Train Wrecks: why do they happen in the technical discussions?

[LiquidFeet]

Train wrecks don't happen in trip reports. They don't happen in discussions about winter tires. They don't happen on gardening forums which I also visit, even when people disagree about what the plant's name is or whether it's failing because of fungus, bacteria, virus, low water, etc.
Why in technical forums?

 

[Art of Skiing]

Probably an ego thing. Ski technique is something very personal and I think it is in people's nature to be competitive about it. Especially when you become better and better and you are passionate about it. I think subjects like plants and tires are less likely to end up in an ego contest. If someone else has a nice plant or tire, you just buy the same one yourself. If someone else has a different skiing concept and you do not know how the person ski's and you disagree with what they are saying, even though they might be right, it takes a lot to swallow your pride and change your attitude towards that subject. Because changing your attitude or opinion probably implies contradicting what you said before and people hate being inconsistent.

 

[karlo]

Why in technical forums?

Lack of definitions. Plus, the inability, without going through an extraordinary writing exercise, to convey intent and subtleties. It's why technical committees assemble face to face at professional gatherings.

Just as an example, the quiet and still issue. Imagine the time that would be required to come to a definition that most can subscribe to, while also coming up with terms that cover the variations and concepts others want to express. A huge amount of time. That means, it is complex. Now, talk about it without the definitions? Train wreck.

I'm going back to the music thread. No train wrecks there.

 

[fatbob]

Ego. Jargon. Respect mah authoritee! Over adherence to dogma. Failure for people to understand that different people learn differently. Difficulty in articulating a simple visual thing in words. People who may be great communicators in real life coming across as narcissistic know it all's.

To be honest it was always the most off putting area of Epic.

 

[Philpug]

Ego. Jargon. Respect mah authoritee! Over adherence to dogma. Failure for people to understand that different people learn differently. Difficulty in articulating a simple visual thing in words. People who may be great communicators in real life coming across as narcissistic know it all's.

To be honest it was always the most off putting area of Epic.

QUOTED FOR TRUTH.

I am debating closing the thread on this comment and making it a sticky at the top of the instructions forum.

 

[LiquidFeet]

Why would you close it?

 

[Core2]

This place is mild compared to car forums.

 

[Erik Timmerman]

It's because everyone wants to be right and to "win" more than they want to understand, learn or share. Well, maybe not everyone.

 

[KingGrump]

I don't really know the cause of the train wrecks and/or how to fix/prevent them. I do notice there are lot more respect among the members that had skied together in real life.

May be there is something there.

 

[4ster]

I usually get off the tracks when I see the train coming .
Someone mentioned it in the other thread, that usually the OP's question or issue has been addressed thoroughly in the first 2 pages. After that the thread usually goes off on some other tangent & on & on & on . Not sure if shutting it down after 2 pages is the answer but maybe.
I think the Ask a Pro concept on the other site was a good premise, just never seemed to get legs.

 

[pais alto]

Sixty-five people at a party, how do you know which one is a ski instructor?

They'll tell you.

I think that's related to the OP, but I'm kind of a dick.

 

[oldschoolskier]

I agree it's an ego thing, failure to understand or accept that all information provides something valuable even if that view point is different than ones own.

Train wrecks are stopped, when openness and acceptance, along with willingness to understand is employed (politely), when these aren't, well.......TRAIN WRECK.

Over all at Pugski the former applies (and enforced thanks Phil, Tricia and the moderators). This openness promotes understand advancement, close this and we live in the dark ages. Fine Balance.

Cheers

 

[François Pugh]

Two things:
1. Ego.
2.

 

[Tricia]

I don't really know the cause of the train wrecks and/or how to fix/prevent them. I do notice there are lot more respect among the members that had skied together in real life.

May be there is something there.

I was thinking about this in the terminology thread, but I didn't know how to say it.

If I'm sitting across the table from you and you say something that I don't agree with, I may say, "Well, that's just dumb". We go on with our discussion with no issues and end up having a good day skiing, eating, and drinking together.
If I reply to a post with a comment like "Well, that's just dumb" you are more likely to take it personally.

The difference is expression. In person, you see my facial expression and the conversation flows based on personal experience. On line, its just words on a page.


We have a few members here that we've had to edit their posts to take out words like useless and senseless. The person who posted them was right, but those words are just train wreck bait.

Maybe, if we do a glossary of terminology we can also do a glossary of words we should refrain from using.

Edit: The words we choose are important, if we want to continue to be part of the discussion, in real life and on line.

 

[Philpug]

IMHO, much has to do with accountability, there are no repercussions for words or actions when hiding behind a handle. This is one of the reasons we preferred members to use their actual name when signing up because there as an additional level of accountability. @KingGrump brings up some good points, the interactions are better with people who actually have met or skied together. One of the best complements @Tricia and I have received over and over is when we go and ski with a new member is them saying "You are exactly like who you are on line", we take a ton of pride in that. As examples...ski with a @4ster, @KingGrump @ScotsSkier @James and you will be able to say the same thing. There are some here or on line that you cannot say that about, personally I do not understand, it is tough enough to be myself, let alone having two personas. Is the internet or being able to hide behind a screen name like being an alcholic and being a mean drunk? To coin @Josh Matta's phrase "It's not that you are a mean drunk, its just that you are mean and the alcohol proves it". I had to say in another thread, if you have to block someone from a thread, it's not the thread that is the issue. We are here to talk skiing at a higher level. That higher level is not just the level of the content but a maturity level too, building yourself up by knocking someone down is not a higher level. Demeaning someone is not a higher level. If someone wants to be that way, there are plenty of other sites to do it on.

 

[mdf]

To expand on @Tricia 's point about face to face communication. It is not just tone of voice that is missing, sometimes it is simply the limited bandwidth of words on a page. There was a recent exchange ("an expert skier, say a Level 4") where one person honestly did not get the context and was puzzled, while the other thought he was trying to start a fight.

 

[KingGrump]

It appears to me the respect, comradery, understanding, humor and what not from the real life meetings carries well over to interactions in the forum.

 

[François Pugh]

Some people are (impolite noun deleted), a few, but enough. However, even (impolite noun deleted) have some incentive to be polite and respectful of people they meet in person who may present a risk of the (impolite noun deleted )having something to lose. They have very little incentive to be nice to folk they figure they will never meet and have nothing to lose by being nasty to them. Thus, on the internet some of the (impolite noun deleted) will reveal their true selves - even if they go by their real names.

 

[Tricia]

To expand on @Tricia 's point about face to face communication. It is not just tone of voice that is missing, sometimes it is simply the limited bandwidth of words on a page. There was a recent exchange ("an expert skier, say a Level 4") where one person honestly did not get the context and was puzzled, while the other thought he was trying to start a fight.

All of this would work best if none of us had ego.

 

[Tricia]

Some people are (impolite noun deleted), a few, but enough. However, even (impolite noun deleted) have some incentive to be polite and respectful of people they meet in person who may present a risk of the (impolite noun deleted )having something to lose. They have very little incentive to be nice to folk they figure they will never meet and have nothing to lose by being nasty to them. Thus, on the internet some of the (impolite noun deleted) will reveal their true selves - even if they go by their real names.

This is why the rules are simple here.
Another welcome thread, this time with rules
We will not allow Pugski to erode like Epic did in this area, and we have no problem pointing the (impolite noun deleted) to these simple rules, and invoking the rules when necessary.

In case you missed it -

While Phil and Tricia's heads are spinning, I'm going to be the bad cop.

The Rules

1. Don't be an ass.
1a. Being overly sensitive is also being an ass.
2. P&T have sole determination over who is being an ass.

Ok, that about covers it!

Also, if you want to read the nice rules, go here.