Re: Query re: IE website

On 2009-06-16 22:21, darkstar100@... wrote:

> Too make things clear from the start, I will explain that I don't
> care who anybody is, or how much money he earns, or who's his
> brother, or even what he published offline in some journal that is
> out of immediate reach online (it's the Internet Age, wake up! What's
> not at your fingertips, no longer exists in nature!).

You don't have to tell us it's the Internet Age. This forum has existed
on the Internet for ten years. But science is not just an interactive
game for Internet addicts. It is developed _primarily_ at universities,
in seminar rooms, at conferences, in laboratories or out there in the
field, in libraries, in paper journals, etc. Of course it also has its
Internet extension, like everything else today, but wake up, Neo, we are
real people studying the real world.

> To me, you're are just letters on the screen,

It's your problem. To me, the list members are human and I try to keep
that in mind.

> and I can only judge you by what you
> write or have to say here and now or at least somewhere online.

Plenty of linguistic books and journals can also be found online, and
quite a few of our posters have published stuff that can be found there.

> I will also test whether you understand basic logic and scientific
> method (many people don't), and attempt to extract some psychology
> info on you based on the way you write.

I couldn't care less what we are to you. But if you are interested in
"testing" your fellow members, choose some other list. This one has
moderators who might not like your tests.

> For instance, if you get much
> too critical, and never say anything good, I may draw the conclusion
> that you're not a creative or maybe not even a smart person and that
> you're only able to criticize other people's work without doing
> anything of your own, therefore good critciism is supposed to include
> a consideration of both strong and weak points of a statement or text
> in question. You're also supposed to back up your statements with
> arguments; free-floating "opinions" are good for the kitchen talk,
> not a scientifically-oriented forum...
>
> If you're not interested in trying to fit these criteria, there's
> probably no point to start.

Do present a thesis and we can discuss it. But a guest should not begin
by telling his hosts what rules they are supposed to follow. It could be
considered arrogance. _You_'d better read this first:

http://tinyurl.com/l6n9a5

Piotr