Searching \ for '[OT]Our Discussion' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=our+discussion
Search entire site for: 'Our Discussion'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]Our Discussion'
2011\03\17@124548 by Carey Fisher

face picon face
Relevant link should be posted somewhere...:

http://unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg

Carey Fisher
Chief Technical Officer
New Communications Solutions, LLC
spam_OUTcareyfisherTakeThisOuTspamncsradio.co

2011\03\17@125456 by Yigit Turgut

picon face
This should be embraced by masses. Very good.

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Carey Fisher <.....careyfisherKILLspamspam@spam@ncsradio.com> wrote:
> Relevant link should be posted somewhere...:
>
> http://unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg
>
> Carey Fisher
> Chief Technical Officer
> New Communications Solutions, LLC
> careyfisherspamKILLspamncsradio.com
>

2011\03\17@131720 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Carey Fisher wrote:
> http://unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg

Rather pointless since agreeing whether a point has in fact been refuted is
usually the issue.  You don't generally argue about black and white issues.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\03\17@140258 by Oli Glaser

flavicon
face
On 17/03/2011 17:17, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Carey Fisher wrote:
>> unrforliberty.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Our-Discussion.jpg
> Rather pointless since agreeing whether a point has in fact been refuted is
> usually the issue.  You don't generally argue about black and white issues.
>

I think the point is more about what actually constitutes a discussion, and goals/etiquette involved. Arguments and lectures are not the same thing (as discussions), and the ability to keep an open mind (and ear) is of great importance - simple concepts, but generally complicated (as are all human activities) by emotions, egos, misunderstandings/conceptions, etc...
The goal is not to "win" or to "teach", rather to cooperatively seek out and further knowledge and understanding. Easier said than done.. :-)

2011\03\17@142943 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Oli Glaser wrote:
> The goal is not to "win" or to "teach", rather to cooperatively seek
> out and further knowledge and understanding.

But that's either a load of crap or grossly naive.  Usually you start a
discussion because you want to convince someone or you want information.
Very rarely is it ballanced where you simply want to "discuss" something and
see where it leads.  It happens, but most conversations don't have that goal
in mind.  That doesn't make the other conversations useless or invalid
though.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\03\17@144042 by N. T.

picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Oli Glaser wrote:
>> The goal is not to "win" or to "teach", rather to cooperatively seek
>> out and further knowledge and understanding.
>
> But that's either a load of crap or grossly naive.  Usually you start a
> discussion because you want to convince someone or you want information.
> Very rarely is it ballanced where you simply want to "discuss" something and
> see where it leads.  It happens, but most conversations don't have that goal
> in mind.

Depends on the person - "to convince someone or to fetch information"
or "to cooperatively seek out and further knowledge and
understanding". You said, you are the first type, but some are the
second type. The reasonable diversity is good, anyway let the
moderators decide.

2011\03\17@151324 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
N. T. wrote:
> Depends on the person - "to convince someone or to fetch information"
> or "to cooperatively seek out and further knowledge and
> understanding".

No, it depends on the situation.  Surely you've had conversations where you
were trying to convince someone, where you were asking for information, and
where you were just kicking something around.

My point is that the process illustrated in that diagram may sound nice at
first glance, but it is pointless and essentially meant as a insult.
Everybody is going to say they'll change their mind if their point of view
is proven to be incorrect, but the problem is of course in deciding when
something has been proven.  Very rarely is there unequivocal and unrefutable
evidence.  Usually it's all about how much weight you assign to various
pieces of partial evidence, and different people will assign different
weights.

Or put another way, do you understand now or do you still disagree? ;-)


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\03\17@154644 by N. T.

picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I don't know, it's getting too complicated, as for me.

2011\03\17@155607 by Oli Glaser

flavicon
face
On 17/03/2011 18:30, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Oli Glaser wrote:
>> The goal is not to "win" or to "teach", rather to cooperatively seek
>> out and further knowledge and understanding.
> But that's either a load of crap or grossly naive.  Usually you start a
> discussion because you want to convince someone or you want information.
> Very rarely is it ballanced where you simply want to "discuss" something and
> see where it leads.  It happens, but most conversations don't have that goal
> in mind.  That doesn't make the other conversations useless or invalid
> though.
>

No, of course not - all I was pointing out is that maybe then they become something other than a "discussion" by definition. By that token, most conversations will be a combination of discussion, lecture, argument and so on.
If the diagram is trying to say all other modes of communication are useless (not really sure - it does say something about a "waste of time") then no, I don't agree there - arguments, lectures, etc all have their uses also.
If I can infer a "useful" message there, it is maybe that sometimes we lose sight of the intellectual goals in pursuit of more "personal" and immediate ones, and this can waste time being unproductive. I'm sure you can agree with that to some extent.

