Horological Meandering

Hi,

"Context is everything. Everything is context."

Is there a difference between these two statements?

1. "The Patex Pigueron Submersible Travel Timer Big Date is one of the biggest rip offs in the watch industry."

2. "The Patex Pigueron Submersible Travel Timer Big Date is one of the biggest rip offs in the watch industry, in my opinion."

================

I was brought up to always remember to say "please" and "thank you" and "good morning" and "good bye" and even today, I still strongly believe in opening and closing salutations in posts, emails, etc.

I'd use salutations in sms too but I have to learn to adapt to "reality" and evolution. In fact, for a short SMS that doesn't come close to the max characters, I still use opening salutations.

In conversations with different people of different backgrounds, I get quite a range of opinions about the above. I have met more than few people who feel that pleasantries like "Hi, ..." or "Dear..." or "IMHO..." are not only unnecessary, but in fact a waste of valuable bandwidth and typing efficiency, ie, wasted keystrokes.

One comment in particular sticks in my mind: "How stupid to add in forum posts, IMHO (in my humble opinion); OF COURSE it's your opinion."

I'm not sure I agree; in fact, I strongly disagree.

I can understand when a professional journalist or author needs to state even dubious "facts" as facts in a feature article (though I'd respect the author more if they took the time and effort to soften the statement. Doing this also tells me the author is not a complete moron stupidly and lazily repeating marketing bullshit. But still, I understand, in its proper context.)

I also understand why a materials scientist, or a bio-medical researcher, or a physicist, makes statements of "fact" in their fields of specialization, even if those "facts" are perhaps the subject of controversy (evolutionary biology is rife with this.)  Same applies to graduated licensed pharmacologists, clergymen who have devoted decades, even lifetimes, to their religion; et al.

It is another thing entirely when bi-directional/multi-directional communication/conversation, such as most forum threads are, present questionable "facts" as FACT.  This comes through in tone; in choice of words.

"Ferrari is the best car in the world." is an opinion.

"Lamborghini's are lemons" is an opinion.

"The engine puts out 563 bhp and can do 0-62 in 3.9 seconds" is either a lie, a fact, or blind regurgigation of either. But I don't think it can be an opinion.

========================

So,

how do you feel about "imho" or "my thoughts are"...

Is there a difference between facts and opinions?

Should communications preserve pleasantries like "Dear..." and "Hi..." and "Please..." and "Sincerely..."?

scratch scratch scratch...

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

TM

They allow an individual to express his/her honest opinion freely and without fear by also covering his/her a-- at the same time. 

They allow this and also don't necessarily force the opinion on to others to adopt them as well.

In a sense, putting it out there but not completely in your face.  They set the tone and keep a cordial mood to the conversation.

This is all, of course, IMHO. 

Hi, Ping,

I thought about leaving this for another headscratcher, but I'm not sure there's enough on the topic to discuss to be the start of another thread.

"Context is everything;

Everything is context."

I am reminded of the "2010 is the start of a new decade"

"No it's not"

discussion we had early last month.

Thank goodness all parties weren't pig headed and itching for a fight!

That seems as good a case as any that, all parties to the discussion were correct, in their respective context, yet upon presentation and without context, were mutually exclusive (yes it is/no it's not)

Any new year that ends in zero (00, 10, 20, 30, etc) in a decimal calendar system is the start of a new decade. End of discussion, that's the way it is.

BUT

if one were to look at a calendar system that starts with an event, such as the death of Christ/Buddha/Mohammed/detection of the Northern Star/ascension of new Pharoah/emperor/dynasty/etc where the counting starts with 1 instead of 0 (zero) then indeed, WITHIN THE SPECIFIC CONTEXT, the new decade doesn't start until 01 (11, 21, etc)

Ah, I wonder how many wars start because of mis aligned context!

Cure laziness and pigheadedness all at once!

-----------------------------
Sincerely and IMHO,
SteveH

so we won't be reinstating signatures because it opens up Pandora's box for the moderating team.

Best,
Anthony

please bear with me, but I do appreciate all responses and comments, thoughts - that's what "open" discussions are for!

Thanks!

TM

Hello Thomas,

Whereas I have just realized from looking at previous posts, I rarely use opening salutations here on PPro, I am a fan, believer and user of such "pleasantries". I gather that my opening salutations are missed here because of my tendancy to start my message in the title field and continue it in the message body field and it becomes slightly ackward to sneak in a hello in between.

