Doug Beman Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 Note: the word "you" is, in this post, not meaning any you specifically. It's a personal pronoun placeholder. You don't have to do a forum search before holding an opinion. That said, holding an opinion and asking questions are separate things. You should search before asking factual/gameplay questions, as many of these questions have been answered. There was talk of a FAQ (and I was involved in that) but the FAQ seems to have disappeared (and I am partly to blame for that as well) If you want to come in here saying "Germans always ruled!" or "Americans always ruled" that's your opinion, your business; just be prepared for a lot of people to slam you. If, however, you want to know "why can't I order the crew of a bunker to evacuate" or "why can't I order my riflemen to pick up the ammo of their fallen comrades," you should first do a search to see if it's already been discussed. If a teacher gives his victims...er, students...a physics textbook, and the next day a student asks "what are Newton's Laws?" what do you think that teacher's reaction should be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seal7 Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 "you" being generic handle as well... Why "should" you run a search before asking a simple question? Maybe they'd rather play CM than dick around searching through posts when one of the CM Gods can answer their question quickly and easily? For that matter, how do you know they aren't trying to get an expanded answer on the subject matter found in their search? Maybe <gasp> they just don't have the Puma-like mental quickness of the typical CM player and are trying to get help? Instead of abusing newbies asking what might be an inane question to you from the depths of your infinite wisdom and CM prowness...how about either ignoring them or trying a civil answer? If you're gonna waste time making an abusive post, why not use the time to answer the fricking question instead? What's the point of having resident CM Gods if they don't exercise a little benevolent omnipotence occasionally? Subjective opinions like your examples...yeah, they're "fair game" in my non-searched opinion. By the same token though, I'm sure you can find a post where someone opined that "Germans kick butt ect.", and the reply has been to "search the archives cuz "joe smucko" conclusively proved that this was wrong in a post 4 months prior as everyone knows". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jackson: This is something that I have noticed also. There are some great players in the Peng thread (and outside of it) that never divulge tactics. I assume it's because they feel they will lose their competitive edge. Or maybe, in their humility outside of the Peng thread, they do not consider themselves "expert" enough to be giving advice.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes! I never tell anything to anyone! Never! One day I will rule the world because nobody understands my superior Germanboy tactics - muhahahahahahahahaha. But seriously, while I have an about even win-loss record, I would not think of myself as an expert, and I would find it condescending to come here and spew forth wisdom on my moves. I may do that privately if I notice that my opponent has made some really blatant mistake, but even then I try not to ruffle any feathers. As some other example going on here (squad experience) shows quite clearly, some people just can not take criticism, and it is difficult to establish that through communicating by electrons. So in emails, I may enter into such a conversation, debating moves when it no longer matters for FOW. But on the board, I don't know. It really has nothing to do for me with trying to withhold information. In am more inclined to do the opposite, as Chupacapra and Peter_NZ could tell you, from my comments on watching their hotseat games. The following I posted on the Squad experience thread, that is rapidly showing the ignorance of some people around here that makes it so difficult to engage in discussion - I feel it is quite appropriate for this discussion too: As for the rest of this thread - I think the last couple of posters brought out what seems to be a key about much WW II research. It is often positively or negatively biased. This is not necessarily because there is a hidden agenda (there may well be), but it has to do with access to sources and material. E.g. if you don't speak German, access to 1st hand accounts by German vets will be extremely difficult. You either have to go through translations (often flawed) or interview those that speak English (few, and a skewed selection). So there are obvious problems. The main thing is not to rely on one source (no matter how much you like that author) if you are reading to learn (note, if you are reading for entertainment, this obviously won't matter). Cross-check, re-read, come here and propose a thesis you are interested in/confident of, and see where it leads you. If all you have to answer to justified criticism of your thesis is 'Bah you are all bad people because you don't agree with me.' then you are better off not doing it in the first place. I have learned an amazing amount from this board, but a lot more from the reading I picked up here. Just do not trust the 'experts'. They are only human (even Ambrose or Keegan) and make mistakes. If you chose to take their word over everything else, then you just do not deserve to be taken seriously. No amount of reading can replace thinking and openess to other people's opinions (which does not imply these are equally valid than yours automatically, sometimes they can indeed be very stupid or just plain wrong - I would know, had my share of either of these) . Back to this thread: alternatively, if you have something you are interested in but don't know much about, just say so in your post, and if you are willing to learn, you can have a wale of a time. ------------------ Andreas <a href="http://www.geocities.com/greg_mudry/sturm.html">Der Kessel</a > Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 