2011\03\17@162549 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Oli Glaser wrote:
> If I can infer a "useful" message there, it is maybe that sometimes we
> lose sight of the intellectual goals in pursuit of more "personal" and
> immediate ones, and this can waste time being unproductive. I'm sure
> you can agree with that to some extent.

Yeah, it's real waste of time when others continue to argue after I'm
obviously right ;-)


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000

2011\03\17@173423 by Oli Glaser

flavicon
face
On 17/03/2011 20:26, Olin Lathrop wrote:
> Oli Glaser wrote:
>> If I can infer a "useful" message there, it is maybe that sometimes we
>> lose sight of the intellectual goals in pursuit of more "personal" and
>> immediate ones, and this can waste time being unproductive. I'm sure
>> you can agree with that to some extent.
> Yeah, it's real waste of time when others continue to argue after I'm
> obviously right ;-)
>

Lol, can't disagree with that one..  :-)


2011\03\17@232206 by RussellMc

face picon face
No violence intended to the intentions of the original poster, but:

It wouldn't work for me.
No surprise I'm sure :-).

In left hand column:

Number 2 is too cut and dried. "Shown to be faulty" has all sorts of
auumptions in various contextst.

BUT

#3 ythey say "principles of reason", which may just possibly be able to be
worked with BUT then explain it with a completely invalid example -

"More reasonable" is never a guarantee of fact or truth.
Neither is "more supporting evidence", even if "supporting" can be agreed
on.

Number 4's 4 points sound to be more written for a formal debate than for an
attempt to elucidate truth.

And their conclusions at bottom right feel like what the page is really
about. viz an attempt to make a "rule set " that will let you declare your
opponents tactics illegitimate and so show that they have lost the argument..

Mayhaps too harch, but I can't feel good about it even at a relook "just in
case".

Whatever.


2011\03\18@042757 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face

On Mar 17, 2011, at 8:21 PM, RussellMc wrote:

> Whatever.

I frequently find "arguments" between two people who know more about  something than I do to be extremely educational.  You can apply the  "discussion" rules to a private conversation if you want, but I think  the game changes if there is an audience (as is usually the case on- line.)  Sort of like a debating club; the idea is not to change your  opponents' position, but to convince the audience that your position  is more correct.  Or simply to educate.

BillW

2011\03\19@095019 by ZKWrightTrash

picon face
Unfortunately I feel as if Olin has driven many away from using this forum.  Discussions become about whether Olin is "right" and are hijacked by him.  His replies are condescending and seem more about "winning" the argument to prove his vastly superior intellect than to help others and/or teach something useful.  Regardless of whether his statements are factually correct, the manner in which this "advice" is given is so acidic that it has become useless.  If Olin worked for me he would either be relegated to a position in which I could isolate him from all human interaction or fired for his inability to hold a discussion in a professional and adult manner (i.e.. treat people with respect).

2011\03\19@100452 by RussellMc

face picon face
> Unfortunately I feel as if Olin has

While it seemed likely that Olin was a catalyst for this thread it
wasn't stated  specifically.

While I agree in general with the gist of what you are saying I don't
agree wholly with the specifics.

The Olin you describe is the one you meet on many occasions but not
the only one. Olin, or maybe the other  Olin, can be, in my
perception, "just plain helpful", generous and open with his time and
advice and generally above reasonable reproach. But, you can't count
on it.

If Olin worked for me we'd both go mad or bleed to death from wounds
mutually inflicted :-). The ideal would me to have him (or me) working
for a trusted sub contractor which had a suitable API / UI to allow
the one of us  involved to be interfaced successfully to the other.


 Russel

2011\03\19@111548 by Michael Watterson

face picon face
On 19/03/2011 14:04, RussellMc wrote:
> Olin, can be, in my
> perception, "just plain helpful", generous and open with his time and
> advice

Yes, Olin is exceptionally generous with his time and his technical advice is usually very good

2011\03\19@113231 by davidcou

picon face
I entirely agree. I fully support the positive intent of the statements below.
My belief is that this forum is extremely helpful to many people and therefore has great value to its members.
I would ask that we all strive to support each other and not be "mean to each other".  I believe that each member should be respected and treated with proactive positive support.  
Each of us have the potential to be 'Teachers' but all of us are 'Students'..

