Posting on the Adelaide Board

[Southerntakeover]

Erm no....in fact you can't have an opinion that is wrong.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

You can, however, be incorrect in the statement of fact. For example, your post is wrong, because you have given a statement of fact that is, in fact, incorrect.

However, in the spirit of this thread, I will embrace your illiteracy as the embodiment of that which makes the world go round, acknowledge your right to hold a view, hold up my middle finger to you and wish you a merry christmas.

See, this is what happens when people quote definitions from www.dictionary.com without understanding them.

Yes, an opinion is a theory which lacks sufficient evidence to be called a fact. This does not mean however that the opinion cannot be invalidated by the addition of new evidence, or as you put it, the facts.

Example... a doctor may give a medical opinion in court regarding the cause of a persons death. If new evidence is found which proves there was a differing cause of death, that opinion was wrong.

 

[ICanDressMyself]

Always gotta have the last word don't you ST

 

[Mad Dog]

See, this is what happens when people quote definitions from www.dictionary.com without understanding them.

Yes, an opinion is a theory which lacks sufficient evidence to be called a fact. This does not mean however that the opinion cannot be invalidated by the addition of new evidence, or as you put it, the facts.

Example... a doctor may give a medical opinion in court regarding the cause of a persons death. If new evidence is found which proves there was a differing cause of death, that opinion was wrong.

at what point does an opinion become an assertion ?

 

[swanfan]

at what point does an opinion become an assertion ?

When you are a child and your parent is about to take a belt to you.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Always gotta have the last word don't you ST

No...

 

[Southerntakeover]

at what point does an opinion become an assertion ?

Are they mutually exclusive?

 

[Southerntakeover]

When you are a child and your parent is about to take a belt to you.

HAHA!

 

[Mad Dog]

Are they mutually exclusive?

no - quite the contrary.........at some point an opinion becomes an assertion - usually when the holder of the opinion deems it to be fact, or seeks to modify the opinion of others......at which point the assertion could be proven ill found, ill contrived or plain wrong - which by extension deems the original thought or opinion incorrect

 

[Ozzie]

no - quite the contrary.........at some point an opinion becomes an assertion - usually when the holder of the opinion deems it to be fact, or seeks to modify the opinion of others......at which point the assertion could be proven ill found, ill contrived or plain wrong - which by extension deems the original thought or opinion incorrect

****ing lawyers.

 

[Crow-mo]

Erm no....in fact you can't have an opinion that is wrong.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

You can, however, be incorrect in the statement of fact. For example, your post is wrong, because you have given a statement of fact that is, in fact, incorrect.

you're mixing relativism with the factual.

what if "a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty" is only insufficient grounds because you are not acquainted with the relevant facts?

this is an important distinction. an opinion based on something that inherently is subjective, is not the same as personally not having an understanding of the grounds needs to establish objectivity.

i.e. there not being grounds to certainty, is not the same as not knowing those grounds

 

[Crow-mo]

no - quite the contrary.........at some point an opinion becomes an assertion - usually when the holder of the opinion deems it to be fact, or seeks to modify the opinion of others......at which point the assertion could be proven ill found, ill contrived or plain wrong - which by extension deems the original thought or opinion incorrect

perhaps the question could be phrased as: when does a stated opinion ever fail to be an assertion?

is it asserted the moment it is verbalised. imo

for example, your faith in the almighty (say) is a personal opinion - and a very important and dearly held one. the statement to others, that you believe in god is an assertion that you believe this opinion to be correct. which is fair enough I might add.

when you make your opinion known to others, on the understanding that you believe it, how does it ever be anything other than an assertion?

 

[Crow-mo]

i've been thinking about this - christ knows why!

but there are a couple of things that trouble me.

reading back through this I think there are some concepts greatly misunderstood here.

that of inclusion, price of entry, and respect.

Bigfooty is just like any discussion group - it is an exchange whereby opinions, and observations are traded by interested people. it's no different to a real time book group or any other discussion board on the internet.

It is a very good thing to try to be inclusive. to welcome all comers, but it is very unusual to try to separate that from the price of entry or participation. I belong to a number of discussion groups where if you do not pay the price of entry, you are given the boot. the price of entry is usually effort. effort is a very inclusive concept, that no one is unable to provide from time to time.
For example, if you attend a book group say (I'd rather gnaw off my leg, but that's not the point ). you'd not get far if you tried to argue the toss without having read the book. you'd certainly not get away with declaring "it's my opinion", if you had not made the effort to read the text. and why should you? to quote a great man, if that offends you "harden the **** up"

I think there is an idea that being inclusive is an absolute value, without taking into account the basic requirements of participation. all discussion groups do this, and it does not stifle a welcome to all.

