# Mexdisconnect



## dongringo (Dec 13, 2010)

Mexconnect is a one of the oldest, still remaining, websites and forums dedicated to tourism in Mexico. Their site is extraordinarily informative about Mexico in general and niches never considered by tourists.

Their forum, unfortunately seems to be managed by the chamber of commerce of Mexico, the diocese of Queretaro, or worse.

There are at least 7 posters on that forum, that I know of, who were banned on Mexconnect without them providing a reason. Yes I am one of the banned.

Screw them!
I'll probably get banned on this forum for that phrase, too.


----------



## Isla Verde (Oct 19, 2011)

dongringo said:


> Mexconnect is a one of the oldest, still remaining, websites and forums dedicated to tourism in Mexico. Their site is extraordinarily informative about Mexico in general and niches never considered by tourists.
> 
> Their forum, unfortunately seems to be managed by the chamber of commerce of Mexico, the diocese of Queretaro, or worse.
> 
> ...


Why are you bringing this up now? Have you just been banned? Being banned without a reason being given must be very frustrating.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2011)

*Banning*

I have been banned from Chapala webboard and warned here once. Got a favorable rating for the same post. Go figure. I think there are two problems. 

First is that there is a huge emphasis on political correctness and not wanting anyone's feelings to be hurt. Second, webboard moderators have power that they never had in their previous life.

It seems to be the norm not to give a reason. Yu are just banned and if you do make contact with them via email or in person, a reason is not given since your contract is also ignored.

I am too old to worry about being pc or caring about what some other person thinks about my comments. Used to call this being sa Dutch uncle. I just hate alking on eggs before making any comment. I bett quit now before I get zinged here too, if it isn't too late that is.


----------



## conklinwh (Dec 19, 2009)

I don't go on Mexconnect so have no view; however, I do believe that the management of this site does a great job. If one stays away from personal attacks then they seem to err on the liberal side of accepting posts. I think that we should thank the monitors for exercizing judgement in allowing disparate discussions.
By the way, I have no axe to grind one way or the other.


----------



## Mexicodrifter (Sep 11, 2011)

I love this forum. it gives me a chan¿ce to share the things I have learned. Doesn´t mean it is the "Truth" is just means my experience. Sometimes we get caught up in our personal views as being the only way. It is just human nature.

Conklinwh has it right. Here the monitors pretty much leave us alone and let us have our say. The rules are fair and seem to be applied evenly and fairly. I´ve only been on teh forum for fa few months but so far I am liking it better every day.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*Civility*

Civility seems to be the word I come up with. Our moderators here seem just to be looking for that. I have not seen any issue with what is said as long as it comes from civility. If this Forum turned into those about politics and such in the States, I for one would leave.

We are communicating with people of intelligence and, yes, civility. I has seen nothing deleted or banned because it disagreed with the "agenda" of the moderators, nor have I walked on eggshells on any topic. The recent thread on the shootings in Chapala clearly provoked thoughtful discussion and not total agreement nor an agenda to push it under the rug, for example.

Mature people can disagree in a civil manner. 

 I mean if there is any agenda here it comes from the "Lakeside Chamber of Commerce" members (of which I hope to be one soon)!


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

As one who has probably started and then fueled more controversial threads than most I must agree that the people who manage this site are very interested in allowing civil commentary. 

I have twice requested that a thread be closed because I felt that it was starting to get very testy. In both cases I was told that they would monitor it but wanted to see if it could calm itself down. It did. 

Some comments get deleted especially when you describe a persons relatives in very unglowing terms. But if we keep it to the point and use civil (I love that term) language everything should be fine. 

It's nice to know that I don't have to be in agreement with everyone nor they with me but we can exchange thoughts and see where ideas go. 

GREAT JOB :clap2::clap2::clap2:


----------



## Hound Dog (Jan 18, 2009)

dongringo said:


> Mexconnect is a one of the oldest, still remaining, websites and forums dedicated to tourism in Mexico. Their site is extraordinarily informative about Mexico in general and niches never considered by tourists.
> 
> Their forum, unfortunately seems to be managed by the chamber of commerce of Mexico, the diocese of Queretaro, or worse.
> 
> ...


dongringo:

An interesting post calling for a response from an ex-Mexico Connect subscriber.

