Main      Site Guide    
Message Forum
Re: three times too short :-)
Posted By: Ferrick, on host 63.86.126.135
Date: Thursday, June 14, 2001, at 08:21:56
In Reply To: Re: three times too short :-) posted by Wolfspirit on Wednesday, June 13, 2001, at 21:35:58:

> > But, hey, I'm getting better. This response was four times as long when I first started writing it.
> >
> > Ar"edit yourself so no one else has to"thur
>
> Bah. You see? You've caved into peer group pressure and now you've lost your individuality. Now you sound like, oh, our gentle and self-referential Don the Monkeyman (not that that's a bad thing)... but you definitely don't sound like your unique Arthur you.
>
> Wolf "seems to be of opposite opinion to not only Brunnen-G, and Ferrick, but...but... Ellmyruh too! *sob* " spirit

Well, I guess I should have editied myself, too. My comments came only after reading that Arthur wanted people to read his posts and worried that some people might just skip them without even skimming them. I wanted to give my reasoning to Arthur. I understand the purpose of length. Sometimes a question deserves a simple answer, sometimes it warrants a long response. My use of the word "evidence" probably was ill advised as well. Evidence is important to any argument and I feel that Arthur has valid arguments and backs it up. After taking many classes on rhetoric and communication, though, I often am too critical on the delivery instead of content. This is both good and bad, I know. I suppose what I felt was overdone was the examples using words. Or phrases. Or sentences. Or paragraphs. That was where I began to skim, when it seemed that more words were being thrown in and I wanted to find out what was hidden, to see if a Straw Man had been placed. I don't think Arthur was putting up a smokescreen to hide anything, but I was wary of that, nonetheless, and I wanted to be fair about it. I'm convinced of this even more because Arthur has stayed with us through all this.

Anyway, I do not want to stifle anything. My comments were but a suggestion and obviously others will disagree with me. I do not have a problem with that. Ultimately, it is what you have to say that impresses me. How you say it can either enhance or detract from that, obviously. And, as Issachar pointed out, I need to examine myself as well.

Ferrick