather than "cynical" (the distinction is non-trivial). Indeed, the scholarly literature is generally filled with mutual criticism (there's this methodological flaw in a certain experiment, this proof isn't quite correct, etc.), and often such criticism gives rise to important discoveries. With this said, I'm not sure how to interpret your assertion that "those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about." What would it mean, for example, to have "first hand knowledge" in mathematics? Either its meaning is empty or trivial. Everyone who studies mathematics acquires "first hand knowledge" of the subject in the sense that such knowledge is, by definition, indistinguishable on the basis of its bearer; whence we see that such an interpretation is trivial. Otherwise, we can't give an intelligible definition of "first hand knowledge" in mathematics. You might argue that a professional mathematician might have a "deeper" knowledge than say a neophyte student; however, this is misleading: it is "deeper" only in the sense that there's more of it, i.e., the mathematician has a wider breadth of knowledge, and thus can construct more intricate relations (analogous to the advantages a virtuoso musician has over someone just beginning an instrument). If, on the other hand, we may say that experts have "first hand knowledge" of their field expertise; but this is largely marketing: experts are experts on the basis of their ability to articulate the current ideological consensus in their field--this is plainly not knowledge in any substantive sense of the term.
I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts.
So, is it not possible for, say, an US historian, who has devoted her academic career to research British history to have an authoritative opinion on that very topic?
|
|
Posted By: Moatilliatta
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 13:38
I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts.
So, is it not possible for, say, an US historian, who has devoted her academic career to research British history to have an authoritative opinion on that very topic? [/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
No! An American should not be interested in any other country other than America! That's not our way! So, we have to teach her a lesson. And Americans turn opinions into facts, I know I do (only with my own opinions of course), so he couldn't trust that US historian anyhow.
Also, I don't like arguing, but I can't helping debating sometimes.
------------- www.last.fm/user/ThisCenotaph

|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 13:56
WinterLight wrote:
Dick Heath wrote:
I get really irritated at those (usually) prolific correpondents here who have this proclavity to argue because they are full of so-called facts they have read, which contradict those facts coming from those with first hand experience, been eye witnesses or whatever.
Yet it's well-understood that eyewitness testimony is not completely reliable; in particular, it should be corroborated by other testimony or previously established (i.e., accepted) results or facts. For example, if someone claims to have witnessed an occurrence which is physically or logically impossible, then of course I'm going to be skeptical, if not dismissive, of their assertion.
If you have noticed I stopped correponding/arguing on certain subjects, it is often because I feel I've hit a brickwall of intransigence. I wish people would listen or read and have the good grace to acknowledge somebody may know better. Whilst I can overwhelm with data both correct and less reliable, I'm more than willing to listen to those who are experienced and learn. What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about.
I think that you mean "critical" rather than "cynical" (the distinction is non-trivial). Indeed, the scholarly literature is generally filled with mutual criticism (there's this methodological flaw in a certain experiment, this proof isn't quite correct, etc.), and often such criticism gives rise to important discoveries. With this said, I'm not sure how to interpret your assertion that "those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about." What would it mean, for example, to have "first hand knowledge" in mathematics? Either its meaning is empty or trivial. Everyone who studies mathematics acquires "first hand knowledge" of the subject in the sense that such knowledge is, by definition, indistinguishable on the basis of its bearer; whence we see that such an interpretation is trivial. Otherwise, we can't give an intelligible definition of "first hand knowledge" in mathematics. You might argue that a professional mathematician might have a "deeper" knowledge than say a neophyte student; however, this is misleading: it is "deeper" only in the sense that there's more of it, i.e., the mathematician has a wider breadth of knowledge, and thus can construct more intricate relations (analogous to the advantages a virtuoso musician has over someone just beginning an instrument). If, on the other hand, we may say that experts have "first hand knowledge" of their field expertise; but this is largely marketing: experts are experts on the basis of their ability to articulate the current ideological consensus in their field--this is plainly not knowledge in any substantive sense of the term.
I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts.
So, is it not possible for, say, an US historian, who has devoted her academic career to research British history to have an authoritative opinion on that very topic?
Certainly it is possible; else it would mean nobody could be an expert on Roman history, for example. And on the other hand, how many Brits are really experts at British history?
|
|
-------------

BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue.
|
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 15:23
I glad that somebody hasn't worked out if I was getting specifically worked up and not spotting what I was refering to. However, to be more specific about my reference to "historians" - here4 I was refering to somebody who write about recent social history (from 3 to 4000 miles from his/her subject) and employs the web as his/her medium, so smacks as being an amateur suggesting lack of resource to thoroughly research, as well as avoiding one's peers - hence my cynicism
------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS.
CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php
Host by PA's Dick Heath.
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 15:27
Jim Garten wrote:
Dick Heath wrote:
I get really irritated at those (usually) prolific correpondents here who have this proclavity to argue because they are full of so-called facts they have read, which contradict those facts coming from those with first hand experience, been eye witnesses or whatever. If you have noticed I stopped correponding/arguing on certain subjects, it is often because I feel I've hit a brickwall of intransigence. I wish people would listen or read and have the good grace to acknowledge somebody may know better. Whilst I can overwhelm with data both correct and less reliable, I'm more than willing to listen to those who are experienced and learn. What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about. I get do really get pissed at having non Brits telling about me about recent British history, and quoting non-British social historians(?) writing on unrefereed websites and then writing selectively on a very complicated subjects. The problem is recognising and avoiding secondhand opinions made into facts. |
      
Dick, you've just defined the expression "hit the nail on the head", and I salute you; I've said it on this site often before, there is a big difference between holding a strong opinion and being self opinionated.
Personally, I'm more than happy to be proven wrong, as let's face it, when you're proven wrong, you learn something.
There are those who instead of searching Google or Wikipedia should instead check the dictionary definitions of the words 'Courtesy' and 'Humility'
Nice one Dick.
 |
you know.. that is one hell of a post Richard. My clappies don't compare to Jim's.. but as it is with the prized clappies... one can never have too many
    
Five clappies... a masterpiece of PA's posting.
------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 15:29
Henry Plainview wrote:
heyitsthatguy wrote:
also they're not ruining the internet, they ARE the internet. The good, the bad, all of it
|
I see you have swallowed whole their egocentric self-aggrandizing propoganda. Well there's no point in discussing this further, because if you don't see why that's wrong then it's something you have to realize on your own. |
I'm almost positive that was sarcastic and I think you're taking sh*t too seriously.
------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want!
|
Posted By: Pnoom!
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 15:33
stonebeard wrote:
prog music is boring to argue about |
Exactly the problem. 
|
Posted By: Henry Plainview
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 22:48
Well sorry, but I couldn't tell because I don't know him at all and what he said is exactly what 4chan and /b/ claim about themselves. So I'm pretty sure he wasn't joking. That doesn't make him one of them, but since he knew enough to make it /b/, I doubt that was said out of ignorance.
------------- if you own a sodastream i hate you
|
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: June 12 2008 at 22:50
stonebeard wrote:
prog music is boring to argue about |
yeah
|
Posted By: Visitor13
Date Posted: June 14 2008 at 10:36
Pnoom! wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
prog music is boring to argue about |
Exactly the problem. 
|
Nah, prog's ok, it's you, numerous PA members, who are the problem. You simply don't like prog. I mean think about it - if you liked prog, you would be spending time listening to it instead of arguing about it.
|
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: June 14 2008 at 18:52
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: June 16 2008 at 19:48
Chameleon wrote:
We wouldn't have such senseless debates if Magma wasn't so obviously superior to every other band. |
... you forgot to add this little phrase "that sings in kobiain".
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
Posted By: debrewguy
Date Posted: June 16 2008 at 19:54
As a Canadian who gets to watch/read/listen to the American Right go on about how the media is leftist, while conveniently forgetting that their friends actually own most of it ... I say if you're going to back an argument with citations & references, remember that your facts might not be as factual to me as they are to you. BE it history, music, or just about any subject or topic, chances are that there diverging points of view that are often held as objectively true by the many sides (or interests in some cases) in the debate. Or, what we think we know is just what we think we know.
------------- "Here I am talking to some of the smartest people in the world and I didn't even notice,” Lieutenant Columbo, episode The Bye-Bye Sky-High I.Q. Murder Case.
|
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: June 19 2008 at 04:13
WinterLight wrote:
Dick Heath wrote:
What we teach at university is to be somewhat cynical of what you read, even from textbooks and refereed journals, because inevitably there will be errors - and avoid the web as a source being too often of unproven and unrefereed information - and realise that those who speak from first hand knowledge usually know what they are talking about.
I think that you mean "critical" rather than "cynical" (the distinction is non-trivial). |
|
No - he meant cynical.
I've been to a British university, and that is exactly what I was taught.
------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning.
|
|