Respect. This notion of a clique is fairly insulting. there a few lads who go the footy together, know each other outside this board, and obviously that translates. big deal. and then there is the issue of some posters opinions being respected more than others. that's what happens over time, people's contributions are rated by the relative peer group. if you don't think that happens in real life, look around you're missing something. People establish their credentials over time, and that's as it should be.

People such as Macca23 and Stiffy have been here for a long time, and have contributed many, many thoughtful pieces - it's not exclusionary to recognise that, it's just appreciating that someone brings good understanding AND effort to the table. equally Vader hit the ground running and very quickly established his credentials for interesting perspectives. The Gun club were off the bat light hearted and enthusiastic, and not long after showed themselves to be fairly sharp to boot. all these people were ONLY judged on face value. Expecting any different is naive. I'd argue that people complaining that they are not being taken on face value, are instead being regarded by just that. it shows a distinct lack of respect to those who do bring interesting ideas and discussion, to suggest any respect offered by others is actually the work of 'the inner circle'.

Going back to the book group analogy. some people will be more literate than others, and they may also have time/interest to consider things more thoroughly. that doesn't mean others cannot read the book and give their honest thoughts, in fact, that's absolutely essential for diversity. however, you would not expect someone who has casually and quickly flicked through a difficult novel to vehmently argue there is no subtext (say), when it is widely considered by the wider literary community to be heavily imbued with subtext and imagery. that's not an opinion, that's a lack of respect and effort.

between enthusiasm and effort, I don't see how anyone can say that the 'price of entry' is too high. hiding behind "it's just my opinion" is just lazy, and mostly gets the short shrift it deserves.

 

[Mad Dog]

perhaps the question could be phrased as: when does a stated opinion ever fail to be an assertion?

is it asserted the moment it is verbalised. imo

for example, your faith in the almighty (say) is a personal opinion - and a very important and dearly held one. the statement to others, that you believe in god is an assertion that you believe this opinion to be correct. which is fair enough I might add.

when you make your opinion known to others, on the understanding that you believe it, how does it ever be anything other than an assertion?

I agree completely - hence the reason for putting it out there.

Once an opinion is verbalised - it is an assertion.

I maintain that an opinion can be classified as wrong if the premise or facts on which it was based, or conclusion drawn from it's formation are incorrect or have an error of logic.

 

[Mad Dog]

i've been thinking about this - christ knows why!

but there are a couple of things that trouble me.

reading back through this I think there are some concepts greatly misunderstood here.

that of inclusion, price of entry, and respect.

Bigfooty is just like any discussion group - it is an exchange whereby opinions, and observations are traded by interested people. it's no different to a real time book group or any other discussion board on the internet.

It is a very good thing to try to be inclusive. to welcome all comers, but it is very unusual to try to separate that from the price of entry or participation. I belong to a number of discussion groups where if you do not pay the price of entry, you are given the boot. the price of entry is usually effort. effort is a very inclusive concept, that no one is unable to provide from time to time.
For example, if you attend a book group say (I'd rather gnaw off my leg, but that's not the point ). you'd not get far if you tried to argue the toss without having read the book. you'd certainly not get away with declaring "it's my opinion", if you had not made the effort to read the text. and why should you? to quote a great man, if that offends you "harden the **** up"

I think there is an idea that being inclusive is an absolute value, without taking into account the basic requirements of participation. all discussion groups do this, and it does not stifle a welcome to all.

Respect. This notion of a clique is fairly insulting. there a few lads who go the footy together, know each other outside this board, and obviously that translates. big deal. and then there is the issue of some posters opinions being respected more than others. that's what happens over time, people's contributions are rated by the relative peer group. if you don't think that happens in real life, look around you're missing something. People establish their credentials over time, and that's as it should be.

People such as Macca23 and Stiffy have been here for a long time, and have contributed many, many thoughtful pieces - it's not exclusionary to recognise that, it's just appreciating that someone brings good understanding AND effort to the table. equally Vader hit the ground running and very quickly established his credentials for interesting perspectives. The Gun club were off the bat light hearted and enthusiastic, and not long after showed themselves to be fairly sharp to boot. all these people were ONLY judged on face value. Expecting any different is naive. I'd argue that people complaining that they are not being taken on face value, are instead being regarded by just that. it shows a distinct lack of respect to those who do bring interesting ideas and discussion, to suggest any respect offered by others is actually the work of 'the inner circle'.

