oltmannd So, we are free to do what we chose to do and measure "better" anyway that we care to rationalize it in our heads. What's really unfair is to pin Fred to a cross for having an opinion we don't particularly like or agree with.
So, we are free to do what we chose to do and measure "better" anyway that we care to rationalize it in our heads. What's really unfair is to pin Fred to a cross for having an opinion we don't particularly like or agree with.
Don,
I generally agree with much of what you say except that I don’t understand this part:
Why is it unfair for us to criticize Fred while it is not unfair for Fred to criticize us?
You seem to be exaggerating our criticism of Fred (saying we are pinning Fred to a cross) while deemphasizing Fred’s criticism of railfan behavior that he does not prefer. I don’t think anything said here is any harsher than what Fred has said about certain fan behavior.
megh--I think that part of the problem may also be that there is a kind of relationship here between the writer (one who is currently having a column in a publication), and the reader--who is in a position usually seen as mainly passive.
BucyrusWhy is it unfair for us to criticize Fred while it is not unfair for Fred to criticize us?
This creates an uneasy situation wherein one has access to a media source( hence, has more influence) than a reader, who, most of the time can shrug his shoulders and carry on---in a somewhat less active position. I heard this termed a type of "power relationship". In that the columnist has a type of power--in this case he has access to print media---that others, ourselves, the reader---do not. Myself I'd rather stick with active/passive pairings here----
All in all, for a reader to criticize a columnist in his/her position will be seen, by some, as "unfair"... for me---not so much----if he can, then we can too....
Any argument carried far enough will end up in Semantics--Hartz's law of rhetoric Emerald. Leemer and Southern The route of the Sceptre Express Barry
I just started my blog site...more stuff to come...
http://modeltrainswithmusic.blogspot.ca/
If I were a columnist like Fred Frailey or Don Phillips I would be thrilled to get the responses those two generate!
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
You can criticize what Fred said , but when you criticize Fred himself, it's personal. An example would be if one of the "seven ways" was"never jaywalk - a friend of mine was killed by a car while jaywaking". But, someone would argue, "what if it was an emergency?" , or "what if I'm very careful and it's 7 AM on a Sunday morning?", or even "I don't believe in crosswalks?" So, it would that make it wrong to write "never jaywalk?" Would you have to carefully word your statement around every possible argument for fear that someone may internalize your generality? You should write, "for some of you I would suggest that you don't jaywalk unless you are very careful, have a deeply held need to jaywalk or otherwise feel jay walking is a reasonable thing to do,at least some of the time."? No. I don't think so. "Never jaywalk" is a good succinct expression of the point you're trying to make. Should you be offended by someone writing "don't jaywalk"? No. it wasn't personal. But, if someone writes back, "I don't believe you know someone who was killed while jaywalking.", that's calling a specific person a liar and that's personal.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
henry6If I were a columnist like Fred Frailey or Don Phillips I would be thrilled to get the responses those two generate!
But when you can't come up with a good arguement on the facts you always go for character asassination. It is the American way!
henry6But when you can't come up with a good arguement on the facts you always go for character asassination. It is the American way!
oltmanndThe second is what do we use in this case as the measure for better. With tennis, it's pretty easy, if you win more against the same level of opponent, then you are the better player. In this case, we have a pretty well connected guy within the industry laying out those things he thinks would make us "better".
I believe that Fred was crystal clear over the grounds and areas which he feels are most in need of improvement in order for us to qualify as 'better" under his sieve. Considering he began with a rant over why his industry buddies feel uncomfortable sharing online forums with 'un-better' railfans who might harbor an opinion thatconflicts with their preferred personal out look, and his 7 bullets that follow seem tailored towards creating a more "coco-and-marshmallows" type environment for their comfort and pleasure.
oltmannd. What's really unfair is to pin Fred to a cross for having an opinion we don't particularly like or agree with.
If you ask me, it appears more like those here trying hardest to defend Fred are the ones who really have him 'up on the cross'... fwiw.
oltmanndhenry6If I were a columnist like Fred Frailey or Don Phillips I would be thrilled to get the responses those two generate!I think they'd rather we react to their ideas than how they expressed them!
