godofthunder9010
Active member
Is it just me, or does this section seem to be less ABOUT history, and moreso that it's just HISTORY? That is to say ... this section's kinda dead. Any ideas why?
Is It History?
Mark Conley
Active member
This is interesting: can you be a little more elaborate on the question? Im not quite understanding you...
"Is it just me, or does this section seem to be less ABOUT history, and moreso that it's just HISTORY? That is to say ... this section's kinda dead. Any ideas why?"
Now when post..are we examining history? bring out its accuracys or inaccuracys? trying to correct, or comment?
from my view point..if we post for opinion related history items..it could go on and on, or stop if no one found it interesting enough to waste their time with..
If we post for information required to verify..it would be rather short post if a consensus was reached that the answer satisfied everyone..or a consuming fire if the answer did not satisfy everyone.
In what way do you think the sections dead Godofthunder? What do you think it needs to spice it up?
i will let this stay in the history section for a few days...although it actually is a question about the mechanics of the forum topic area itself, it does bend across to the historical perspective.
"Is it just me, or does this section seem to be less ABOUT history, and moreso that it's just HISTORY? That is to say ... this section's kinda dead. Any ideas why?"
Now when post..are we examining history? bring out its accuracys or inaccuracys? trying to correct, or comment?
from my view point..if we post for opinion related history items..it could go on and on, or stop if no one found it interesting enough to waste their time with..
If we post for information required to verify..it would be rather short post if a consensus was reached that the answer satisfied everyone..or a consuming fire if the answer did not satisfy everyone.
In what way do you think the sections dead Godofthunder? What do you think it needs to spice it up?
i will let this stay in the history section for a few days...although it actually is a question about the mechanics of the forum topic area itself, it does bend across to the historical perspective.
GuyontheRight
Active member
What it needs, is political free discussions started by members who have a genuine love of history.
Duty Honor Country
Active member
GuyontheRight said:
Yes yes, we need to keep politics out of the history dabate. Politics has a way of blurring the truth.
I'll be the first to say I love history since every book I own is related to history in one form or another.
Jason Bourne
Active member
yes, good idea.
godofthunder9010
Active member
The specific politics that I'm seeing as the major problem is Patriotism for ones nation and its military history. The second biggest problem is tact.
If I say that US/UK bombing campaign against Germany was barely relevant to the overall outcome of World War II, British and Americans are going to throw a fit.
If I tell a Russian that the Soviet Union would have been completely overtaken if it hadn't been for Ameican and British support, its not going to make a Russian pretty pissed.
If someone makes the statement that Vietnam was a waste of time, certain people are likely to disagree.
If somebody states that the US was the only reason that the Allies won WW1, the French and British are certainly going to have a big problem with that.
I don't want responses to any of those, since I'm not taking any of those stands anyway. Just examples of the problem. If you make a statement of "fact" out of an opinion, then you are likely to offend people. If your solution to their disagreement with your "facts" is to berate or belittle them, well its obvious that they are not going to want to continue the discussion.
There are people in this world who can discuss politics and religion rationally. And those people are so rare that it ends up being better to never discuss either topic.
If I say that US/UK bombing campaign against Germany was barely relevant to the overall outcome of World War II, British and Americans are going to throw a fit.
If I tell a Russian that the Soviet Union would have been completely overtaken if it hadn't been for Ameican and British support, its not going to make a Russian pretty pissed.
If someone makes the statement that Vietnam was a waste of time, certain people are likely to disagree.
If somebody states that the US was the only reason that the Allies won WW1, the French and British are certainly going to have a big problem with that.
I don't want responses to any of those, since I'm not taking any of those stands anyway. Just examples of the problem. If you make a statement of "fact" out of an opinion, then you are likely to offend people. If your solution to their disagreement with your "facts" is to berate or belittle them, well its obvious that they are not going to want to continue the discussion.
There are people in this world who can discuss politics and religion rationally. And those people are so rare that it ends up being better to never discuss either topic.
Mark Conley
Active member
Yes i can see your points Godofthunder and they are very valid (could we just call you woden or zeus...such a long name to type).
could we not phrase our posts to eliminate bias, or guide our discussions that would allow flexiabilty to introduce that which wasnt common to the main group of posters? some could do this..some may not have the communication skills to do it.
You present some fine ideas and all ribbing aside, i must reply as thus: we cant control the poster of the topics, or the replys. Oh we can ban: we can edit: we can maybee ridicule: but we cannot change the mind set of the poster.
If it were not for friction sometimes, we wouldnt get anywhere, as in the case of tires gripping a road. Some friction in life is necessary.
Too much fricton, and we experience a wearing. once again at the expense of getting us from point A to point B, our tires wear away.
but when purpose is properly balanced with the outcome..we get from point A to Point B at an acceptable cost.
My thoughts on this, would be the following rules for posting responsibly:
I believe that in any posting, the number one rule should be: "If i post this, would it be productive? would some good or learning come from the expression of my ideas? Would someone smile, and then reply in kind?
The second rule that should be the posters responsibility: If i post this, would i be willing to take the heat for the reaction it causes if negative, or the praise modestly if its positive?
the third and final rule is simple: is the posting of the idea worth the cost or addition to my character? could i look the person in the eye, while i shot him in the back? (just seeing if you are reading...+ +).
Maybe someone else can see something and post please?
could we not phrase our posts to eliminate bias, or guide our discussions that would allow flexiabilty to introduce that which wasnt common to the main group of posters? some could do this..some may not have the communication skills to do it.
You present some fine ideas and all ribbing aside, i must reply as thus: we cant control the poster of the topics, or the replys. Oh we can ban: we can edit: we can maybee ridicule: but we cannot change the mind set of the poster.
If it were not for friction sometimes, we wouldnt get anywhere, as in the case of tires gripping a road. Some friction in life is necessary.
Too much fricton, and we experience a wearing. once again at the expense of getting us from point A to point B, our tires wear away.
but when purpose is properly balanced with the outcome..we get from point A to Point B at an acceptable cost.
My thoughts on this, would be the following rules for posting responsibly:
I believe that in any posting, the number one rule should be: "If i post this, would it be productive? would some good or learning come from the expression of my ideas? Would someone smile, and then reply in kind?
The second rule that should be the posters responsibility: If i post this, would i be willing to take the heat for the reaction it causes if negative, or the praise modestly if its positive?
the third and final rule is simple: is the posting of the idea worth the cost or addition to my character? could i look the person in the eye, while i shot him in the back? (just seeing if you are reading...+
+).Maybe someone else can see something and post please?