Going back to the book group analogy. some people will be more literate than others, and they may also have time/interest to consider things more thoroughly. that doesn't mean others cannot read the book and give their honest thoughts, in fact, that's absolutely essential for diversity. however, you would not expect someone who has casually and quickly flicked through a difficult novel to vehmently argue there is no subtext (say), when it is widely considered by the wider literary community to be heavily imbued with subtext and imagery. that's not an opinion, that's a lack of respect and effort.

between enthusiasm and effort, I don't see how anyone can say that the 'price of entry' is too high. hiding behind "it's just my opinion" is just lazy, and mostly gets the short shrift it deserves.

Good post Crow-Mo...

We also have some George's who just prefer to watch the movie....

 

[-VC-]

some of you ***** are taking this way too ****ing seriously

There have been some great points throughout, but the most simple and least eloquent is probably the best yet.

As far as us regulars go we've all got a common interest - we all go for the Crows and we all have a love for the club. We've got our eternal optimists, we've got the glass half empty types and everyone in between. It's basically a cross section of the football loving community. The young bravados, the old wise heads and even a close family member of one of our players .

I will say the only thing that we are missing from the wider football community is the people who make up the majority of footy crowds - the completely ****ing clueless. Whether everyone likes to admit it or not, there is a comparatively high level of football knowledge on this forum to the wider Crows supporter base. I believe this is because we're all showing an active interest in having discussion with a diverse group of people for whatever reason. This is the basic dynamics of most forums on any subject.

As far as cliques go, I'm not exactly sure what this is referring to. Is it the senior posters? Is it people who are friends with each other away from the board? I mean, we've all started out here and this same discussion of a clique was about when I signed up three years ago. I didn't see it then (as a new member) and I don't really see it now. Is a group of mates really a clique? I call a spade for a spade and would just say that it's a group of mates on a forum. All this talks about cliques and exclusion is a little soft if you ask me. It almost sounds like people wanting validation for their posts.

 

[J-Ro-20]

some of you ***** are taking this way too ****ing seriously

agreed.

some peoples egos are way too inflated. Just because there are members who have been around for a long time, does not mean they are superior in any way.

 

[feenix67]

Well in my view an opinion only becomes an assertion (correct or incorrect) when the person offering the opinion claims it to be definitive ie. is closed to an alternate view.

So far, there are a few people that have asserted my view as incorrect, however how can they claim their view to be any more or less definitive than mine? This is exactly what I mean. Someone offers a view that someone else disagrees with. Healthy debate would be "I disagree with your view because etc etc etc....", however on this board the approach tends to be "No, you are wrong yada yada yada...." The first approach opens the door to healthy debate, the second approach gives rise to egotism and alienation.

ST is a classic. First he derides me for quoting the dictionary to reinforce my point on the word "opinion", then goes on to assert his own view as definitive. However, ST doesn't know my background, literacy etc.....he just assumes he is more enlightened. Pretty much sums up my point though, so thankyou. Cro-mo reinforces the point of the thread by asserting that unless you make an effort to know your subject, you should shut the hell up and not contribute. It's this view that led MadDog to open this discussion in the first place.

[edit: just occurred to me - isnt quoting the dictionary doing my research, something that Cro-mo said people should do??? ]

This is an open board on an emotive topic frequented by people from all persuasions, backgrounds, experience, football knowledge. To embrace that by promoting group discussion will lead to group enlightenment. Its the basis of democracy and the reason why we defend the right of free speech. Otherwise, what the hell is the point of having an open discussion board???

 

[Cap]

Who was that guy who used to post a bit here claiming to be a Crows fan

really went missing a few months ago after the GF

can't think of why

 

[Southerntakeover]

Well in my view an opinion only becomes an assertion (correct or incorrect) when the person offering the opinion claims it to be definitive ie. is closed to an alternate view.

So far, there are a few people that have asserted my view as incorrect, however how can they claim their view to be any more or less definitive than mine? This is exactly what I mean. Someone offers a view that someone else disagrees with. Healthy debate would be "I disagree with your view because etc etc etc....", however on this board the approach tends to be "No, you are wrong yada yada yada...." The first approach opens the door to healthy debate, the second approach gives rise to egotism and alienation.