I first joined Mexico Connect in 2001 and was a member and prolific poster on their forums for years. I was banned first in about 2004 and, after they asked me to rejoin in 2005, again in about 2007. I was, once again banned from their forum in 2008 and, in 2010 they asked me to once again rejoin which I did under a new name and, then, in 2011, when I got into a forum disagreement with one of their moderators, I was banned again and, of course, would never rejoin again after that. Keep in mind what I just said. They came to me hat in hand twice and requested that I rejoin - I did not approach them - and I was almost certainly their most prolific poster over the years I was there. 

My main contribution to the forum was my postings on Southern Mexico where we live about six months a year. I was banned the last time in 2011 because one of their moderators I considered to be pontificating spuriously about the glories of Michoacan cuisine, became engaged in, shall we say, a rancorous discussion regarding the UNESCO assessment of Michoacan food as deserving of world heritage status. After all, Dawg is a moderator on another forum on Mexico and I cannot abide phonies except for myself, of course.

Because of my banning over at Mexico Connect. I now post my observations about Southern Mexico here on this forum and on another forum known as the All Mexico Forum Oracle which is based in Morelia but has been expanded to include all of Mexico. 

Just a word about Mexico Connect since I was a member there for so long:

* The owner of the Magazine _Mexico Connect_, does not consider the forum to be an important feature of the magazine and this he told me directly in his home in Ajijic when he was signing me up for de-banning at his request before he moved back to British Columbia. Therefore, you may rest assured that, unless he has changed his attitude over the last few years, there will be no attempts to improve that small part of the product which, incidentally, I consider to be a pretty good internet magazine overall. 
* The moderator of the General Forum with whom I got into a spat last year is no longer with the magazine for whatever reason and that is a significant improvement for the forums since most if not all of the remaining moderators are pretty decent people. The woman I had my disagreement with was highly opinionated and intolerant of dissenting opinions but I don´t think that is typical of the remaining moderators although, perhaps I am wrong about that. The owner of the product who, as a moderator, calls himself "Webjefe" or, alternatively, David McLain, can, perhaps, be a bit petulant and easily offended but, what the hell, so am I so who am I to criticize that characteristic.

I agree with the OP on this thread that moderation here is exercised with moderation and that´s a good thing. As a moderator myself on the All Mexico Forums, I believe that forums are made more entertaining and informative if moderated lightly and with a respect for the expressions of diverse ideas and opinions.


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2011)

*Moderators*

As I stated earlier, I am not at all PC and that is one reason why I was banned on Chapala.com or the web board of Chapala Realty. What I really dislike is to have the moderators just zap you with no warning. The people posting are walking on eggs which I am not about to do.

I got a warning here regarding a post and got a thumbs up by another poster on the same post. So all is in the eye of the moderator whether or not to castigate.

It got so bad on the other web board that I always wondering if this post was the dropping of the last shoe. I really don't care anymore and if I see that some pompus no brain is posting I just ignore rather than reply. Works for me.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*It's How You Do It That Counts*



Chapala Payaso said:


> As I stated earlier, I am not at all PC and that is one reason why I was banned on Chapala.com or the web board of Chapala Realty. What I really dislike is to have the moderators just zap you with no warning. The people posting are walking on eggs which I am not about to do....


The difference between PC and civility is a crucial one. PC is a newer concept, civility and good manners is what we were taught by our parents. Racial jokes, lewd postings are definitely not PC and not good manners.

Saying that you do not agree with racial quotas, feminism, that you like lewd humor et. al. may not be PC but can be said in a civil manner with good manners.

Personally, all my views may not PC - but the way I choose to express them can be civil and well mannered.

 The British have mastered how not to be PC and still be civil, maybe it's their accent, but a Brit can tell you things about your mother or what pleasure you can enjoy by yourself, and have you thank them for it - it's a gift!


