Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We seem to be accelerating the Drawing Room into a 'Fisking' paradise.


For those that don't know, 'Fisking' basically entails a copy & paste of a previous post accompanied by a point by point rebuttal.


It was the original preserve of socially dysfunctional conservative schoolboys, but has crept into bulletin boards because they were popular with socially dysfunctional conservative schoolboys.


It's not only ugly and unreadable, but it defeats the object of the commentator because it renders the overall message lost in a world of annotated garbage.


The only person that is satisfied by a point by point rebuttal is the person who posts it. No-one else can read it, or cares.


To 'Fisk' is to demonstrate that you don't get it. It makes the 'Fisker' look like an idiot. And it also looks like you copy schoolyard children because you're impressed by them. Not great for adults.


We like rational debate and coherent arguments, not a dirty protest.


Please please please can we stop this ridiculous practice on the EDF?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/10805-quoting-posts/
Share on other sites

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It makes the 'Fisker' look like an idiot.


How else do we respond to various points made in long posts, without it looking untidy? Also, I find it helpful in the sense that I am able to see at a glance to which (and who's) quote the poster is responding. It is also useful where e.g. some time has passed since X's post and Y's response (and where several posts have been entered in the meantime).


> We like rational debate and coherent arguments,

> not a dirty protest.


How does copying points from a previous post and subsequently posting a response to that post equate to a "dirty protest"? And how does the practice prevent debate being either rational or coherent?


I realise you will in all probability view this post as fisking (or as a dirty protest), but so be it.


*thinks: grumpy old man*

We seem to be accelerating the Drawing Room into a 'Fisking' paradise.


Who's "we"?


For those that don't know, 'Fisking' basically entails a copy & paste of a previous post accompanied by a point by point rebuttal. It was the original preserve of socially dysfunctional conservative schoolboys, but has crept into bulletin boards because they were popular with socially dysfunctional conservative schoolboys.


I do it all the time. And I am neither conservative nor a schoolboy


It's not only ugly and unreadable, but it defeats the object of the commentator because it renders the overall message lost in a world of annotated garbage.


No it doesn't. Bet you can still read this.


The only person that is satisfied by a point by point rebuttal is the person who posts it. No-one else can read it, or cares.


Yes they can. And yes they do. I found LadyMuck's reply simply fascinating.


To 'Fisk' is to demonstrate that you don't get it. It makes the 'Fisker' look like an idiot. And it also looks like you copy schoolyard children because you're impressed by them. Not great for adults.


No it doesn't.


We like rational debate and coherent arguments, not a dirty protest.


There's that "we" again. And who says that dirty protest isn't valuable?


Please please please can we stop this ridiculous practice on the EDF?


Shan't. And you can't make me.

" fisking

n.

[blogosphere; very common] A point-by-point refutation of a blog

entry or (especially) news story. A really stylish fisking is witty,

logical, sarcastic and ruthlessly factual; flaming or handwaving is

considered poor form."


Quite clearly doesn't apply...


Altho I was sure "fisking" was something else... something between two males... ah nevermind!

Whilst fisking has its place from time-to-time (and the Chair's alter-ego has been guilty of it), the Chair is of the opinion that the Drawing Room participants are capable of reading, cogitating, digesting and discerning information from paragraphs of text without resorting to breaking it down in to bite-size chunks of meaningless sound bites.


The Chair does not wish for style guidelines to be drawn-up but merely asks that we all try and behave like well-rounded, intelligent adults and show those Lounge-types how it's done.


That is all.

pffft...prohibited from quoting Homer Simpson, unable to bring in bacon sandwiches, and now the practice of "fisking" is to be limited to "from time to time"?


It's all going to the dogs I tell you...to the dogs...(and grumpy old men).


Incidentally, isn't this thread ripe for tossing into the About This Forum section?


*clears off to The Lounge with lunchbox and can of cider*

I think it can be quite a useful way of answering someone - especially on a thread where there are lots of posters going off on tangents. I'm surprised anyone would find it unreadable. I find it can actually make a post a lot more readable, by providing context and setting out points clearly.


It's only a problem when the response takes a condescending, superior tone. A trait which if anything, is more common amongst the non-fiskers!

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think it can be quite a useful way of answering

> someone - especially on a thread where there are

> lots of posters going off on tangents.


Absolutely.


>I'm

> surprised anyone would find it unreadable.


Seconded.


I find

> it can actually make a post a lot more readable,

> by providing context and setting out points

> clearly.


Couldn't agree more.


> It's only a problem when the response takes a

> condescending, superior tone.


Spot on!


>A trait which if

> anything, is more common amongst the non-fiskers!


*falls off chair laughing*


Over to you grumpy old man!

I'm with the ladies (and Jezza) on this one. When responding to a particular point or series of points within a post it makes sense to be clear which aspects of a long post you are referring to. Agree that it can be annoying if badly done, of course - but that is true of almost any debating style. For example, deliberately mis-interpreting others' comments and responding with unnecessary aggressiveness really winds me up.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Miranda Sawyer of the (once) Observer has done a piece on festival on Insta which might be of-interest.  Councils are private companies, imo. They make money for themselves, imo.  I do not think by law that they have to follow anything brought up by a consultation, this is for 'face' only - hence, LTNs and everything else.  
    • My understanding is the "free event" is 100% Gala, nothing to do with the council. Obviously Gala will still make money from the food & drink that they are trying to coerce punters into buying on their social media posts. Their costs will be negligible due to already having the infrastructure in place for Gala. So Gala are trying to appear community minded by providing this "free event", but the real goal is to set a precedent for a fourth day's festival - which surely no one could possibly object to?!? - in preparation for applying (again) for two three-day festivals spread over two weekends. It's only another two days, right, and the site & equipment is already there, so why would anyone object?!? More money for the council, much more money for Gala, win-win right? But yet another week of our park taken away from us, too, and another 18,000 people trampling & littering the park, and another week of disturbance for the native birds & wildlife...
    • Meson Don Felipe on The Cut was my go to place for many years. Though it's now many years since I was there. 10-15 minute walk from the Tate. If you go can you tell me what it's like nowadays?
    • Doubt you would have got much change out of £150.00 for battery and certainly having forked out for it, best to use your car. I recently sold  my car via webuyanycar.com - very pleasant experience & was roughly what I was expecting. Pop your bangers reg jnto their website to get an idea of price - they do send e mails once a fortnight/month just as an aid for you. Easy enough to delete - don’t even have to read valuation. They literally buy any car - if you can’t get it to them, they will charge you to get it there or recommend a co that will do it for you. Must say, mine was a 2014 reg and whilst a bit suspicious, paid extra to get money into my account as needed it for next car but was assured funds had I not gone down route I took would be in my account within 5 days. I now live in the country - every time I have been back to Dulwich and surrounding area, normally get a fine for driving at wrong time or parking at  wrong time so if I drive now, park in West or East Dulwich and do everything else by public transport and walking.  Were I still to be living in ED then before I left was pondering this very issue but since I have been back regularly for health reason I no longer drive but take the train and then buses, walk or Uber. Much cheaper than running a car and had I stayed, that would have been the course I would have taken. I don’t go out everyday, have an allotment or job to go to or family so in my case, would be cheaper not to have a car.  Was truely shocked   at the cost of second hand cars…..but where I now live only has a smattering of buses so no choice but to have wheels to get from A to B etc.          
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...