ST is a classic. First he derides me for quoting the dictionary to reinforce my point on the word "opinion", then goes on to assert his own view as definitive. However, ST doesn't know my background, literacy etc.....he just assumes he is more enlightened. Pretty much sums up my point though, so thankyou. Cro-mo reinforces the point of the thread by asserting that unless you make an effort to know your subject, you should shut the hell up and not contribute. It's this view that led MadDog to open this discussion in the first place.

[edit: just occurred to me - isnt quoting the dictionary doing my research, something that Cro-mo said people should do??? ]

This is an open board on an emotive topic frequented by people from all persuasions, backgrounds, experience, football knowledge. To embrace that by promoting group discussion will lead to group enlightenment. Its the basis of democracy and the reason why we defend the right of free speech. Otherwise, what the hell is the point of having an open discussion board???

No, im deriding you for not understanding the dictionary you quoted, not for quoting it. Theres a difference.

 

[feenix67]

No, im deriding you for not understanding the dictionary you quoted, not for quoting it. Theres a difference.

That's funny and entirely predictable. Your post does nothing more than expose you my friend.

 

[Southerntakeover]

That's funny and entirely predictable. Your post does nothing more than expose you my friend.

Yes, ive been 'exposed'.

Save the bitterness. You were wrong about a point, get over it. Theres little point to what you're posting now.

 

[MickyCrow]

Kiss a bit more arse why don't ya

Go to the James Moss thread, things are back to normal

 

[MickyCrow]

i've been thinking about this - christ knows why!

but there are a couple of things that trouble me.

reading back through this I think there are some concepts greatly misunderstood here.

that of inclusion, price of entry, and respect.

Bigfooty is just like any discussion group - it is an exchange whereby opinions, and observations are traded by interested people. it's no different to a real time book group or any other discussion board on the internet.

It is a very good thing to try to be inclusive. to welcome all comers, but it is very unusual to try to separate that from the price of entry or participation. I belong to a number of discussion groups where if you do not pay the price of entry, you are given the boot. the price of entry is usually effort. effort is a very inclusive concept, that no one is unable to provide from time to time.
For example, if you attend a book group say (I'd rather gnaw off my leg, but that's not the point ). you'd not get far if you tried to argue the toss without having read the book. you'd certainly not get away with declaring "it's my opinion", if you had not made the effort to read the text. and why should you? to quote a great man, if that offends you "harden the **** up"

I think there is an idea that being inclusive is an absolute value, without taking into account the basic requirements of participation. all discussion groups do this, and it does not stifle a welcome to all.

Respect. This notion of a clique is fairly insulting. there a few lads who go the footy together, know each other outside this board, and obviously that translates. big deal. and then there is the issue of some posters opinions being respected more than others. that's what happens over time, people's contributions are rated by the relative peer group. if you don't think that happens in real life, look around you're missing something. People establish their credentials over time, and that's as it should be.

People such as Macca23 and Stiffy have been here for a long time, and have contributed many, many thoughtful pieces - it's not exclusionary to recognise that, it's just appreciating that someone brings good understanding AND effort to the table. equally Vader hit the ground running and very quickly established his credentials for interesting perspectives. The Gun club were off the bat light hearted and enthusiastic, and not long after showed themselves to be fairly sharp to boot. all these people were ONLY judged on face value. Expecting any different is naive. I'd argue that people complaining that they are not being taken on face value, are instead being regarded by just that. it shows a distinct lack of respect to those who do bring interesting ideas and discussion, to suggest any respect offered by others is actually the work of 'the inner circle'.

Going back to the book group analogy. some people will be more literate than others, and they may also have time/interest to consider things more thoroughly. that doesn't mean others cannot read the book and give their honest thoughts, in fact, that's absolutely essential for diversity. however, you would not expect someone who has casually and quickly flicked through a difficult novel to vehmently argue there is no subtext (say), when it is widely considered by the wider literary community to be heavily imbued with subtext and imagery. that's not an opinion, that's a lack of respect and effort.

between enthusiasm and effort, I don't see how anyone can say that the 'price of entry' is too high. hiding behind "it's just my opinion" is just lazy, and mostly gets the short shrift it deserves.

I like books

 

[Ozzie]

i've been thinking about this - christ knows why!

but there are a couple of things that trouble me.

reading back through this I think there are some concepts greatly misunderstood here.

that of inclusion, price of entry, and respect.

Bigfooty is just like any discussion group - it is an exchange whereby opinions, and observations are traded by interested people. it's no different to a real time book group or any other discussion board on the internet.