Anyway, back to your question. I believe that courtesy, politeness and respect of other opinions and decisions are always appropriate no matter how efficient you are trying to be. All too often, I experience how hours are wasted trying to sort out misunderstandings and -interpretations of "cut-corner" messages. This is - IMHO - very true in a written media where you cannot count on a smile or gesture to rescue a bold statement.

I am with you 100% on your argument about the difference between experts/professionalists who are actually asked or even paid to provide their opinion and more or less lay-men contributors to an open discussion (which would be the case in internet fora where everyone and anyone can provide their views, right?). In open discussions you can come a long way in proving your point by respecting the opinion of others and we should not forget that many of the topics discussed are very subjective.

I could imaging a scenario where the soothing and placating could be too much though. I am not asking obsequiousness (I hope I have applied this word rightly; if not I am sure Dr No will hunt me down and smack me hard with a dictionary), but in case of expressing subjective opinion I firmly belive in a IMHO.

A true Purist Headscratcher!

Nikolaj

PS: Any pics to share of that Patex Pigueron Submersible Travel Timer Big Date??

. . . good call, Nikolaj . . .

I appreciate your comments, and I agree that the point can be taken overboard too.

I'll see what I can do about that Patex Pigueron. It seems it does have its fans...

;-)

All the best,

TM

i always try, and hope i succeed, in being polite whenever i have a typed conversation, if you can call it a conversation

i may not start with, Dear Mr Mao, but i always end with 'best, Graham' or similar. politeness costs nothing and people should take the time to type a salutation. personally i hate 'type speak'. perhaps i am a technophobe, but i would much rather have a phone conversation with someone than type a message. i have recently been introduced to the wonders of Skype and with a webcam i can have a proper conversation with my few friends. much much better than an email.

with regards to the question of opinion, i also totally agree with you Mr Mao

'it has a Unitas movement' is a FACT,

'the movement could be finished better' is an opinion and therefore you should add IMO.

IMHO i have given the best answer i can.

best

Graham

it's great when one gets to know someone; it definitely helps with context.

Knowing that you are an ex-copper (since you have mentioned this publically before, I assume it is okay to share publically) brings to mind an issue that comes up frequently in regards to LEO's - there is one school that strongly believes that Law Enforcement Officers should never smile while on the job - they  have to always maintain an air of being in control - of themselves, of the situation.  Being friendly or amiable are not part of the job description, and in fact, can be dangerous at worst, counter productive at best.

What I've always found interesting is that this school conveniently forgets, or ignores, the percentage of the population that actually reacts very badly to being "coerced" by power and power figures.

It's a tough and delicate balance, just like real life in general, and again, dogma and slavish devotion to a "rule book" loses.

Back to the OP, your posts are always polite and enjoyable, whether you include opening salutations or "imho" in a specific post or not.

Thanks for your participation and presence in this community!

Cheers,

TM

Dear Fellow PuristS,

One of the things that I admire about this site and its members is that in general I think there is a very high level of civility, and politeness not found with same consistency elsewhere. IMHO. IMHO that has a lot to do with the tone set and maintained by the moderators as well as the members themselves.  

Also, IMHO, etiquette, civility and politeness are just ways one behaves in relation to others.  Because we cannot all be counted on to behave the same way, there are proscribed rules of etiquette, including salutations, that get us all on the same page.  As I said above, IMHO the members here generally behave with a great deal of civility and politeness towards one another, so I do not generally miss the occasionally omitted "IMHO" or the clearly stated distinction between an opinion and a fact.  I always appreciate the efforts made to be clear and to be polite, but I think here, at least on this site, the intentions are usually good and good natured. IMHO, of course.  I can think of several occasions where I have stated something I purported to be a fact, omitted even so much as an "IMHO" and was subsequentyly, gently and thankfully corrected by someone more knowledgable than I.  That seems to me to be the essence of polite discourse.  We follow the rules of etiquette as best we can, but more important are our intentions and best efforts to be polite.

By the way, is the Patex Pigueron Submersible Travel Timer Big Date a real watch?  I respect your opinion, ThomasM, so I will accept your statement about the watch with or without the "IMHO."

Faithfully yours,

respo

 

I always respect someone who tries to live up to their own standards, which you certainly seem to.

Your "guidelines" for conduct are right on, imho.

Man, that Patex Pigueron seems to be reallly popular!  I just might have to get one!

TM

…amongst our number who takes the view that it is actually almost something of an egotistical presumption to express the views of a neophyte to an audience of cogniscenti, and for that reason eschews the personal pronoun (and derivations thereof) in posts. Even writing in that way, it is possible to convey the usual (others might say ‘old-fashioned’) courtesies and to impart a discernible distinction between fact and opinion. Indeed, taking it to the other extreme, it is possible to do so without resort to acronyms and neologisms which arguably (some might say) are as great a slight upon polite discourse as the absence of salutations.