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2011)

Thank you for the English lesson but I am aware of the difference. I guess the difference between the Brits and the Gringos is that the former tell you to go to hell and make you look forward to the trip whereas the latter really don't care if you look forward to the trip or not and tend to speak like a Dutch uncle. I call things the way I see them and point out deficiencies of the written word as I see them. Sometimes a reality check is in order with a gentle slap to the head. You know, just to get their attention. And sometimes the moderators are sparring for a fight that their opponent cannot win in a fixed game environment. That is the essence of my point. You have to know when to jold them and know when to fold them. Or, like me, just ignore them.


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

Chapala Payaso said:


> Thank you for the English lesson but I am aware of the difference. I guess the difference between the Brits and the Gringos is that the former tell you to go to hell and make you look forward to the trip whereas the latter really don't care if you look forward to the trip or not and tend to speak like a Dutch uncle. I call things the way I see them and point out deficiencies of the written word as I see them. Sometimes a reality check is in order with a gentle slap to the head. You know, just to get their attention. And sometimes the moderators are sparring for a fight that their opponent cannot win in a fixed game environment. That is the essence of my point. You have to know when to jold them and know when to fold them. Or, like me, just ignore them.


I personally think that your dealings with other sites has clouded your view of this site. The moderators here do not just ban you because they don't like you. They delete posts but usually list a reason. At the beginning of this site there are the rules, those who follow them have no reason to worry. Those who do not should worry. 

IMHO, there are at least two ways to say everything. This site asks all posters to take the civil way but not necessarily the PC way. Those who are proficient in the English Language should be able to give your "reality check" without insults, demeaning slurs or nasty remarks. If you are not proficient then the moderators seem to understand that and take it into consideration. It's the "reality checks" with little or no regard to civility that gets people into trouble. Comments like "pompous no brain" are the thing that can get someone in trouble.

I really wish that you would judge this site on it's own and not allow your opinions to be colored by what has happened on other sites.


----------



## Guest (Nov 3, 2011)

I have done as you requested. Very early on I was both praised and castigated for a comment to another poster who I informed that I thought he was playing with me and I was not interested. I gave both reactions equal weight.

I admit I am somewhat surprised about the fire storm arising from an essentially non issue. If someone is offended, that is on them. If they wonder if I am taking them to task then I am not. I have only mixed reviews here and so do not take either very seriously. 

Is there a good old boys club in play here? Dunno or care. Am I too direct to the point of being confrontational? Yes. Some boards have this as the norm. Will I pussy foot around issues? No. But I can just ignore them here.

I think my participation here is better off for all if I am a spectator and not a participant worried about getting booted or hurting someone's feelings. And so it shall be.


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

Chapala Payaso said:


> I have done as you requested. Very early on I was both praised and castigated for a comment to another poster who I informed that I thought he was playing with me and I was not interested. I gave both reactions equal weight. *The fact that you were warned that you were getting close to doing something wrong is proof that the moderators are more concerned with keeping things civil than just deleting or banning someone. The fact that someone gave you a "like" also shows the diversity of the readers here.*
> 
> I admit I am somewhat surprised about the fire storm arising from an essentially non issue. If someone is offended, that is on them. *This is where I must take exception. The fact that you might have offended someone is on YOU also. That is the act of civility. * If they wonder if I am taking them to task then I am not. I have only mixed reviews here and so do not take either very seriously.
> 
> ...


Be happy, be healthy and enjoy Mexico.


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2011)

Below is the comment in entiety that we are discussing ad nauseum. I made it without rancor, just putting the poster on notice that I was no longer engaging with him but evidently the moderator thought otherwise, no doubt weighing my grain in her scales. Page 3 of the Perry sending soldiers into Mexico if you care to verify.

*"Monty: I find your comments to be nit picking, exagerations and a diversion. I am no longer up to that type of interaction. I am sure others enjoy a good piddling contest but not I. Adios." *

You will note that I did not call him any names and merely expressed how I viewed the content of his posts. My interpretations and my shortcomings. Where was I not civil? This whole subsequent conversation smacks of political correctness and implying that I stepped over boundaries by being unkind. 

