We’ve noticed that.
Sometimes your point, however good it may be, is obscured by the verbiage.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Is it just me? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter GrampaTom
- Start date
Sometimes your point, however good it may be, is obscured by the verbiage.
Thank you.
No doubt some will see this as tit for tat, apologies to those. You of course are the other I allude to. I sometimes think you see yourself as Haiku master. Brevity is not always an asset.
I struggle for balance and mess up. You?
I think your premise is flawed. Just because people come here for advice in no way strips them of either their adulthood or their ability to reason.
Yes, sometimes they get a lot of advice which may be irrelevant or biased, but they have to pick through the plop to find the seeds.
Some can, and some can’t.
Addendum: Fewer words does not mean less meaning or clarity.
Yes, sometimes they get a lot of advice which may be irrelevant or biased, but they have to pick through the plop to find the seeds.
Some can, and some can’t.
Addendum: Fewer words does not mean less meaning or clarity.
Last edited:
Did I say that?
Scheez!
You do know "Garbage in garbage out"? It doesn't matter how smart you are, if all you have is plop
Maybe I didn't use enough words.... Ha!
Not guilty.
I do not see myself as any such thing, but I have a great deal of respect for language, the purpose of which is to exchange thoughts.
Precision and brevity, with carefully chosen words, enhance that exchange.
Addendum: We agree frequently, we just seem to have nearly irreconcilable stylistic differences.
Last edited:
Sometimes
How an (optical) inexperienced member cand separate the information received here in false/true, subjective/objective, relative/absolute, relevant/irrelevant.
Or how to identify the level of importance from him/herself?
How to determine a post is written by an experienced member, a self-interested one, a preacher for some "perfect" brand(s)? All with good intentions, sure, but not knowing the interest of the inexperienced member?
Probably we must ask more questions about the new member experience, requirements for optics, interests in birding (like where you do the main birding?), ... And respecting his/her budget...
Last edited:
Thank you
I would debate that and serve it up as an example. NIce, short, concise it is. Not the whole story. Fewer words does not always mean better meaning or clarity.
More often than not, it does.
It is not always necessary to explore every nuance, and “the whole story” is superfluous if the essence is all that is needed.
Of course.
You caught a few that I missed! I totally forgot "blue ring of death" and a few others. You know, it occurs to me there's a lot of benefit to this - put all the complaints in one centrally-located place so they're easy to find. Brand-neutral. It might cut down on a lot of sniping back & forth, the fawning fanboyism, etc. It's all the "dirt" people really want to know, no sifting through post after post of fluffy praise and "immersiveness" to find the real story
Hermann
Well-known member
This wouldn't work. Never ever. Take a couple of examples, e.g. glare in (some) Swarovski roofs: For some people it's a dealbreaker, others don't mind, and yet others don't see it at all. Or the colour cast of (some) Zeiss binoculars: Some people find it disturbing, other don't mind, and yet others say they don't see any colour cast whatsoever. I'm certain trying to establish such a list in "one centrally-located place" (!) would lead to lots and lots of heated arguments at best with lots and lots of sniping back and forth. Not sure that would be helpful to anyone.You know, it occurs to me there's a lot of benefit to this - put all the complaints in one centrally-located place so they're easy to find. Brand-neutral. It might cut down on a lot of sniping back & forth, the fawning fanboyism, etc. It's all the "dirt" people really want to know, no sifting through post after post of fluffy praise and "immersiveness" to find the real story
Maybe it's time to think about the purpose of this forum:
- Is it a forum where users from all over the world can discuss binoculars and scopes, including some highly technical questions? That's how I always saw this forum, although lately there are more and more posts asking for advice, often on topics that have been dealt with in great detail in the past.
- Or is it a forum that first and foremost aims at providing "objective" (whatever that is) advice to people who come here to ask questions? A sort of support forum for beginners and buyers?
When I look at a review (opinion) of any binocular posted here, I always look at the bottom line of the review. Did the reviewer spend more than a few minutes evaluating them, and in spite of his complaints, decide to keep them, anyway? If so, it is obvious that the virtues, even if not enumerated, must have outweighed the perceived faults. As a buyer, I would be doing the same thing.
Last edited:
What I struggle with is similar to knowing who to listen to here. The assumption that we are writing to regulars here, they’ve heard it all and don’t want to wade through it again does not cover the concern for who’s coming and reading for the first time. It is about the audience. My communication style may not work for many here…. But I do think of the other guy, the ones we don’t know, who’re reading not posting.
Bill you are not the guy I’m writing about….
Why not both? Why objective? Why not more accurate, weighted towards features performance that matters?
Hermann
Well-known member
And who decides what is "accurate"? And what isn't? And who decides what features matter?
Hermann
Last edited:
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Lol, it depends on who you talk to at Nikon. It seems the less they think you know the more they push that.
Any good quality binoculars will give you everything you need to identify species when observing. It’s just the alphas make that more enjoyable.
I think it’s useful as well , and Tom brings a lot of excellent conversations and experience to the forum, even if he is a NYT reader , he can be forgiven for that 😜.
And no, there wouldn’t have been less room for misunderstanding, it’s par for the course and the nature of the beast ✌🏼🙏🏼.
Last edited:
Conndomat
United States of Europe
That's exactly why I've asked Dennis several times not to cheer up a pair of binoculars today in order to sink them in the mud tomorrow.
Tom, it is of course also up to the interested reader to sort the useful from the less useful contributions!
It's a forum where all sorts of people write, it's in the nature of things that a lot of nonsense comes out, we shouldn't exclude ourselves from it, sometimes the daily form is just suboptimal.
Basically, I don't have the impression that the general advice here is completely disastrous, wrong posts are quickly caught and straightened by colleagues, imo that's okay.
It's just our hobby, we are not paid for meaningful contributions, our "reward" is a "like" from a colleague or the "angry" of another colleague, the subsequent battle of words is planned.
All in all, I still see the Birdforum as a useful source of information, you just have to sort it out.
Andreas
