![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Aug 15, 10:37*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes: I'm criticizing people not backing up their claims with fact. Yes, you're criticizing people. *That's not a discussion of aviation. Well this thread really isn't about aviation. This is one of those meta-threads that pop every once in a while. It is about the group and the people who are ruining it. Think of this thread as a sort of "appeals court" for the discussions that go one here. A place to criticize and analyze the things that go on behind the discussions. Statements made by anyone can be evaluated on their own merits, without any reference to personalities or the people making the statements. *Facts are facts; falsehoods are falsehoods. *It doesn't matter where they come from. Statements can be verified by comparison with other sources of known accuracy. There is never any need to worry about who made the statements. No disagreement here. In that post I'm challenging him to back up his claims with fact. Either he is right, or he is wrong. *The old saw about backing claims up with facts is just a diversion tactic, and a poor one at that. *If he is wrong, correct him. *If he is right, let it stand. Huh? Claims never need to be backed up? Backing up your claims is analogous to showing your work on a math problem. It shows the processes you used to come to your conclusion. Dudley made a claim that I whole heartedly disagree with, so I asked him to "show his work" to get a better understanding of why he feels that way. And his reasons for me being the worlds worst instructor I think is very aviation related. No, they are personality related. *Exactly the type of thing that you were criticizing just a few posts ago. What I was criticizing "a few posts ago", was arguments hinged solely on character. This tangent that has popped up may be related to people's character, but you sure won't find me hinging any arguments solely on someone's character, if thats what you're implying. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Google Groups Beta | Steven P. McNicoll | Piloting | 27 | June 10th 05 02:33 PM |
Posting via Google Groups | jim rosinski | Piloting | 7 | February 4th 05 08:13 PM |
The New Google Groups Interface | [email protected] | Soaring | 2 | December 13th 04 06:29 AM |