It is a very good thing to try to be inclusive. to welcome all comers, but it is very unusual to try to separate that from the price of entry or participation. I belong to a number of discussion groups where if you do not pay the price of entry, you are given the boot. the price of entry is usually effort. effort is a very inclusive concept, that no one is unable to provide from time to time.
For example, if you attend a book group say (I'd rather gnaw off my leg, but that's not the point ). you'd not get far if you tried to argue the toss without having read the book. you'd certainly not get away with declaring "it's my opinion", if you had not made the effort to read the text. and why should you? to quote a great man, if that offends you "harden the **** up"

I think there is an idea that being inclusive is an absolute value, without taking into account the basic requirements of participation. all discussion groups do this, and it does not stifle a welcome to all.

Respect. This notion of a clique is fairly insulting. there a few lads who go the footy together, know each other outside this board, and obviously that translates. big deal. and then there is the issue of some posters opinions being respected more than others. that's what happens over time, people's contributions are rated by the relative peer group. if you don't think that happens in real life, look around you're missing something. People establish their credentials over time, and that's as it should be.

People such as Macca23 and Stiffy have been here for a long time, and have contributed many, many thoughtful pieces - it's not exclusionary to recognise that, it's just appreciating that someone brings good understanding AND effort to the table. equally Vader hit the ground running and very quickly established his credentials for interesting perspectives. The Gun club were off the bat light hearted and enthusiastic, and not long after showed themselves to be fairly sharp to boot. all these people were ONLY judged on face value. Expecting any different is naive. I'd argue that people complaining that they are not being taken on face value, are instead being regarded by just that. it shows a distinct lack of respect to those who do bring interesting ideas and discussion, to suggest any respect offered by others is actually the work of 'the inner circle'.

Going back to the book group analogy. some people will be more literate than others, and they may also have time/interest to consider things more thoroughly. that doesn't mean others cannot read the book and give their honest thoughts, in fact, that's absolutely essential for diversity. however, you would not expect someone who has casually and quickly flicked through a difficult novel to vehmently argue there is no subtext (say), when it is widely considered by the wider literary community to be heavily imbued with subtext and imagery. that's not an opinion, that's a lack of respect and effort.

between enthusiasm and effort, I don't see how anyone can say that the 'price of entry' is too high. hiding behind "it's just my opinion" is just lazy, and mostly gets the short shrift it deserves.

That is all well and good but what if one hasn't the desire to pay that "price of entry"? This is a internet forum which is moderated so tightly and carefully to the point of boredom. I have read the rules and compared to some chat forums it is bordering on being constipated. I want a place where one can have some fun and say what you want to say. I come here to find out things about the Crows because I find the AFL site a total waste of time. That is the only thing it has going for it.

It sounds as so I am putting it way down but it tries hard to be wholesome and politically correct to meet today's so called social climate. That is a good thing in it's own way but most of you have forgotten the net is supposed to be fun. Off season we are meant to be relaxing and enjoying the new players etc. but here all the chat has been oh gee why have we done this move or that move. Endless rants on the same things. I must be getting old but I detect a lack of purpose at times.

I read in here on a daily basis and FTR my wife and I have been gold members since 1993. I have watched a lot of the Crows games and read a lot of good stuff and total crap in this board. Anyway carry on regardless.

 

[Crow-mo]

That is all well and good but what if one hasn't the desire to pay that "price of entry"? This is a internet forum which is moderated so tightly and carefully to the point of boredom. I have read the rules and compared to some chat forums it is bordering on being constipated. I want a place where one can have some fun and say what you want to say. I come here to find out things about the Crows because I find the AFL site a total waste of time. That is the only thing it has going for it.

It sounds as so I am putting it way down but it tries hard to be wholesome and politically correct to meet today's so called social climate. That is a good thing in it's own way but most of you have forgotten the net is supposed to be fun. Off season we are meant to be relaxing and enjoying the new players etc. but here all the chat has been oh gee why have we done this move or that move. Endless rants on the same things. I must be getting old but I detect a lack of purpose at times.

I read in here on a daily basis and FTR my wife and I have been gold members since 1993. I have watched a lot of the Crows games and read a lot of good stuff and total crap in this board. Anyway carry on regardless.

Personally I think that is all very fair. equally I can't recall you blathering endlessly that Rendell has the IQ of a 4 yr old, and all our draftees have secretly hidden prosthetic limbs from our recruiting team