11-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 This thread certainly branched out into a few directions today. When we talk of a "community", we mean the familiarity and likeness we feel towards other people on the forum. That doesn't mean we have to turn this into Yahoo! Chat. Communities can still have intellectual discussions. We can get along without having to limit ourselves to such topics as hamsters and muzzle velocities. If this "community" falls apart at the nearest sign of deep discussion then I wouldn't call it much of a community. If the fear of being disagreed with is the route of these "how's the weather" discussions, I say we are not much of a community at all. But this is not the case, we *ARE* all friends here for the most part. I don't mind if people want to discuss trivialities and have a few giggles, but let's not abandon intellectual discussion in favour of it. Some threads going on right now that are quite interesting: "Doctrine" "pbs frontline: Future of war" "Tank destroyers after WW2" The "Doctrine" thread is not a continuation of the "Who uses Scouts" thread. That whole debate with ScoutPL seems to have been semantics, and was worked out via email -- quite productively I might add. Interestingly enough, some US Army Field Manuals allude to the kind of reconaissance I was trying to support. Why the US Army has traditionally used "Route Recon" lies in their planning doctrine -- but that's another thread I don't want to see this board go through a dark ages, where people refuse to think and/or fear to express themselves. Zero X 5000 = Zero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patboivin Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: But the big one, which should be fixed, is the TacAI's incorrect logic that the Boccage is some sort of cover terrain like Woods. This caused units to "run for the boccage men!!", which didn't yield very positive results in terms of defensive manuevers Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This explains what happened to me while playing Cheneux, thanks Charles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 Why should people run a search before asking a question? Gee, maybe because it'd be quicker than waiting for a response? ------------------ Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 Seal7 - unfortunately a "quick answer from the CM Gods" usually does not end up being quick. Most newbies are going to have a curiosity as to "why this" or "why that", etc. ("Revenge of the Two-year olds"). Quite often this will become a re-enactment of a previous thread (for those that would have the energy to rehash it). Admittedly some newbies get a bit of a harsh acknowledgement to their questions from forum veterans. Often this reaction is unwarranted, but some questions however do deserve a bit of the reaction they get. This is especially true when it is a topic that has been covered explicity a couple of threads down or when the question/comment comes off like baiting or trolling (as some newbies are in the habit of posting). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 I feel there are tons of discussions going on here about all sorts of subjects. I don't see where there is a problem. Does every topic have to be an "Intellectual" conversation? It seems to me if you want a stimulating conversation post a topic. If you post something that doesn't get 500 responses maybe people aren't interested in that subject. It doesn't mean the board is falling apart with ignorant Newbies. Everybody has there own deal. Me, I like the lighter conversations and posts. I don't like discussing and answering questions like I am writing a thesis for my Doctorate. But in return I don't care that others do, that's their thing and occasionally I read through the ones I find interesting. I do feel that there has been some arrogant treatment of some of the newer members who aren't a part of the Old Boys Club, but I haven't been treated this way. I don't care that I wasn't here from the beginning nor will I ever. I am here now that's all that matters to me. When all is said and done it's just a game and I think we should all try and help eachother. I always try and answer questions from any member that I feel I can answer about any subject. Maybe when this is all said and done people here, old and new, will have a better understanding of eachother. Don't worry Pillar there are plenty of stimulating conversations to come. I kinda feel you started one with this thread, and to my disbelief the topic title didn't involve anything with 75/88/105mm in it!(anything over 30 posts usually does) Mord. [This message has been edited by Mord (edited 11-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar: Communities can still have intellectual discussions. We can get along without having to limit ourselves to such topics as hamsters and muzzle velocities. If this "community" falls apart at the nearest sign of deep discussion then I wouldn't call it much of a community. If the fear of being disagreed with is the route of these "how's the weather" discussions, I say we are not much of a community at all. But this is not the case, we *ARE* all friends here for the most part. I don't mind if people want to discuss trivialities and have a few giggles, but let's not abandon intellectual discussion in favour of it. I don't want to see this board go through a dark ages, where people refuse to think and/or fear to express themselves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'd agree with you there, but IMHO opinion I think the board is well balanced to be both informative and entertaining, and I don't perceive interesting discussion being threatened by light-heartedness! Further, I believe most of us here have the intelligence to switch between wit and reflection given the subject. Mace (see, I can be serious) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted November 23, 2000 Share Posted November 23, 2000 Like I said Mace, there is nothing wrong with light discussion, as long as it isn't the ONLY type of discussion taking place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts