Murphy SidingYou type your words, I'll type mine, and we won't have to interpret them for others-deal?
If you read what I said, you will see that I only interpreted your words for myself. Did I misinterpret you?
You said, "It wouldn't hurt to show some deference to their knowledge and experience- whether you believe them or not."
I am not in financial, nor a climate change expert, if there truely is one. In such cases, I would defer to those who do. So pardon me that my comment was not aimed at those aspects of the industry or others.
So if a railroad engineer opines that concern about climate change is nonsense, we are to defer to his expertise? If a dispatcher opines on the financials of railroad X, his opinion is more worthy than a financial anayst's or broker? If an outsider living near rail lines voices any complaint, is it just fine if a railroader declares him to be an ignorant NIMBY? Is that what is meant by deferring to the professionals lest they feel insulted or bored?
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm If you take outsider questions and comments as insulting, then perhaps you should notice that this is supposed to be a forum for people interested in trains. It is not a forum exclusively for rail professionals.
If you take outsider questions and comments as insulting, then perhaps you should notice that this is supposed to be a forum for people interested in trains. It is not a forum exclusively for rail professionals.
A rather disingenuous replay.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy SidingEuclid tree68EuclidBut how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class? I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class. But I do agree with Murph that the opinion of those folks should carry some weight because they have experience in the field and perhaps even with the specific idea under discussion. I am not sure I understand. Since you quote what I said, I assume you are responding to me about that quote of what I said. Yet what you quoted is just my interpretation of what Murphy Siding said. If you disagree with the conclusion of my quote, then you disagree with Murphy Siding. And since I also disagree with what he said, I agree with you, and you agree with me. Awe gee wiz! You don't have to interpret my words or try to turn them to mean something else. Rather than tell the world what you think I mean, why not let the nice folks read my words themselves, and make their own conclusions?
Euclid tree68EuclidBut how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class? I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class. But I do agree with Murph that the opinion of those folks should carry some weight because they have experience in the field and perhaps even with the specific idea under discussion. I am not sure I understand. Since you quote what I said, I assume you are responding to me about that quote of what I said. Yet what you quoted is just my interpretation of what Murphy Siding said. If you disagree with the conclusion of my quote, then you disagree with Murphy Siding. And since I also disagree with what he said, I agree with you, and you agree with me.
tree68EuclidBut how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class? I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class. But I do agree with Murph that the opinion of those folks should carry some weight because they have experience in the field and perhaps even with the specific idea under discussion.
EuclidBut how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class?
I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class.
But I do agree with Murph that the opinion of those folks should carry some weight because they have experience in the field and perhaps even with the specific idea under discussion.
I am not sure I understand. Since you quote what I said, I assume you are responding to me about that quote of what I said. Yet what you quoted is just my interpretation of what Murphy Siding said. If you disagree with the conclusion of my quote, then you disagree with Murphy Siding. And since I also disagree with what he said, I agree with you, and you agree with me.
I did not turn your words into anything. I only asked you how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class. You never replied, so Larry replied to your words but he replied to me as though I had said what you said.
Larry said, "I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class."
I agree with him. That was my point when I asked you how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class.
Euclid...you agree with me.
Not even close.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Euclidtree68EuclidBut how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class? I don't think it's a matter of being considered correct just because they are members of a class. But I do agree with Murph that the opinion of those folks should carry some weight because they have experience in the field and perhaps even with the specific idea under discussion. I am not sure I understand. Since you quote what I said, I assume you are responding to me about that quote of what I said. Yet what you quoted is just my interpretation of what Murphy Siding said. If you disagree with the conclusion of my quote, then you disagree with Murphy Siding. And since I also disagree with what he said, I agree with you, and you agree with me.
Mookie RRKen Euclid I am all for not insulting people either by direct name calling or by the fine art of condescending sarcasm. Disagreement without taking it personally is a fine art, and forums such as this are great places to practice that art. There are those who know and have been active within the industry, and others looking in from the outside that merely guess. It is insulting to those who do, to listen to those who have not done, make specious arguments or unqualified comments. Considering the history of a few here, like Bucky, it is no wonder a lot of folks no longer are active here, and at other venues. Could you just read and reply to those that ask questions? Maybe? Sure would make the forum a lot more interesting to a few of us that do have questions or want to hear some of the details.
RRKen Euclid I am all for not insulting people either by direct name calling or by the fine art of condescending sarcasm. Disagreement without taking it personally is a fine art, and forums such as this are great places to practice that art. There are those who know and have been active within the industry, and others looking in from the outside that merely guess. It is insulting to those who do, to listen to those who have not done, make specious arguments or unqualified comments. Considering the history of a few here, like Bucky, it is no wonder a lot of folks no longer are active here, and at other venues.
Euclid I am all for not insulting people either by direct name calling or by the fine art of condescending sarcasm. Disagreement without taking it personally is a fine art, and forums such as this are great places to practice that art.
I am all for not insulting people either by direct name calling or by the fine art of condescending sarcasm. Disagreement without taking it personally is a fine art, and forums such as this are great places to practice that art.
There are those who know and have been active within the industry, and others looking in from the outside that merely guess. It is insulting to those who do, to listen to those who have not done, make specious arguments or unqualified comments. Considering the history of a few here, like Bucky, it is no wonder a lot of folks no longer are active here, and at other venues.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
tree68 One "problem" we do encounter is someone bringing up an idea that's been beaten to death in a much older thread. Most of the time someone will dig into the archives and post a link to the old thread, but if it's been too long, the natural turnover of participants means the discussion starts anew...
Yes, but..............
Unless a poster gets snippy because his idea has been rated as a non-starter, I think most of the "old heads" are more than willing to discuss the hows and the whys of an operation and how the posted idea doesn't (or does) fit into the mix.
One "problem" we do encounter is someone bringing up an idea that's been beaten to death in a much older thread. Most of the time someone will dig into the archives and post a link to the old thread, but if it's been too long, the natural turnover of participants means the discussion starts anew...
ACYI have personal knowledge of a recent situation where new management came into a situation with preconceived notions. Old heads were not consulted, in spite of the fact that the combined work force had several THOUSAND accumulated years of experience. There was no appreciation of the notion that those employees understood the problems or might contribute to solutions. Experienced employees were told, in so many words, that their input was not wanted or needed.
.
Murphy SidingWe are all able to take the validity of anyone's opinions- including yours and mine- in any way we wish. However, it's a railroad oriented forum, with Actual railroad employees participating. It wouldn't hurt to show some deference to their knowledge and experience- whether you believe them or not.
This is a discussion forum, and that means there will be disagreements, so we should be free to disagree. But how can there be honest discussion if one particular class of participants are considered to be correct whether they are or not, just because they are members of a class?
dehusman Convicted One I may like trains, the people who work on them, and the business model surrounding them, but dang it: Some of my best friends might be.....environmentalists.....or ....Hospital Administrators.....or (shudder) NIMBYS. And reading enough of the coarse observations often made here toward such "clueless morons"...you soon lose respect for the source of that material. Looking at it from the other side of the glass. I have over the years past read some very insulting and disparaging things written about professional railroaders. I have read some nasty comments made about situations with which I was directly involved and since I was directly involved I knew the assumptions made by the non-railroad people were uninformed. Since the non-railroaders didn't seem to have much concern for the railroader's feelings, I have over the years been less concerned about their feelings. I actually was so PO'd by the venom that I didn't even read, let alone participate on the Trains Forum for three or four years.
Convicted One I may like trains, the people who work on them, and the business model surrounding them, but dang it: Some of my best friends might be.....environmentalists.....or ....Hospital Administrators.....or (shudder) NIMBYS. And reading enough of the coarse observations often made here toward such "clueless morons"...you soon lose respect for the source of that material.
I may like trains, the people who work on them, and the business model surrounding them, but dang it: Some of my best friends might be.....environmentalists.....or ....Hospital Administrators.....or (shudder) NIMBYS. And reading enough of the coarse observations often made here toward such "clueless morons"...you soon lose respect for the source of that material.
Looking at it from the other side of the glass. I have over the years past read some very insulting and disparaging things written about professional railroaders. I have read some nasty comments made about situations with which I was directly involved and since I was directly involved I knew the assumptions made by the non-railroad people were uninformed. Since the non-railroaders didn't seem to have much concern for the railroader's feelings, I have over the years been less concerned about their feelings. I actually was so PO'd by the venom that I didn't even read, let alone participate on the Trains Forum for three or four years.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Euclid - thank you for your reply. I will have to sit with it for awhile. I am really in over my head, but will try to sort through the wide range of your interests. While I will watch heavy equipment work for hours, and I am mesmerized by trains, planes and ships - you go a lot deeper than I would. I guess you would be more the "how does it work" and I am the "I want to watch it work."
I lived toward the end of the steam era. It was dirty, hard work, long hours, bad weather, hard on families and you had to be pretty sturdy to do the job. But I still wanted to work for the railroad!
Convicted One Murphy Siding Pick an example. I really don't want to single out individuals, lest the point I'm trying to make then becomes dismisable as a personal attack. And i'm really not trying to make any one person look bad. But go back to the Rochester/Mayo threads, the Abo Canyon threads, the "neighborhood desires a silent crossing" threads and just absorb the diminutive color volunteered towards "outsiders". I may like trains, the people who work on them, and the business model surrounding them, but dang it: Some of my best friends might be.....environmentalists.....or ....Hospital Administrators.....or (shudder) NIMBYS. And reading enough of the coarse observations often made here toward such "clueless morons"...you soon lose respect for the source of that material. Now mind you, I'm not saying those guys are not entitled to their opinions, and i'm not saying they should not be allowed to express those opinions. I'm real big on free speech. But What I'm saying is, if you (they) want to play with fire, then sometimes the heat's going to flash back at them, and trying to argue that they should be held immune from the same sort of treatment that they dish out, is fantasyland. If LeBron dissed my daughter just because of where she worked, I really wouldn't care how offended he became over my payback to him .
Murphy Siding Pick an example.
I really don't want to single out individuals, lest the point I'm trying to make then becomes dismisable as a personal attack. And i'm really not trying to make any one person look bad.
But go back to the Rochester/Mayo threads, the Abo Canyon threads, the "neighborhood desires a silent crossing" threads and just absorb the diminutive color volunteered towards "outsiders".
Now mind you, I'm not saying those guys are not entitled to their opinions, and i'm not saying they should not be allowed to express those opinions. I'm real big on free speech. But What I'm saying is, if you (they) want to play with fire, then sometimes the heat's going to flash back at them, and trying to argue that they should be held immune from the same sort of treatment that they dish out, is fantasyland.
If LeBron dissed my daughter just because of where she worked, I really wouldn't care how offended he became over my payback to him .
Railroaders can handle the heat - they are immersed in it on a daily basis. I seems to be the non-railroaders that have a aversion to the heat of the topics.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Mookie,
My interest is mainly in the physical plant and operations, but not much in the business end. It began in the present era many moons ago. I was too late for the golden age of steam, but lived it through books and stories.
Eventually that interest flowed backward in time and I followed it back to the late 1800s. I spent some time there and did some historical research. I was amazed at how little appreciated that era of railroading is. I guess it is because it is so far removed from the present that it seems practically inaccessible to most people. Those were the wild teenage years of railroading.
I am somewhat interested in ships and historic shipwrecks, but not in other transportation modes. I have lots of different interests in machinery and heavy industrial things like power plants, mines, bulldozers, and heavy construction equipment. I occasionally enjoy a good refinery.
For the day to day operations of current railroading, my interest has broadened out to more general trends such as the oil-by-rail issues, new equipment developments, etc.
While everyone is over on Google, I have a question for Euclid - I haven't read many of your posts, since I am more the "how does the engine work". But I was wondering if you would tell me what is your interest in railroads? Is it the day-to-day operations, the business end of it, the mechanics, a certain part like MOW or coal or moving of freight or the study of the people involved in railroading.
And is it just railroads or do your interests lie in other businesses, ie. automobiles, ships/boats, airplanes, etc. Feel free to PM me if you aren't comfortable answering on the forum.
Euclid On a forum, I place no value on credentials, claimed, assumed, or otherwise presented. I only judge what people say based on my own knowledge of what they are saying. If my knowledge does not encompass what they are saying, I consider the reasonableness of what they say and their attitude in saying it. If it is snarky, I dismiss their argument out of hand whether they are professional railroaders or not.
On a forum, I place no value on credentials, claimed, assumed, or otherwise presented. I only judge what people say based on my own knowledge of what they are saying. If my knowledge does not encompass what they are saying, I consider the reasonableness of what they say and their attitude in saying it. If it is snarky, I dismiss their argument out of hand whether they are professional railroaders or not.
Murphy Siding:
What you are saying is that you have divided the forum into two groups. One group you define as professional railroaders. You then assume that because they are such, they know everything about railroading, and are always accurate in that knowledge. Therefore, when they speak on the topic, everyone in the other forum group should defer to the railroader and not question or disagree with anything they say.
This is so utterly simplistic that I am surprised you are not embarrassed to admit it. You are using the professional status as the sole credential that qualifies a person as all knowing on the topic. Yet you have no way of knowing who is a professional railroader or has been one. You also have no way to account for railroad knowledge gained through other means. And most importantly, if you hung around with professional railroaders, you would know that, as a group, they are just like any other group. Some are wise and knowledgeable, others not so much.
Smokescreen? Pick an example. Suppose we all went on an NBA forum, and told all the NBA players on the forum that they didn't know what they were doing, and then proceeded to tell them how they should play? What would be the incentive for the NBA players to stay on the forum?
tree68I'd opine that it's because many times the railroader's "opinion" isn't an opinion at all - it's based on real-life experience, To draw on Euclid's example - if he and his team walked into the CEO's office with their latest creation, and after their presentation the CEO walked over to a file cabinet, pulled out an identical item and said "this one didn't work, either," would they spend time pointing out why their (identical) invention is better?
To draw on Euclid's example - if he and his team walked into the CEO's office with their latest creation, and after their presentation the CEO walked over to a file cabinet, pulled out an identical item and said "this one didn't work, either," would they spend time pointing out why their (identical) invention is better?
Your observation on "opinion vs experience" likely has some merit (in context with this discussion), but it appears that you have missed the central gist of my previous post,
if in your example the CEO pulled out the prior work and then chided those in his office as being "About AS CLUELESS AS THE MORONS WHO SUBMITTED THIS GARBAGE 5 YEARS AGO", and then proceeded to dress down his current audience with an array of condescending epithets, ...would you be inclined to excuse his childish behavior simply because his beard was greyer than yours?
Would you walk away from the meeting feeling like you were a part of something important, that you wanted to contribute again to, in the future?
How much tolerance should you be expected to have for some one who is clearly stroking their own ego at your expense, and even being rude about how they go about it? Are we to be made to feel we are just a piece, or a part? That is what I saw at the core of this thread, just enveloped in a smoke screen
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.