I would ask that we all treat others the way we would want to be treated.
There are so many positively presented technical topics and knowledge enhancing solutions presented on this forum.  I want to support and thank each and every positive contributor.  I have consistently gained very much benefit from your contribitions.  
David

 -{Original Message removed}

2011\03\20@121137 by Sergey Dryga

flavicon
face
RussellMc <apptechnz <at> gmail.com> writes:

>
> > Unfortunately I feel as if Olin has
>
> While it seemed likely that Olin was a catalyst for this thread it
> wasn't stated  specifically.
>
> While I agree in general with the gist of what you are saying I don't
> agree wholly with the specifics.
>
> The Olin you describe is the one you meet on many occasions but not
> the only one. Olin, or maybe the other  Olin, can be, in my
> perception, "just plain helpful", generous and open with his time and
> advice and generally above reasonable reproach. But, you can't count
> on it.
>

Have anybody noticed lately (over last 2-3 yr) how many conversations turn from
technical Q&A to what could be called "Olin bashing", almost universally ignited
by the non-technical aspects of Olin's answers to technical questions?  I
suggest that we utilize an engineering approach to this problem.
The problem: noisy communication channel.
Solutions: 1) reduce noise at source (translation: people, please respect other people);
2) install band-pass filter (translation: people, before answering to an
inciting post, think if it will contribute something positive to the list.  If
not, and you still like to complain, maybe contact admins directly.  I am sure
that after receving many private complaints, they will take action)
3) make your circuit less noise-sensitive. (translation: is it really worth it?)
There was recently a news that DC Comics apparently shut down commenting on its
blog The Source after things got ugly in a thread  about an eternal question:
Who runs faster, Superman or The Flash?
(http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/18/serious-flamewar-shu.html).  Let's just
keep things in perspective.
ZKWrightTrash says that he would fire a person from his team if he behaved like
Olin does on the forum.  I would to, and, in fact, did fire a person for
anti-team behavior.  But, there is a difference between a open and free forum
where people go to mostly spend their time, and work, where people go to make a
living.

I enjoy this forum, and try to utilize solutions listed above to increase the
enjoyment.  Sometimes even some extra noice is not bad, especially on slow days.

Sergey Dryga
http://beaglerobotics.com



2011\03\20@130804 by Manu Abraham

picon face
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Sergey Dryga <.....sergeyKILLspamspam.....dryga.us> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

-- schnipp --

ACK

The best only possible solution that could ever happen is to keep the
subject of the post intact. ie, do not stray away from the subject of
the post to other aspects eg: "It would work like this, but if you
don't know Y, you aren't fit to ask that question". If one is prompted
to write such a post, the best option for that person is to sit on
their hands and let some time fly away on it. After a while, even one
were to write an offending reply; he would have thought (in that time
space) "how silly it is to fight on the internet with too many a
people, even people whom one barely knows".

Also, another aspect is Topic switch within the same thread, this just
again incites additional noise alone. After a while, if necessary
create a new thread, rather than causing heavy threads. The problem is
that any information if a newcomer has to search the archive; he just
has to search tons of just all these Off topic things within the same
thread. "Data is good, only if it is organized properly, else garbage"

Some people argue that they have been with ages, on ML's but the
quality of the posts are quite bad, due to the above said reasons.

The point is: If one can contribute only noise, just mute the signal.
Keep the SNR high at the source itself (foolish to think that the
Noise gets reduced in the communication channel or at the
destination).

My 2c

Best Regards,
Manu

2011\03\20@131812 by Olin Lathrop

face picon face
Manu Abraham wrote:
> do not stray away from the subject of
> the post to other aspects eg: "It would work like this, but if you
> don't know Y, you aren't fit to ask that question".

That is exactly the subject of some posts.  PICs and electronics aren't for
everyone.  Others use the list as a substitute for doing some digging on
their own first and just blurt out whatever pops into their little minds.

> If one is prompted to write such a post, the best option for that
> person is to sit on their hands and let some time fly away on it.

You mean like you did with this post?  So you are allowed to mention
something you think should be different, but nobody else is?  Grow up.

2011\03\20@133259 by Oli Glaser

flavicon
face
On 20/03/2011 16:11, Sergey Dryga wrote:
> The problem: noisy communication channel.
> Solutions:
> 1) reduce noise at source (translation: people, please respect other people);
> 2) install band-pass filter (translation: people, before answering to an
> inciting post, think if it will contribute something positive to the list..  If
> not, and you still like to complain, maybe contact admins directly.  I am sure
> that after receving many private complaints, they will take action)
> 3) make your circuit less noise-sensitive.
Manu Abraham wrote:
> The point is: If one can contribute only noise, just mute the signal.