 

So, is this fact or is it opinion?  Is it less than polite?

 

;-)

 

Thanks again for the ‘brainfood’, dear and most esteemed Dr Mao.

 

 

 

Cheers,

pplater.

No message body

others look forward to your comments on a given subject, or miss you when you don't post.  I always look forward to your words, on whatever subject.

You mentioned the use of acronyms - interestingly, I didn't intend this thread to address that, but as I mentioned to Park, I find that extension of the topic fascinating.

I tend to look at acronyms and lingo fairly forgivingly; it can be shorthand; shorthand for specialists; signals to other specialists and insiders (which, I can imagine, can be (mis) understood as exclusionary, elitist, snobbish, show offy, and rude)  Under the last two, I can see how it might be looked at harshly by some.

On a more abstract, meta level, I also see language as a living thing, so to me, the infiltration of IMO or LOL or Kleenex into the casual lexicon is no more "offensive" than Anglicised Japanese like "batt-eli" or "hoteru" which finds frequent, common usage in Japan and Taiwan.  Yes, I know there are Nihon-go purists, and Francais purists, and ...In this case, I think my aversion to dogma and "slavish devotion to the old ways" wins out, so long as the person using colloquialisms, slang, lingo, and yes, new media neologisms, also knows the proper, formal form of expression.

I constantly tell my daughters (so much so I'm sure they are sick and tired of hearing it, but as I tell them in response to that, "listen and take it to heart, and I'll stop repeating it!") that sure, it is fine to use the outer fork first, or inner one; hold the fork in the right hand or left; use neologisms. Just be sure you know the proper terms and correct manners first. Knowing the "proper way" or rules or laws is pre-requisite to discretionary adaptation of them. (one of my few "rules")

Of course, I realize that even this is fraught with potential problems - inconsistent rules; stupid (ie, counterproductive to stated purpose) laws; obsolete or antiquated conventions or terms - are they necessary to know?

Cheers, Mr. Stewart.

… to flattery and back to politesse, all in the one post! Thank you also for the allusion to one of Hollywood’s more persuasive advocates:

 

[The great Mr James Stewart in 'Anatomy of a Murder" - pic from independentcritics dot com]

 

Wholly undeserved, of course, but hey…. J

 

 

There can be no issue with the deployment of acronyms or lingo per se. As you have sagely reminded us more than once, however, so much revolves around ‘context’, does it not?

 

We are taught acronyms at school from an early age; they are a useful coda to a communication that is shared by one and all. It allows us to know that a spin doctor  on an FM station in DC referring to the GDP of the G7 in the context of the EOFY 09 budget for UNESCO is a public relations consultant speaking on a (frequency modulated) radio broadcast in the District of Columbia about the gross domestic product of all of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America in the context of the 2009 end of financial year budget for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. Easier; more practical; helpful. Importantly: almost universally understood.  No argument there.

 

Equally, we seem to agree that most extant languages are iterative, and that for the most part that is beneficial. In some countries this change is left to serendipity; in others it is somewhat more contrived. Was it not our French friends who recognised this inevitability, and sought to modulate the pace and direction of change by investing a formal and highly esteemed academy (the Academie Francaise) with the responsibility of shepherding the development of that most beautiful language?

 

Even so, change in language, written or spoken, is most palatable when it is ‘gentle’: when it is evolutionary, not revolutionary. Language should be permitted to meander forward along its own path at its own pace; violence is done to language when it is kidnapped upon that path, indecently assaulted, and returned to continue its journey in a daze. Some might say that one such mugging occurred, for example, when ‘SMS-speak’ burst upon the scene with the mass take-up of the mobile phone: how cn  ne1 wan 2  perpetu8 d intrusion of this abr8ion in2 evry day communic8ion?

 

Whilst on that theme, please: for those of us on foreign shores whose only exposure to the great literary oeuvre of the US of A revolves around last decade’s discarded sitcoms being re-run in the graveyard timeslot, can anyone – anyone – explain the origin, sense, purpose or usefulness of modern-day ‘jive talk’??? Why is it that seemingly well-educated, gainfully employed, God-fearing, family-rearing adults seem intent on popping their eyes in expressions of mock astonishment, adopting a ‘crouching tiger’ stance, throwing their hands forward with fingers and thumbs splayed and spew forth, at considerable volume, a  third person, expletive-laden, consonant-dropping diatribe worthy of Samuel L Jackson in a Tarantino movie?

