Let's see if anyone reads this: Current State of the Internet forums

Journal JohnnyComeLately's Journal: Let's see if anyone reads this: Current State of the Internet forums 3

Journal by JohnnyComeLately on Thursday October 20, 2011 @02:01PM

I've always enjoyed that certain forums I've posted in had a certain decorum. For example, I used to get on F-Body.com every couple hours and swap info with Camaro and Firebird enthusiasts, until one day someone, rather than respond calmly, wrote, "F... you, you're full of s.." and let's just say that was the best part of it. I stopped going that day and have been back 3 or 4 times in the 6 or 7 years since.

Slashdot really hasn't gotten close, but it seems like we're a lot closer than a few years ago. It used to be, if you quoted stuff, threw in firsthand knowledge, you were safe. Now, you get people Google and Wiki mensa members that are great at cut and paste, but light on context. For example, you could state, "I'm a pilot and I promise you that in my x years of flying, the Air Force really tries a landing descent rate at X rate to minimize stress on the chassis." About 10 minutes later, you'll get a reply email. When you click the link to the reply, you'll see something like, "OH! LOGIC FAIL. There was this guy who descended at a faster rate." You're scratching your head, because the context was how to safely land. Most pilots prefer to land in the plane they took off within. Not dangling at the end of a parachute (hopefully deployed). 8 times out of 10 if the person actually read the entire article they quote, they would see that it supports the original statement. I had a neighbor do my legal work for me when he threatened to sue me.

I get a copy from a neighbor of the complaint to the Home Owners Association which also includes an intent for civil court action, in response to my solar panels on my roof. Within the complaint is a reference to a California legal proceeding against someone who had a solar device on his roof. The court rules against this person, so he's made a strong case. Right? Wrong. If he'd continued all the way through it actually completely destroyed his claim. The person had taken a bathtub, painted it black, and put it on his roof. The court rules he can't do this, not because he's not entitled, but because there is a suitable, comparable, practical commercial equiv which is not an eye sore. When you keep reading, it says the homeowner CAN use a commercial system and that this right is affirmed in the California Solar Rights Act. So... My neighbor has handed me all the ammo I need: Case Precedent and a copy of the California Solar Rights Act (quoted in the court case file). I point this out in a reply and never hear from him again.

So I guess I'm done with complaining now. I just wish know it alls really knew it all, as it would save me a ton of time explaining stuff that's quoted out of context or just plain wrong. I know, we're all shocked when something that isn't true is found on the Internet. I had one person kindly suggest that I correct the Wiki page. Right, if there's anything I love more than re-explaining things online, it's spending hours proofing Wiki. *DISCLAIMER* I have actually gone through cleaning up some wiki pages, but I'd rather floss or watch paint dry to be honest.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.