Why not both? I'm sure they get all kinds of responses-----
I mean, if everyone agreed with them I'd be thinking they'd be finding it kind of boring--
Perhaps what Fred was trying to convey was that by limiting ones self to too narrow a spectrum, we are depriving ouselves the full, robust experience that the hobby has to offer?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
edblysard wrote the following post on Thursday, February 25, 2010:
Which is why I was slightly put out at the Mr. Frailey's implied concept of there being a "Better" rail fan, which implies that those who don't follow his recommendations are part of a lesser type of rail fan.
Rather a long pause inn this thread, but maybe time for reflection after 1/2 year. Seems to me everyone should feel free to railfan in the way he/she wants to enjoy themselves, as long as their actions don't hurt or interfere with anyone else or others' properties.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
I can't disagree, any more than I could if someone said this about photography in general, railroad modelling, and a myriad of other pursuits. If a person is reasonably in tune with others around them, and makes a conscious effort to refrain from interfering with another's enjoyment, but otherwise pursues her own way through a favourite pastime, what could the problem be? Each of us should be free to do as little or as much in the way of learning and evolvement, call it 'progess', as we wish to. To some, enjoyment comes largely out of discovery, and for others the discovery is fine only being incidental to other aspects of creating enjoyment, even if it is repeating the same old patterns of behaviour.
-Crandell
schlimm Rather a long pause inn this thread, but maybe time for reflection after 1/2 year. Seems to me everyone should feel free to railfan in the way he/she wants to enjoy themselves, as long as their actions don't hurt or interfere with anyone else or others' properties.
Rather a long pause inn this thread, but maybe time for reflection after 1/2 year.
Seems to me everyone should feel free to railfan in the way he/she wants to enjoy themselves, as long as their actions don't hurt or interfere with anyone else or others' properties.
Wanted to give a couple of rising tempers a chance to simmer down
As far as freedom to pursue ones own destiny goes, Personally i'll agree with you, but this thread is about Mr Frailey's column editorializing on what (he evidently thinks) we SHOULD be doing.
True enough, CO, and I can understand that it invites a debate about the relative merits or value of what one person thinks we all 'should' do vs. what we are permitted and wish to do. It's like the matter of kneeling when/if we pray; all may, some should, none must.
selector True enough, CO, and I can understand that it invites a debate about the relative merits or value of what one person thinks we all 'should' do vs. what we are permitted and wish to do. It's like the matter of kneeling when/if we pray; all may, some should, none must. -Crandell
Frailey is a great writer, as evidenced by the interest stimulated by subject magazine article. I always look forward to his contributions.
off topic, but how come I have to log in twice now, under the new framework?
What I'm talking about is, suppose I am not logged on, and hit the [REPLY] button on a thread, I am immediately taken to a page headed with the words " You must be logged on to contribute" with a list box on the left margin for my e-mail address and password on the left margin, and a Red box on the right side sporting a sub heading that reads "Get our free e-mail newsletters"
So, I enter my e-mail addy and password, and when I try to log on I am kicked right back to the same page headed "You must be logged on to contribute", with the list boxes on the left side, and the same red box on the right, but now under that red box is a whitebox that contains my Avatar plus listed bullets reading :
Obviously, your system knows I've logged on or it wouldn't be displaying my avatar, yet I am required to log on a second time before I can access the customary text composition box to make the intended reply.
Any idea why?
Nope, not a schmick. There are changes that I am dealing with as a mod that leave me less than enthusiastic, too. Twice in the past four days I have moved threads that clearly needed moving, and when I clicked on the function, it hung up until I got a blue font oops message on the white background. Closed the browser, opened, found the site, checked the old location, and the thread is gone, moved. Something's weird and using my time in a way I don't appreciate. . I can't email anyone, nor can you, and now we can't edit PM's to each other. If I goof and don't see a doozie, or dispatch an intemperate composition, we are both stuck with it.
If this problem persists, please contact customer service. It has to be 40% of what they do, looking after problems of accessibility to the forums for several weeks after a new package is rolled out.
Also, Wade notified us that he and team have been busy on the other magazine fora dealing with their issues. I think they may be about to tackle some of the problems people have posted here.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.