 

“This brutha's layin' it on ya straight, Holmes, y'all one shape in a drape, ya dig what I'm puttin' down?”

 

What is that?????

 

Here is the hook. One one view, as you say, there can be no offence taken at the use of these forms of shorthand so long as the person using colloquialisms, slang, lingo, and new media neologisms also knows the proper, formal form of expression. Respectfully, though, is that the only measure? Where are these forms being utilised? Before what audiences, with what penetration, and with what degree of take-up? Where is the comfort that every member of those audiences will know or remember the proper, formal form of expression when circumstances dictate their use? And if there is a proper, formal form: well, gee, Virginia -  why not use that?

 

Playing on, though; what about that audience? If it is a ‘closed shop’ of a particular species (be it a species of professionals, a species of hobbyists, a species of scholars…), then probably, however large the audience, ‘no harm, no foul’. It is convenient and uncontroversial for one doctor in a hospital to tell another doctor to send the MI patient to ICU for full bloods and an ECG. It is convenient and inoffensive on PPro to advertise your Pt JLC MMR in the CM FSOT as LNIB. It is convenient (and almost obligatory) for Stephen Hawking to write a treatise on quantum physics in an arcane language that no mere mortal can hope to comprehend, for consumption by a few salivating and doubtless envious Nobel laureates each of whom wish they had thought of it first.

 

This, as you say, TM, is shorthand for specialists; signals to other specialists and insiders which, you imagine, can be (mis) understood [implicitly; by ‘outsiders’] as exclusionary, elitist, snobbish, show-offy, and rude. Why mis understood? If part of the intended audience is not within the magic circle of insiders, then can it not fairly be said that the use of that shorthand is indeed one or more of: exclusionary, elitist, snobbish, show-offy, or rude? Is it not tantamount to speaking to some guests at the dinner table in a language other than the language shared by all guests?

 

With acronyms and neologisms, then, as with cliff-jumping: just because we can does not mean that we should. There is much to be said for hastening slowly to take up new technologies, new fads, new fashions, new ‘language’. Perhaps those who share that view might be prepared to play some small part in guarding over language as it meanders along its path, to keep the muggers at bay: perhaps the art of polite communication is not lost, it is merely hidden behind the television set....

 

“FWIW”….    ;-)

 

 

Cheers,

pplater.

somewhere where the winged chariot of other posts don't constantly threaten to push it to the internet oblivion of "page 2"...

"

This, as you say, TM, is shorthand for specialists; signals to other specialists and insiders which, you imagine, can be (mis) understood [implicitly; by ‘outsiders’] as exclusionary, elitist, snobbish, show-offy, and rude. Why mis understood? If part of the intended audience is not within the magic circle of insiders, then can it not fairly be said that the use of that shorthand is indeed one or more of: exclusionary, elitist, snobbish, show-offy, or rude? Is it not tantamount to speaking to some guests at the dinner table in a language other than the language shared by all guests?

 

With acronyms and neologisms, then, as with cliff-jumping: just because we can does not mean that we should. There is much to be said for hastening slowly to take up new technologies, new fads, new fashions, new ‘language’. Perhaps those who share that view might be prepared to play some small part in guarding over language as it meanders along its path, to keep the muggers at bay: perhaps the art of polite communication is not lost, it is merely hidden behind the television set....

 

"

I especially would love to explore the above, including my emphasis added sentence.

Cheers,

TM

Is that it's lazy and clumsy. Yes, I use it sometimes. Sometimes I am lazy and clumsy.

It allows a writer to make a strident statement e.g."Xxxxxx Xxxxxx is the biggest cheat in F1" and then retreat behind the initialism "IMHO" as though that softens the blow. It certainly does nothing for the tone of a sentence.

Compare with "Based on what I've seen in that race, Xxxxxx Xxxxxx is a cheat"...

And I completely agree with you categorisation of what is not an opinion.

Though, power is measured in kW and 0-62 isn't impressive if it's in km/h...IMHO.and anyway is it SAE or DIN power..etc etc . Maybe the next head-scratcher should be on pedantry.... or the use of smileys to offset curmudgeoniness

Hi, BDLJ (is this an acronym, pseudonym, "handle" or ...? and what does it say about me to use it slavishly when I know your real name? Or am I respecting your implied desire to maintain a separate identity on the net vs "real life?"    )

"It allows a writer to make a strident statement e.g."Xxxxxx Xxxxxx is the biggest cheat in F1" and then retreat behind the initialism "IMHO" as though that softens the blow. It certainly does nothing for the tone of a sentence. "

Everything can be bastardized. I started the Collectors Marketplace as a free resource that used the power of the net to reduce inherent market inefficiencies, to reduce transactions costs for principals and non-specialists, so the spread can be reduced, so that a closer approximation to (my) optimal pure market clearing price can be reached.

defn: a "fair" price is one where a willing buyer and willing seller can come to agreement on.

a "good" price is one that is higher than the lowest the seller was willing to accept, and lower than the highest price the buyer was willing to pay.

