| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kirby Warden writes:
> In lugnet.build.mecha, Dave Johann writes:
> > In lugnet.build.mecha, Kirby Warden writes:
> > > Bryce-
> > >
> > > You may participate more in a forum than others, but there is no special
> > > recognition or status for doing so. Further, no one is required to post
> > > MOCs just to earn the priviledge of participating in a discussion.
> >
> > Where did Bryce once mention that posting MOCs is a requirement for
> > participation? I've read his message numerous times now and I don't see
> > where he mentions this at all.
>
> I just made a new post where I snipped out the specific issues that I feel
> need to be addressed. Please take a look at it.
I did. You've explained your opinion well in the new post.
>
> >
> > By this logic, I should be able to post in .train and have similar
> > status/recognition as Larry P.? I don't think so.
>
> You are correct that you would not have the same status/recognition. But
> that would not prevent you from sharing ideas or opinions.
I never mentioned that it would prevent me from being able to express my ideas
or opinions. I merely point out that my credibility isn't the same and therefore
wouldn't hold as much influence in their realms of building expertise.
> Posting MOCs of a certain
> > type does lend to your credibility as a builder of that type of MOC. The
> > more credibility you carry, the more you are 'looked up to' and asked for
> > advice more often within that particular building community.
>
> Again, lack of status or recognition should not limit ones participation in
> discussions.
Agreed.
> I'd prefer to
> > ask Lar how to build a train or Shiri a castle then go to Bryce for the same
> > advice.
>
> Such is the result of status and/or recognition. I have given thanks where
> it was due on several occasions.
>
> >
> > I'd agree that while no one is required to post MOCs in order to take part
> > in a discussion, it certainly doesn't hurt one's credibility to do so.
>
> Here, I have the impression you may have misread me. My post has nothing to
> do with ones *credibility*, that is entirely subjective and open to debate
> on a case by case basis. My point is that people should not have to earn
> *any* credibility, status, or recognition just to post an opinion or
> participate in an ongoing discussion.
I agree with you here as well. I suspect that I misread you because you didn't
pull Bryce's earlier post apart enough for me to see where you were going with
your argument. Your more recent post cleared up any misconceptions I had.
Case closed AFAIAC.
-Dave
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: My top 10
|
| (...) I just made a new post where I snipped out the specific issues that I feel need to be addressed. Please take a look at it. (...) You are correct that you would not have the same status/recognition. But that would not prevent you from sharing (...) (23 years ago, 13-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.build.mecha)
|
46 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