There is one problem with the above engineering analogies - we are dealing with human beings here.
The only way to remove the "noise" would be to remove the people.. :-)



2011\03\20@134312 by Manu Abraham

picon face
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Olin Lathrop
<EraseMEolin_piclistspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTembedinc.com> wrote:
> Manu Abraham wrote:
>> do not stray away from the subject of
>> the post to other aspects eg: "It would work like this, but if you
>> don't know Y, you aren't fit to ask that question".
>
> That is exactly the subject of some posts.  PICs and electronics aren't for
> everyone.  Others use the list as a substitute for doing some digging on
> their own first and just blurt out whatever pops into their little minds.
>
>> If one is prompted to write such a post, the best option for that
>> person is to sit on their hands and let some time fly away on it.
>
> You mean like you did with this post?  So you are allowed to mention
> something you think should be different, but nobody else is?  Grow up.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
See Topic

I wondered whether you would bite; Big minded guy, with such a small
thought ? ROFL ;-)

2011\03\20@145756 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> See Topic
>
> I wondered whether you would bite; Big minded guy, with such a small
> thought ? ROFL ;-)

Could you please turn your noise source down?

Where are the admins when you need them...

--
Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products
docent Hogeschool van Utrecht: http://www.voti.nl/hvu

2011\03\20@155101 by YES NOPE9

flavicon
face
>
> On Mar 20, 2011, at 11:18 AM, Olin Lathrop wrote:
>
> Manu Abraham wrote:
>> do not stray away from the subject of
>> the post to other aspects eg: "It would work like this, but if you
>> don't know Y, you aren't fit to ask that question".
>
> That is exactly the subject of some posts.  PICs and electronics aren't for
> everyone.  Others use the list as a substitute for doing some digging on
> their own first and just blurt out whatever pops into their little minds.

I think the list is a great place to go if I have no clear idea of how to thread my way through googleland to an answer i suspect exists.  No one on the list is forced answer me or waste their time.  If they do answer, they can save me a great deal of time.  This is the smartest list I know of.  Sometimes I will ask a question here that people on another list are flailing around about and then post the PIClist answer on the other list.

I learn a lot from reading Olin's posts .... both technically and socially and psychologically.  I have changed some of my behaviours as a result.  Has anyone on the list physically met Olin ?  Does he talk to people in person the same way he does on the list ?

gusINnwDenver   99gus

2011\03\20@165942 by William \Chops\ Westfield

face picon face
> do not stray away from the subject of the post to other aspects

Personally, I find the way that PICList topics "drift" to be part of  the "charm" of the list, as long as the drift stays within a  reasonable cone of interest.  There are enough forums where someone  can ask a question, and noone without the answer responds, and when  someone who does have an answer responds, the topic is over.  Bleh.

I'm getting pretty tired of the number of times that PICList topics  end up discussing Olin and his style of response, though.  This is a  two sided street; yes, it would all go away if Olin (and anyone like  him) became a warm and fuzzy bunny capable of treating questions as if  they all came from fragile egos that needed careful nurturing to  become useful list contributers.  I think by now that we can conclude  that this won't happen.  It would also go away if Everyone Else (many  of whom Ought To Know Better) declined to chime in...

I could do a Pythonesque skit:  Old granddad is telling a story when  out slips an unfortunate politically incorrect epithet for <xxx>.  An  <xxx> is present.   Suddenly there is a large round of cliched and  awkward apologies and explanation ("Some of our best friends are  <xxx>", etc.)  This dies down after a bit, and granddad does the whole  "now where was I" (reminders occur.)  The story continues.  Another  (perhaps different) epithet slips out, and the scene repeats,  essentially identical.  Repeat.   Repeat...  In the end, the story has  taken too long to tell, the <xxx> is more uncomfortable than if they  only had granddad's personality to deal with, and innocent bystanders  are ... nonplussed.

BillW

2011\03\20@190324 by N. T.

picon face
YES NOPE9 wrote:
>>
>
> I learn a lot from reading Olin's posts .... both technically and
> socially and psychologically.  I have changed some of my
> behaviours as a result.  Has anyone on the list physically met
> Olin ?  Does he talk to people in person the same way he
> does on the list ?
>

That old movie "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf" was partially filmed
in MA as well, if I remember correctly. The main character's style is
something :-)

2011\03\20@204907 by Bob Blick

face
flavicon
face
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 19:57 +0100, "Wouter van Ooijen" wrote:

> Could you please turn your noise source down?
>
> Where are the admins when you need them...

OK, I'll bite.

I don't know how many times I've said this, I'll say it again.

If you have a problem with someone's post, Wouter and everybody else,
don't reply to the list, post a message to piclist-ownerspamspam_OUTmit.edu with
your complaint and your message goes directly to all admins.