I post this to clear the air and to state that, in my not so humble opinion, the moderator over reacted to the newbie who dared to challenge one of the establishment's comments. Fin.


----------



## TundraGreen (Jul 15, 2010)

Chapala Payaso said:


> ...
> 
> I post this to clear the air and to state that, in my not so humble opinion, the moderator over reacted to the newbie who dared to challenge one of the establishment's comments. Fin.


Payoso and others: If you have a problem with my moderation, send me a personal message and we can discuss it. Or send a complaint to the forum administrator or one of the other moderators. But the rules do not allow discussing the moderation in the forums.


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2011)

It is no longer an issue since I am no longer a member of thie community. Besides, in any discussion, I am in a one down position. We are not equals, well, at least I am not as equal as you. Why waste my time?


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2011)

Just a final observation. Pap stated, in part, "Just to lurk in the background without making any comments is a waste of your time and of the resources of this site."

While a kinder and more civil word than, "lurk" could have been used, the point is a valid one. I shall no longer lurk either. In addition, I have often told my students that it is not necessary to comment on things you see or hear. Sometimes, like the Chinese gentleman stated, "I see nothing but I see everything."


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

Chapala Payaso said:


> Just a final observation. Pap stated, in part, "Just to lurk in the background without making any comments is a waste of your time and of the resources of this site."
> 
> While a kinder and more civil word than, "lurk" could have been used, the point is a valid one. I shall no longer lurk either. In addition, I have often told my students that it is not necessary to comment on things you see or hear. Sometimes, like the Chinese gentleman stated, "I see nothing but I see everything."


For someone who seems to be filled with negative comments and one who is so upset over one caution I felt that the term "lurk" was very correct. I only hope that you find some site that you can be comfortable with and will be comfortable with you. 

I'm sorry that this is not that site. :sorry:


----------



## Guest (Nov 4, 2011)

Pap: So far nobody has pointed out what part of my post deserved a caution. And, Pap, you are right. This site and I are not a match. As to my negativity, well that developed here regarding this site. Enjoy your site.


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

This is not directed at a specific comment but something that I have noticed in many dialogues between people, whether spoken or written. In other words, not restricted to this site but expanded to life itself.

I have noticed, for myself, that someone may give a critique of something I have done or said. The normal reaction is to defend ourselves and I also have that tendency. But at the same time I try to subjugate it. Long ago I decided that I would also try to see things from the other person's perspective. Why are they critiquing? Is there some basis of truth in what they say? Just because I can rationalize that the person is wrong in 80% of what they say, should I disregard their critique based on that fact or should I comtemplate the 10 - 20% that was true and perhaps readjust my thinking for that portion. That way I benefit myself and constantly improve in my understanding/appreciation of other viewpoints. Does that mean I become a doormat? In no way! Any that know me would say that is far from the case but it there is even a bit of truth in what the other person says, then why throw the baby out with the bathwater? Benefit from it. If they are too critical - that is their problem but I don't need to defend everything I do or say. Neither do I need to always escalate situations, especially over word choice or something that is not 100% correct. I feel life is much more enjoyable that way and we also make ourselves much more enjoyable to be around, without giving up our own viewpoints or opinions.

Hope I haven't started another confrontation! Cheers - and I mean it! (Life is too short!)


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

*Posts*



Detailman said:


