by Terry 53 Replies latest jw friends
I think it's the same as it's always been, we just have lost a few great posters. Some threads are discussion threads and some are comment threads. I always read the initial posts. It depends on how long the thread is as to whether I read all of them.
I am here more to relieve stress and to laugh and find kindred spirits. I read some of the deep threads. I read some fluff threads. Life is heavy enough though. I don't want to come here and be weighted down.
Hi Terry,
1.Do you see a Thread Topic and read ALL of the posts before you comment? Or, do you jump to the end and have your say?
I like to read all the posts first, usually, then reply to what seems relevant to me.
2.Do you consider what the actual Topic started off being rather than where it may have derailed?
I consider the actual topic. I notice that sometimes threads get derailed. But I think I respond generally to the actual topic, rather than otherwise.
3. Do you ask and answer questions factually, with references, quotations? Or, is yours exclusively an emotional response?
Sometimes I will give a comment with references. But other times, I figure the comment is self-explanatory and does not require a back-up. Still other times I like to state something that is outside of the JW box. I am working hard to change my belief system. I would not survive if I did not change my thinking and beliefs. The JWs have set us up to fail if we continued to believe what they taught. It’s part of the brainwash. I have lots of deep feelings about religious cults, since the JWs have severed my family ties and destroyed our family... You bet I can be emotional.
4.Do you care if there is a fundamental difference between an opinion and a fact?
Perhaps not. Opinions count, too…not just “facts” besides, what is “Truth” anyway? By whose definition?
5.Are your posts HUGE CHUNKS OF DENSE PARAGRAPHS THAT GO ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON?
Generally short and concise. Occasionally, I will quote a news article and drop the entire piece along with the link into a thread.
6.Are you pithy (like Minimus) and to the point?
Sometimes, but I can’t set Minimus as my standard. He is a star. I’m just humble satinka. Most people don't even respond to my threads.
7.If you had to characterize your own contributions to JW-net in one word or two at the most; what would it be?
I’m a true Apostate! And proud of it…
And I like the emoticons!
satinka
Terry, you strike me as a Jack Webb kind of guy...."just the facts, ma'am, nothing but the facts". When one interjects opinion, emotion, feelings, or personal thoughts into the discussion, you're turned off, or worse, you discard it as irrelevent and inconsequential. IMO, you have difficulty relating to other ways of social expression that include things like intuition, faith, feelings, speculation and conjecture. You label it in a negative way which limits further discussion.
Personally, I like the free-flow and random interjections as long as the thread doesn't get totally hijacked.
If the topic is heavy and requires real debate with references and cut 'n paste sources, then, IMO, don't get involved in the thread if you're not willing to take the time to present your position properly and offer appropriate rebuttals. My only problem with these "heavy" discussions is that each side can find plenty of cut 'n paste support for their position. So, nothing changes. Nobody concedes anything. They just get tired of the discussion and it stops or digresses into name-calling and personal insults.
But, like others have said, everything that can be said has already been said and archived. Why rehash it? Even the newbies can look in "Best of Topics" and read the old and the new in depth discussions. I'm sure the early JWN was quite exciting, new, and challenging.
As far as my contribution to this board is concerned, I have had a few posters pm me with kind words of gratitude for something I have said but overall, I don't know what if anything my contribution has been.
I think most of the "facts" are really just opinions that people have an emotional connection to.
If these so called facts really were facts then everyone would agree. But they don't, they come up with opposing facts........
So no matter how factual the discussion is, it is predominately based on opionion.
I like both the deeper discussions and the lighter comments. Sometimes I want to learn. Sometimes I want to laugh.
Right you are Paul! How have you been?
Very interesting......very interesting.......
Actually my goal is to be "the thinking man's Outlaw".
Wouldn't that make you a non-thinker?
Terry, I think this board is both. Of course, I too have only been here for a year. So I don't know what it was like before that. There are a lot of comments added without some sticking around for a discussion. But sometimes I really like those comments. Sometimes those make me think more than the drawn out discussions, because they bring something fresh to the perspective.
1.Do you see a Thread Topic and read ALL of the posts before you comment? Or, do you jump to the end and have your say?
I try to read all the comments first. But sometimes they've veered away from the OP, and I really liked the OP, so I just quickly skim then and respond to the OP. So it depends on the question and the answers.
2.Do you consider what the actual Topic started off being rather than where it may have derailed?
Both.
3. Do you ask and answer questions factually, with references, quotations? Or, is yours exclusively an emotional response?
I answer with what I believe, and I think I explain why I believe as I do in my answers. Probably not always though. I very rarely reference a book, unless its the bible. I sometimes reference a dictionary, or a wikipedia article, or an online encyclopedia. Depends on the academic level of the OP.
4.Do you care if there is a fundamental difference between an opinion and a fact?
Of course.
5.Are your posts HUGE CHUNKS OF DENSE PARAGRAPHS THAT GO ON AND ON AND ON AND ON AND ON?
I try to break up my paragraphs into readable material ;)
Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I try to answer everything as fully as I can, and sometimes that leads to a longer answer. (I don't think my posts are any longer than yours though)
6.Are you pithy (like Minimus) and to the point?
If I can be. But not usually, because as I said, I'm always trying to explain the why, and fully.
7.If you had to characterize your own contributions to JW-net in one word or two at the most; what would it be?
Different perspective?
(I hate those kinds of questions. I just do what I do.)
Tammy
[Marking for later]
What was the question again ?
Loz x