There is no "best" as "good" is one among a range.

So, the guideline definition was simple, to me, to use the original Collectors Marketplace: for free use by sellers who purchased the piece being offered ORIGINALLY and PRIMARILY for personal ownership and use, and not primarily for resale?

Then the bullshit started:

What if the seller was making a profit?

What if the seller wasn't making a profit?

What if the seller bought it equally with the intention for resell?

What buyer is so rich, or so sure of their purchase, that they did not intend to EVER offer the piece for sale?

Is it possible for a personal use buyer to offer 5 pieces in one month? 10? 50? 100? 1000?

Hey, TM, you're an idiot. You can't read people's minds! So just set up rules that apply evenly to everyone, that don't require mindreading, and don't try to be so  high falutin and principled.

===================

(sigh) People, the original paradigm was simple and easy, and only required a modicum of personal integrity and self-respect. (sigh)

So, my dear BDLJ, IMHO can either be pure, or a cheat to disingenuously "soften" what is already known to be a strident, unnecessarily hurtful statement. By the way, not all uncomplimentary comments need be hurtful.

Just like, "with all due respect..."

Ben, I have to say, you are a true rare gem. Cynicism, curmudgeoniness, erudition, wide ranging real world experience balanced by obvious well read and well understood theory balanced by rubber meets the road street cred.  Me'thinks your frequent online crustiness hides a pretty cool human being underneath.  Your obvious real life experience softens the pedantry, certainly more so than many others who love to pedant away (tee hee )without any real life experience. A favorite pejorative comes to mind..."mind wanker."

But that's just my humble opinion.

Cheers, dude.

TM

post script: I'm not sure IMHO or ROTFLMAO or Hi or PS or eg or ie necessarily need be lazy or clumsy.

Hi Thomas,

 

I agree with your general comments about the use of salutations and qualifiers.

 

I have commented on this before, but I have noted on the various PuristS channels, as well as other internet sites, that the use of qualifiers such as IMVHO, YMMV, IME, AFAIAA, AFAIK, etc., are used less frequently than they used to be. Even I use them less than I used to, but they certainly have their place.

 

They are particularly important in such a diverse group as ours. We come with different backgrounds and experiences, we speak different languages, we have varied cultural backgrounds and knowledge and I think these little niceties can smooth many unintended faux pas.

 

Andrew

 

Electronic communication: never before have so many chatted for so long about so little.

... have you seen the bottom of your posts today???

;-)

 

Cheers,

pplater.

Yes I noticed the links but was too terrified to press on anything. Hopefully we will get an explanation from the ‘techs’, or being a citizen of the 21^st century am I supposed to know what “Delicious”, “Digg”, “Technorati”, “Reddit”, “Stumbleupon”, “Propeller”, “Newsvine” and “Mixx” all do?! At least I had heard of Twitter and Google Bookmarks, so I am not completely ready to retire myself.

 

Geez, I’m suddenly feeling very old fashioned!

 

A

....and he eats for a day. Teach him how to fish and he eats always'.

For the Luddites amongst us, Bill, tell us how and when we should be using these new 'thingies'.

 

Cheers,

pplater.

The promise is that it will attract like minded reader due to the way they get ranked.  If users are interested it climbs.  Obviously our universe is small so we will attract  users with high interest.

Other things like twitter I still don't quite know how people use them but I am curious to see if it can be beneficial.

In general I think most can just ignore the links but my hope is that users that know these social tools can educate us.

Bill

No message body

"Never in the history of humankind has so much misinformation been owed by so many to so few, so quickly."

;-)

Like, if I said "Brand ABC's watches are ugly", it sounds pretty harsh.  That's how I read it.

If I were to say 'Brand ABC's watches are ugly IMO", it sounds harsh but more in a subdued tone of voice.

I like adding "IMO" sometimes to my written opinions because I don't want to come across as my opinion is the absolute correct opinion.  I add the IMO to soften the forcefulness of my opinion.

It's not about of course what you're writing is your opinion so why even write IMO or IMHO - but it's how you protray your opinion in the virtual medium.

Cheers,
Anthony