> This is not directed at a specific comment but something that I have noticed in many dialogues between people, whether spoken or written. In other words, not restricted to this site but expanded to life itself.
> 
> I have noticed, for myself, that someone may give a critique of something I have done or said. The normal reaction is to defend ourselves and I also have that tendency. But at the same time I try to subjugate it. Long ago I decided that I would also try to see things from the other person's perspective. Why are they critiquing? Is there some basis of truth in what they say? Just because I can rationalize that the person is wrong in 80% of what they say, should I disregard their critique based on that fact or should I comtemplate the 10 - 20% that was true and perhaps readjust my thinking for that portion. That way I benefit myself and constantly improve in my understanding/appreciation of other viewpoints. Does that mean I become a doormat? In no way! Any that know me would say that is far from the case but it there is even a bit of truth in what the other person says, then why throw the baby out with the bathwater? Benefit from it. If they are too critical - that is their problem but I don't need to defend everything I do or say. Neither do I need to always escalate situations, especially over word choice or something that is not 100% correct. I feel life is much more enjoyable that way and we also make ourselves much more enjoyable to be around, without giving up our own viewpoints or opinions.
> 
> Hope I haven't started another confrontation! Cheers - and I mean it! (Life is too short!)


That is why a detailed post works much better to convey your thoughts. The ones who can't type with their 5 word posts always seem to be saying something but I don't know exactly what most times unless they are replying to a direct thing. The fact that many to not use the quote option and don't address the poster they disagree with and his exact statements really makes for a lot of trying to figure out what they are really commenting on and sometimes their posts sound ridicules.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*The Essence...*

...is still this: civility. 

In a milieu where all you have are words, it is much more difficult to get your message across. That is just a fact. We lose 4 of our five senses we use to interpret communication.

Getting a thicker skin is a matter of time and desire. If in conversation you say something the wrong way to the listener, you have the immediate opportunity and feedback to know it and if possible correct it. Here, there is no such feedback.

As to specifically addressing the person with whom you want to speak, I've noticed in this medium that is not always the case. Perhaps it would provoke more dialog if we did, and maybe the 5 word sentence people would then need more time and could not zing back. 

On CNN.COM, for example, any comment older than 20 minutes is ancient history so to get your two cents in, you need to write your 5 or 15 word comment. Needless to say some of my comments are buried very quickly because of that.

I still believe that conflicting views are able to be discussed and argued in a civil manner, and that in doing so, like we learned in Argumentation class in college, means you put the "self" in the background and deal in the moment of the argument. Will you always win? Nope, but the joy is in the learning.

Peace out! eace:


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

AlanMexicali said:


> That is why a detailed post works much better to convey your thoughts. The ones who can't type with their 5 word posts always seem to be saying something but I don't know exactly what most times unless they are replying to a direct thing. The fact that many to not use the quote option and don't address the poster they disagree with and his exact statements really makes for a lot of trying to figure out what they are really commenting on and sometimes their posts sound ridicules.


Very true what you say.

For clarification, my comment was initiated by following the posts on this particular thread and the way it just seemed to escalate with one poster. Like the proverbial glass half empty versus half full. It didn't matter what was said - the position was defensive - which is that person's right. My viewpoint was simply another way of looking at people's comments, viewpoints and critiques. If we are always defensive, about even the smallest things, including word choice, phrases, innuendoes what does that say about ourselves? Perhaps we have a somewhat elevated opinion of ourselves -- or our opinions.

That in itself will also make it hard for us to adapt in another cultural environment, such as Mexico.


----------



## AlanMexicali (Jun 1, 2011)

*Posts*



Detailman said:


> Very true what you say.
> 
> For clarification, my comment was initiated by following the posts on this particular thread and the way it just seemed to escalate with one poster. Like the proverbial glass half empty versus half full. It didn't matter what was said - the position was defensive - which is that person's right. My viewpoint was simply another way of looking at people's comments, viewpoints and critiques. If we are always defensive, about even the smallest things, including word choice, phrases, innuendoes what does that say about ourselves? Perhaps we have a somewhat elevated opinion of ourselves -- or our opinions.
> 
> That in itself will also make it hard for us to adapt in another cultural environment, such as Mexico.


I did read the whole thread and the other to refresh myself earlier and did know what you were saying and simply added to your insights with a technically I have been struggling with that some do not seem to realize they are doing which adds complication to things for others which is not really necessary in my opinion. Maybe being lazy or not able to handle/use the quote option. If the post being quoted is long I just delete the part not relevant to my thoughts and leave the other poster's part that I am talking about. Works for me. I notice you can not see what post is being commented on unless there is a quote or the poster addresses it to a name. This is not the norm on the other sites I visit. A button goes to the post someone is replying to. Or haven't I found it yet?


