About How to post in the History forum
|September 5th, 2004||#1|
| || |
How to post in the History forum info
1. Lack of a world wide common core of historical accuracy: we have many people, from many areas, that are taught history from their countries education system perspective. Some education systems respond politically to their country values. Others culturally. Some even respond by telling it the way it was. Yet no matter how you slice it, not everyone is going to be on the same sheet of music. The closest item we have now that may allow a chance at a common core of historical accuracy may be the internet itself, and only if and when you post on it after a careful research of the subject that proves its case.
2. A concentration on one focal point versus a wide focal point in the whole scheme of history. We study and observe what interests us. Some interests concentrate so keenly at one point that they tend to ignore the bigger picture historically. an example might be a strictly world war II buff who ignores the historical perspective of the prewar years of 1920-1938, or the post war years after. to that buff, nothing else exists but WWII.
3. Poor communication skills. Its not that they donít know the history, but cant express it in words to a common consensus point that everyone understands.
4. Too advanced communication skills: the historical poster understands the subject so much and so well, that in their enthusiasm over empathize it with terms or expressions of their craft that no one understands.
5. Over concentrated emotional targeting: a tendency to see ones posts point only to the extent that they exclude the posts of others in a search and hunt down of offenders contrary to their posts. (this is my favorite sin).
6. Not reading the complete topic before they post. They donít read the entire topic before posting, miss something and post their perspective not realizing its been covered. This leads to a possible reaction, maybe like thinking this guy is a total loss or something to that effect.
7. Accepting lore or legends as bonafide facts, and acting on it.
8. Not testing the accuracy of a post before posting it. Anything that is not opinion i test by seeing if two bonifide sources have it as reasonable fact or not.
9. Not recognizing what sources are bonifide in the educational aspect. Is it as validly truthful as research, analyzing and reporting can make it, or is it the simple ranting of a lunatic that sold long and well?
This list could go on and on but it wont. These are just whatís common in my sight.
so what could make the history forum better?
For the initial poster...first, decide what your topic is to be.
Decide what type of response you want. Do you want to learn something new? Ask a question thatís open ended, something that cant be answered yes or no. Want an opinion? Say so. Want an accurate answer to a question? Ask a question that requires accurate research (figures, numbers, or data) to answer.
state (define) the parameters of the topic, discussion, or posting. Tell them up front what you want. of course it helps also to tell them whatís not acceptable either.
try and keep what you want to one simple subject. we have people on the forum that could write volumes if you want volumes. Redleg doesnít have the bandwidth to support that. Just keep it to one simple subject.
Finally, donít take the answers you get personal, unless they are personal.
For the post responders:
read the entire thread of the post. twice if you have to. But read the whole thing. sometimes, people edit or retract items said, so its best to read the entire post again every time you look at it. i mean, what else do you have to do with your time?
If you donít understand the post..personal message (PM) the topic poster with you questions to provide clarification. True historians encourage, not tear down other historians. sharp shooters on the other hand, just shoot..
Please use the quote-snatching engine sparingly as a means to provide context to your reply. Please use ... symbols to frame the quote if only a section of the quoted statement is used, so the reader of your reply knows you are snipping it.
Donít flame in your reply. Donít use all caps to emphasize your reply. if you wouldnít say it to your mothers face, donít say it here.
Please research your answer. 2 reliable witnesses were required a long time ago to convince a judge or jury to put a person to death in some societies. 2 reliable researched items would be very helpful here.
See. Think. Research. Compose. Post.
Well thatís what I see could be useful.
ďIf we should have to fight, we should be prepared to do so from the neck up instead of from the neck down.Ēó General James H. Doolittle, USAAF
|September 6th, 2004||#2|
| || |
Great one Mark!
I split it from the other topic, since this one is worthy of an Anouncement..
And linking to images in the posts does not use any of the forums bandwidth, but it "steals" from the other site.
So try to use links to the images instead, or at least post a link to the source if you choose to display it in your post(s).