238 replies to this topic 13 votes

[Denis W]

Way back years ago, one of the news articles had a picture of a WHAAMBULANCE. Think it was around the Vista beta era. I'm pretty sure Steve did it.

Also, loosely related to this topic: I remember asking about why swear words were allowed in articles on the front page, despite the rules. I've came to the understanding that the rules are meant to enforce restraint than clear cut "break it and you're screwed" guidelines. So for swearing, perhaps the occasional dropping of a four letter word isn't a big deal, but if members start ****ing saying **** like this ****** will for no ****ing reason then yeah, that's annoying. If I and other mods were following rules to the letter, a good number of these discussions would be deleted.

I could be wrong; don't take this as official policy. Just stating my thoughts on this matter.

[Shane Nokes]

*Pokes head out*
Nope. Not touching this one.
*Crawls back into shell*

[Nothing Here]

Shane Nokes, on 18 September 2012 - 20:00, said:

*Pokes head out*
Nope. Not touching this one.
*Crawls back into shell*

You just did Brother. Let's hear what you have to say.

[tsupersonic]

The quality of this site is going down the tubes. Heck, even some corporate tech sites have better quality news articles. This is a place to engage in discussions about technology, not immature name calling. You guys just need better writers...

[Astra.Xtreme]

Personally I would think a tech site like this would want to attract people to read the articles (including editorials). If articles are overly opinionated and unprofessional to the point of calling people stupid, you're automatically shunning out the people in that "category" and everybody else that's looking for an intelligent conversation.

Isn't the point of an editorial to provide an opinion on something in hopes of convincing others to agree with you? Nobody from the other side is going to change their mind if you call them stupid...

[Shane Nokes]

Lakota Rising, on 18 September 2012 - 20:02, said:

You just did Brother. Let's hear what you have to say.

Without going into this specific case, which I don't wan to touch?

I think tech journalism is lazy journalism in a lot of cases these days. A ton of 'top' sites seem to employ the write & immediately post model. Very little copy-editing or fact checking.

I like to call it blurnalism since the quality tends to rival the average blog post, but with more 'authority' or heft backing it.

It happens at a ton of sites. I don't want to call them out though because some of their staff are members here.

[andrewbares]

Astra.Xtreme, on 18 September 2012 - 20:08, said:

Isn't the point of an editorial to provide an opinion on something in hopes of convincing others to agree with you? Nobody from the other side is going to change their mind if you call them stupid...

Yep. bdsams missed the point of an editorial.

[ahhell]

freak180, on 18 September 2012 - 19:35, said:

Yeah I couldnt believe he said we desevered to be shot for thinking differently basically. Hence why he changed it but didnt have the balls to mention he shouldnt have said that. That seriously bothered me.

It's a figure of ****ing speech. JESUS!!

Also, he never specifically listed anyone's name or even insinuated that he was referring to a user on Neowin.

Maybe it is time to bring back the waaambulance.

[andrewbares]

ahhell, on 18 September 2012 - 20:12, said:

It's a figure of ****ing speech. JESUS!!

Also, he never specifically listed anyone's name or even insinuated that he was referring to a user on Neowin.

Maybe it is time to bring back the waaambulance.

So now making a good argument == "This group of people look like idiots, and should be kicked in the shins"??? That's one problem with the article.

And by saying that a group of people are idiots, that means you're calling each person in that group idiots...

[dead.cell]

Man, people here really can't handle being told their opinions are wrong.

I don't like generalizations personally, but you guys are really taking this article to heart. They're a bunch of text representing the opinion of one person. You're free to disregard the post and consider them an idiot just the same. If you want to call them idiots in the same light, well hey, maybe you should try writing up your own editorial and submitting it? Or does that require too much effort?

[ahhell]

andrewbares, on 18 September 2012 - 20:16, said:

So now making a good argument == "This group of people look like idiots, and should be kicked in the shins"??? That's one problem with the article.

And by saying that a group of people are idiots, that means you're calling each person in that group idiots...

I have no idea what it is you are trying to say...and here I thought you were a writer.
Hmmmm...

[bdsams]

freak180, on 18 September 2012 - 19:35, said:

Yeah I couldnt believe he said we desevered to be shot for thinking differently basically. Hence why he changed it but didnt have the balls to mention he shouldnt have said that. That seriously bothered me.

Whoa, I did say that was wrong, thus the change. Sorry, it was posted on Twitter (where most of the flak came from) and it was changed...not hiding here.

It was a poorly placed joke from the Office: http://macromeme.com...ffice-funny.jpg

[andrewbares]

ahhell, on 18 September 2012 - 20:20, said:

I have no idea what it is you are trying to say...and here I thought you were a writer.
Hmmmm...

Remember when you said "Also, he never specifically listed anyone's name or even insinuated that he was referring to a user on Neowin."?

Remember when bdsams said "Calling Windows 8 the next Vista makes you look like an idiot"?

Consider the group of people that called Windows 8 the next Vista... that group contains users of Neowin. By saying a group of people is x, you're saying that EVERY person in that group is x, unless you say "SOME people in this group are x".

Therefore, he did say that members of Neowin look like idiots and should be kicked in the shin, twice.

And when have good arguments consisted of name calling?

[Arceles]

bdsams, on 18 September 2012 - 20:27, said:

Whoa, I did say that was wrong, thus the change. Sorry, it was posted on Twitter (where most of the flak came from) and it was changed...not hiding here.

Since I still see the title saying "Idiot" in such manner then...

Editorial:

bdsams, I tell you "Windows 8 is like Vista" Therefore according to your words I'm an Idiot, then I reply you, YOU are the one to be called 1D10T here since you couldn't accept this from another user.

There, I used Editorial, let's see how long until I get a warning.

Edit: I feel at ease now, peace.

[Dashel]

Denis W, on 18 September 2012 - 19:41, said:

I've came to the understanding that the rules are meant to enforce restraint than clear cut "break it and you're screwed" guidelines. If I and other mods were following rules to the letter, a good number of these discussions would be deleted.

1) That results in arbitrary enforcement and punishment that isn't fair to anyone and 2) You can't enforce the rules to the letter, because they are simply too broad and unenforceable.

Fix the stupid rules so they aren't so vague and catch-all, make intent matter, provide some constructive 'editors' in contentious threads, and have punishments be consistently enforced across all members at all levels.

Most importantly, let the players play.