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

Much of what you both say hits the nail on the head. However, some of the points that you wonder about seem to miss the nail by a glancing blow. 
Just as in adapting to life in Mexico, postings frequently contain errors which make communication difficult. Even the four or five postings, prior to this one, could do with some 'spellchecking' and editing for word choice; probably mine as well. However, some postings are really bad and the reader is so distracted, or should be, by poor grammar, word choice, syntax errors and horrible punctuation, that the real meaning is hard to find. Such postings may, at first sight, seem to be written by a less than intelligent person, but on second review be found to be by a very intelligent person who is less than fully literate. Let's face it; our education system is so broken that it hasn't turned out many literate graduates in well over a generation. In reading, the USA is now 15th in the world, 23rd in mathematics and 31st in science. The fact is that there are a lot of jobs available in the USA, but few qualified applicants. Those, who are qualified, tend to be from other countries but the visa quotas are usually filled by the first few months of each year. This is all part of the same problem; education. So, until it improves a great deal, we'll probably continue to fail in our attempts at lucid communication, especially without the visual cues that facial expressions and body language can impart to any such intercourse.
So, let's all try harder and also refrain from arguing points, which may be unclear in the first place.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*I Coulda Been A Teecher...*



RVGRINGO said:


> Much of what you both say hits the nail on the head. However, some of the points that you wonder about seem to miss the nail by a glancing blow.
> 
> Just as in adapting to life in Mexico, postings frequently contain errors which make communication difficult. Even the four or five postings, prior to this one, could do with some 'spellchecking' and editing for word choice; probably mine as well.
> PARAGRAPH
> ...


Hey, RV buddy, I love your work, but paragraphing makes them easier to read. When I was on my college paper and took journalism, the instructor taught me that 3 or 4 sentence paragraphs are easier to read. Man, I love the posts here, but can we all take refresher courses in paragraphing.  Have a nice day!


----------



## RVGRINGO (May 16, 2007)

You might enjoy reading 'The Decameron'. It is translated from 14th century Italian into old English and there are sentences which go on for pages; to say nothing of long paragraphs. By the way, paragraphs aren't necessarily to divide the text into easier visual bits; they are used to indicate a change in the text. Very long sentences are still much more common in British English writing, or speaking, for that matter, and indicate a much higher attention level on the part of both the speaker and the listener; a trait seemingly lost by most Americans in their 'sound byte' world of quick snippets of information mixed in a hodgepodge stew of statements, often within a group of young folks trying to talk over each other or to impress each other with their 'quick wits' but seldom achieving that goal. Oh, heck! I just wrote a long sentence.

Now, on to other things.


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

We have written a lot about communication and that’s great but we must remember that there are 5 steps to good communication. This is from my communication class taken in 1963. My degree is in Speech Education (teaching speech, radio, theater and broadcasting). 

1-you communicate
2-they hear, see or read it.
3-they understand
4-they respond
5-you react to their response. By their reaction you will know if they have understood what you have said.

Without all 5 of those steps you really do not have effective communication. When we write here we change the 5 steps slightly.

1-you write something
2-they read it 
3-they understand it
4-they respond 
5-you react.

As you can see they are almost the same but there are a few differences. First of all in your communication and in their understanding we remove the visual factors. We also remove those factors in the response and the reaction. And, in written only communication we have the factor of language. I’m not necessarily talking about English vs. French but Maine vs. Texas. Each part of the US and also of other countries has their idioms. For example ask for a root beer soda in Texas and you’ll get root beer with ice cream in a glass, ask for the same thing in Boston and you’ll get just the root beer soda pop. 

When we communicate here we all (me included) must be as careful as possible to insure that our thoughts are understood by the reader(s). My suggestion (and I’m as guilty as anyone else) is to take your time and re-read your posts to be sure it has a good chance of communicating your thoughts correctly.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*"Why is this site different from all other sites?"*

 See, that is what is so great here! Intelligent minds using decades of knowledge and spewing all these pearls before a group of...well never mind.