So everyone that thinks the S/N ratio is bad, yet makes it worse by
replying, please understand that the "admin channel" is the way to make
a suggestion without contributing to noise.

Best regards,

Bob

-- http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different...

2011\03\21@041820 by Yigit Turgut

picon face
On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 3:50 PM, ZKWrightTrash
<@spam@zkwrighttrashKILLspamspamcomcast.net> wrote:
> Unfortunately I feel as if Olin has driven many away from using this forum.  Discussions become about whether Olin is "right" and are hijacked by him.  His replies are condescending and seem more about "winning" the argument to prove his vastly superior intellect than to help others and/or teach something useful.  Regardless of whether his statements are factually correct, the manner in which this "advice" is given is so acidic that it has become useless.  If Olin worked for me he would either be relegated to a position in which I could isolate him from all human interaction or fired for his inability to hold a discussion in a professional and adult manner (i.e.. treat people with respect).

Completely correct statements. He is not happy from his personal life
and doing everything possible to project this unhappiness to people
around which corresponds to a specific psychological disorder - if you
check it up. That's why he works in his small company rather than a
big corporate environment. He just thinks that he knows everything or
has the base to get everything once researched - but he is really far
from that. Most of you think he knows what he is doing on topics other
than embedded design but (sorry) those who think this way knows no
more than him on that topic obviously. He has extensive knowledge on
PIC's -only- and nothing else. He thinks stuff he learned years ago is
practical and valid today and this can be understandable since
tendency to believe self's  solution is the only correct one is one of
the specific characteristics of small minds. Maybe he's just not
evolved enough to hold a discussion in a professional manner or has
issues getting hard. Either way he should only be posting to PIC and
some of EE tags.

2011\03\21@055539 by Moreira, Luis A

flavicon
face
Hi Yigit,
I think you are completely wrong about Olin, but of course you can think what you like. Although I do not always agree with is approach, he is a great asset to this list, and the experience that he has, that you think not relevant, I found it quite relevant in the past. If he really upsets you this much, why don't you try ignoring him, there are plenty of people that will be willing to help you if they think your question merits it.
I have been flamed by Olin in the past, but I also have been helped by him to, so I just developed a way to deal with it.
There is method in is madness.

Best Regards
           Luis

 
{Original Message removed}

2011\03\21@062239 by RussellMc

face picon face
ADMIN HAT:

Listen up, please.

> I think you are completely wrong about Olin, but of course you can think what you like

You may indeed think what you like about Olin, BUT you quite probably
may not say all of it here.

I read through these threads and try to decide what constitutes honest
reasonably factual comment and what constitutes opinion which is
neither necessarily correct nor based on anything reasonably knowable.

We have now got well past factual into ad hominem attack in a number
of posts. Olin is reasonably good at just ignoring such things, but
that does not make them fair or right.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ). Using Olin's behaviour as
a model for your own is probably not a good idea. Complaints to the
admins ARE effective if those who do care complain when they are
unhappy and in a consistent manner. In list grumbling just gets
swallowed up in the noise that it helps create. {
KILLspampiclist-ownerKILLspamspammit.edu   ]

As this thread was at least notionally about styles of discussion,
please try to keep it in that general area. Please avoid general
personal comment about Olin, or anyone else. Personal comment about me
is always welcome, as long as it's sent offlist :-). (The real me is,
I'm assured, much more complex and interesting than anything the
internet filter lets you see ;-) ).

______________

Removes admin hat:

FWIW a recent comment about the state of Olin's technical knowledge is
wronger than it should be based solely on reading list posts. I don't
know how well Olin maintains his technical knowledge in all technical
areas, and he's not always correct, but he does reasonably to very
well in a range of areas outside plain EE and PIC.

And, abysmal knowledge in other areas, as exhibited by some on
occasions :-), is still no bar from being allowed an opinion.





On 21 March 2011 22:55, Moreira, Luis A <RemoveMELuis.MoreiraTakeThisOuTspamccfe.ac.uk> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> {Original Message removed}

2011\03\21@062514 by RussellMc

face picon face
> Where are the admins when you need them...

Listening.
Sadly, wearily, resignedly, deja vu-edly, invariably, disconsolately.


               Russel

2011\03\22@041831 by N. T.

picon face
ZKWrightTrash wrote:
> If Olin worked for me he would either be relegated to
> a position in which I could isolate him from all human
> interaction or fired for his inability to hold a discussion
> in a professional and adult manner (i.e.. treat people
> with respect).

No such rule listed:
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/aeronautics/skunkworks/14rules.htm

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2011 , 2012 only
- Today
- New search...