Posted by
Rikus Combrinck on
Oct 13, 2009; 11:12am
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/An-easier-question-less-contentious-but-somewhat-depressing-tp3802172p3815480.html
I'm comfortable with detailed criticism and familiar with the strange
activity patterns of online forums. What disturbed me was the notion that
knowledge, discussion or inquiry without immediate, direct application is
undesirable. I find such a stance shortsighted, to say the least, and was
taken aback that it seemed to be able to survive in intelligent, educated,
experienced minds. Human knowledge is a vast web that only occasionally
supports application, but it needs the whole web (well, most of it) to carry
the weight of need and use in such instances. Frequently, it's impossible
to tell ahead of time which strands may take up the weight years later.
I lumped a post of yours (Glen) with some others in my rant, because it
seemed to support said stance by casting the unused as unreal, and hence --
in my mind, at the time -- unsuitable for discussion. That was probably an
unfair interpretation.
Steve mentions good-natured ribbing among friends; this is valid and I'm
aware that a large part of the FRIAM membership has face-to-face interaction
and enjoys a consequent sense of social awareness and cohesion that may cast
conversations in a different light. I should probably be more sensitive to
this.
No need for saccharine, only respect for a sincere desire to know, to
understand and to share insight. It underpins all human achievement and it
riles me to see it trivialised.
Having said that, it is also true that capable minds and the bandwidth that
connects them are valuable resources. I acknowledge that signal-to-noise
ratio and opportunity cost become relevant at some point and that opinion on
optimal focus, volume and quality may differ.
Rikus
--------------------------------------------------
From: "glen e. p. ropella" <
[hidden email]>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 7:22 PM
To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" <
[hidden email]>
Subject: [FRIAM] Criticism and feedback (was Re: Theory and practice)
Thus spake Rikus Combrinck circa 09-10-11 01:53 PM:
> What the hell? [...]
> If there is the possibility of
> additional insight, any insight, how about some applause when people spend
> their own resources to advance their understanding, and share it for free
> as
> they go!
Well, the thing you might be missing is that detailed criticism _is_
applause in scientific circles. Online media are difficult to
understand. Detailed criticism is usually a sign of _respect_ and
should be interpreted as an "atta boy". But ignoring someone's post is
NOT a secret message for that person to stop contributing. Sometimes,
the impact of a post is quite large even if there is no response. These
things are occult. But one thing is for sure, if a person takes the
time to actually read and respond to what you've written, then it is a
sign of RESPECT, even if (or perhaps especially if) the response is very
critical.
Now, while I agree that self-indulgent mocking in the form of "Oh no,
not again", without any detailed criticism is bad form (because it's
mostly useless), I don't think we need saccharine back-patting. But
then again, I've been accused of total failure in my attempts to
encourage people after doing a good job. ;-) So, what do I know?
--
glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095,
http://agent-based-modeling.com
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org