Pappa: Wow, 1963 huh? Did you have ink pens then, or were you still using slates and rocks?

RV: Tried to read it years ago. Maybe when I join the retirees in Lakeside, we can do oral recitations on it, after we have all the time in the world, right?

Pappa: I'd say that this forum seems to follow the classic patterns, but in other places I expound in, the sequence usually leaves out #3 and if you're smart, then you leave out #5. Understanding takes too much time when history = 20 minutes, and therein lies the problem alluded to by our "sound byte" mentality. 

("Why is this site different from all other sites?")
So then, on most other sites it is like:
1-you write something
2-they read it
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
4-they respond
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You can see this pattern in TV and even film, especially in film - the 30's- mid-60's, the scenes were shot longer and contained more dialog, characters took time to develop, and exposition was crucial and could occur over the period of many scenes and cuts. By the late 60's until now, the short attention span phenomena took over, resulting in quick cuts, less character development, or instant character recognition using pre established concepts, shorter dialog in scripting. Again not in all cases, but in general.

In closing this long winded pontification...think about this: Who writes letters any more?


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

FHBOY said:


> See, that is what is so great here! Intelligent minds using decades of knowledge and *spewing all these pearls before a group of...*well never mind.
> 
> From your earlier post: "We are communicating with people of intelligence and, yes, civility."
> 
> ...


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

Detailman said:


> FHBOY said:
> 
> 
> > See, that is what is so great here! Intelligent minds using decades of knowledge and *spewing all these pearls before a group of...*well never mind.
> ...


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

FHBOY said:


> Detailman said:
> 
> 
> > Yes humility, one of my better traits!
> ...


----------



## kcowan (Jul 24, 2010)

I find this forum to always be on the edge of chaos. I think it is because the United States of Mexico provide substantially different experiences, depending on where you are and where you have been. Since we are all dealing from our own experiences, there is substantial opportunity for disagreement on the facts.

Then you have the inherent biasses that people bring to the table based on where they are from and what other experiences they bring, and you have a volatile mix.

Although I enjoy sharing knowledge with people less knowledgeable than me, I find it strange that people want to challenge the facts. I mean if I state what I experienced, why would anyone challenge that? Do they think I am lying? I only come here to see if I can help. I get no ego reinforcement.

So as a result I only drop in once in a while when I have the time. Mainly because there are other places that respect my contributions.


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

kcowan said:


> I find this forum to always be on the edge of chaos. I think it is because the United States of Mexico provide substantially different experiences, depending on where you are and where you have been. Since we are all dealing from our own experiences, there is substantial opportunity for disagreement on the facts.
> 
> Then you have the inherent biasses that people bring to the table based on where they are from and what other experiences they bring, and you have a volatile mix.
> 
> ...


I personally have a real problem with some of what you have said here. First of all this site is never ALWAYS on the edge of anything. It seems to float very nicely. 

I do agree that the differences in the posters create many chances for many different opinions. Your term "less knowledgeable" presupposes that your information is the only correct one. That is not always the case, many of our opinions are tainted by who, what, where and why we are, that's part of the sharing and learning experience you can find here. 

One of the problems with asking questions based on personal experiences is that we all might have different experiences. Just because someone has a different experience than you have had doesn't mean that you're lying or are they. 

If you don't want to post here, then don't. If it bothers you so much when others post their experiences (different from you own) then don't post here. If you feel that you are not respected here, then post somewhere else. BUT, if you enjoy sharing your experiences (good, bad or indifferent) with other please continue to post here. This site lives on the differences of the posters. :ranger:


----------



## kcowan (Jul 24, 2010)

pappabee said:


> I personally have a real problem with some of what you have said here. First of all this site is never ALWAYS on the edge of anything. It seems to float very nicely.


I think we are in agreement. Perhaps violently so!

That is what I mean. There is this undercurrent of dissention when there is actually nothing to dissent about.

Perhaps it is reading comprehension or reacting to one word or phrase?

What is it about my post that you actually disagree with?


----------



## pappabee (Jun 22, 2010)

kcowan said:


> I think we are in agreement. Perhaps violently so!
> 
> That is what I mean. There is this undercurrent of dissention when there is actually nothing to dissent about.
> 
> ...


Interesting that you should use the term "violently" here and "volatile" in your original post. Those are (IMHO) untrue. Also this site is not ready to fall off any edge. And I think that I covered my other concerns already. Yes on some posts there is distention but everyone must have the right to disagree in order for discussion to exist. If everyone was required to agree we'd have another "1984".

I will say this that I might be reacting to a word or phrase but my "reading comprehension" is far better than is needed to understand what you have said.

I really think that I've said enough for this post and we can agree to disagree although not violently.


----------



## Mexicodrifter (Sep 11, 2011)

I really want to jump in here and put in my two cents but I think I will let it ride. This looks good.


----------



## FHBOY (Jun 15, 2010)

*...but I will*

Look, guys, this thread is beginning to look like a CNN.com thing. We have all said when all we have are words, it is much more difficult to get your message across and more importantly, the meaning of it.

I do not think that one person's experience can be evaluated as right or wrong. Like feelings, there is no right or wrong in experiences they are facts. As a matter of fact, sharing experiences are great teaching tools. How we relate these facts is probably where we run into difficulties. I can say the local police guy did this when I did this...that is fact, you can't tell me it didn't happen. It did..to me but maybe not to you. You can say you had a different experience in the same situation, but it doesn't make my experience less valid. I hate one-upmanship and people who have to always convince you that they are right. No one is right all the time.

For people to pickup and leave because some one may have had a different experience in the same situation only means that...well it was different. One was correct one wasn't incorrect. They were just different.

I think what I am saying is the commonality of what is represented here should trump any difficulty in communicating. I have not found this to be an edgy place at all, it seems that in the main, we are all people who have learned over the years to find a way to respectfully disagree.

OK - direct: pappabee and kcowan - as a poster here I can respect both of you, you may know more than me, and one of you may know more than the other. SO WHAT!? Your knowledge and experiences will help others. I don't like seeing any one leaving, and that even applies to chapala payaso, whom I had words with.


----------



## Detailman (Aug 27, 2011)

FHBOY said:


> Look, guys, this thread is beginning to look like a CNN.com thing. We have all said when all we have are words, it is much more difficult to get your message across and more importantly, the meaning of it.
> 
> I do not think that one person's experience can be evaluated as right or wrong. Like feelings, there is no right or wrong in experiences they are facts. As a matter of fact, sharing experiences are great teaching tools. How we relate these facts is probably where we run into difficulties. I can say the local police guy did this when I did this...that is fact, you can't tell me it didn't happen. It did..to me but maybe not to you. You can say you had a different experience in the same situation, but it doesn't make my experience less valid. I hate one-upmanship and people who have to always convince you that they are right. No one is right all the time.
> 
> ...


Well said. I just may come out of my concrete bunker. The last several posts, including yours, have hit the nail on the head.

I have heard that " we are the end result of everything that has happened to us." I totally agree with that but I also feel that we can go beyond that.

People sometimes have a tendancy to say things like: "I don't trust ***** people." "I think that all ******** people are lazy." And so on. That may be their personal experience and their perception based on limited experience and exposure. That is their "reality." That does not make it necessarily true (or a fact if you are viewing a fact as something that can be relied upon) and that is why we should relish hearing other people's experiences as a comparison. Then we can judge for ourselves whether we need to adjust our veiwpont. It is true that even then our judgement may not be correct.

And just because the majority adhere or support something does not make it a fact. Think of those individuals that were ridiculed for denying the accepted fact that the earth was flat, and thousands of other examples prior and since. The perception of the majority does not make someting a fact and neither does one person's experience make something a fact, although it may be their reality.

I am out of the concrete bunker but I think I will keep my helmet on for the time being.


----------

