Profiles and Credibilty

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote,
  Self importance of some on this site is astounding!

As you have just proved.......

 

[JANES]

What is easier to prove or disprove; a profile or a post?  What is more important to prove or disprove?  Would you rather research someone or research a topic of interest to you?  Some of you no doubt have nothing better to do than to search for posers.  Myself, I couldn’t be bothered wasting my time, I’d rather search whether their post is accurate or not, and will probably learn something in the process.  Then it is confirmed in my mind that the facts are true or false and I have gained valuable information in the process.  It’s better to learn for yourself than to simply be told something.  I would imagine a post is easier to qualify or disqualify than a profile, and the journey much more enjoyable and noble. 

Any professional who is a “professional” will not take internet dialogue as doctrine.  They will research the topic for themselves.  Any non-medical professional, any reasonable person for that matter seeking information here should not take internet discussion as fact, and should research the topic for themselves.  What if my profile said Dr. Bloggins?  Does that mean that my posts are fact, and that all the Medics can go use fentanyl lollypops (how would they get them)?  No, because they are on the internet.  This is a discussion forum, not a doctrinal writing board.  The topics are meant to generate discussion and instigate research and learning.  These are not official documents or Medical Journals.  If I was writing a medical paper, then I would put my credentials.  There is a big difference.  This is a forum to discuss new idea’s and new concepts.  If I say the sky is green, I would hope that everybody will stick their head out their window and realize that’s not true and come back and say “the sky is not green, it is blue in my world”.

“The process has not been without controversy.  The debate encouraged by this publication began long before the Dispatches made it to print, all pointing to Tactical Medicine remaining a controversial topic.  There are legitimate worries that some people will read this paper and assume that, having read it, they are experienced enough to begin practicing tactical medicine.  That is something we want to discourage.  This publication is an attempt to convey that fact as well as identify new approaches and equipment requirements.”

This is a quote in the Forward of the Dispatches on TCCC written by Cpl Kopp.  I think there are some similarities here. 

If you want credentials read my posts and research the topics.  Research them with the proper authorities.  If you think fentanyl lollypops have no place in the field, then call Capt Butler and ask him his opinion.  He is the expert, not the civilian doctor who doesn’t have a clue about TCCC.  If you can’t find the information, ask for help, ask me for a reference, I given them in the past when asked.  If I have to make footnotes for all my posts, that would take some time, that I don’t have.  I will assure you, and this is as good a profile as you are going to get, that I do have field experience, and as worded before, I have “gotten my hands dirty”. 

My other question is this.  Does a soldier on verbal warning have to wear a big red sign around his neck stating he has been put on a verbal warning so that everyone else knows this?  Does the OC mention it in the O Group?

I thought the dunce cap was taken out of our school system.  I though our society had evolved.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

My other question is this.  Does a soldier on verbal warning have to wear a big red sign around his neck stating he has been put on a verbal warning so that everyone else knows this?  Does the OC mention it in the O Group?

I thought the dunce cap was taken out of our school system.  I though our society had evolved.

I could really care less who you are. It's the way we do things around here. Go read the Guidelines for more info. Don't like it? Don't get caught in the Warning System.

 

[George Wallace]

Where to start?

What is easier to prove or disprove; a profile or a post?  What is more important to prove or disprove?  Would you rather research someone or research a topic of interest to you?  Some of you no doubt have nothing better to do than to search for posers.

If I am going to research something, perhaps a quote from someone, it would be nice to be able to research that person along with the quote.   

Myself, I couldn’t be bothered wasting my time, I’d rather search whether their post is accurate or not, and will probably learn something in the process.

Arrogance, never made for good research.  A neutral approach and collection of all the facts would seem essential.  Even posers can get facts right at times.   

Then it is confirmed in my mind that the facts are true or false and I have gained valuable information in the process.  It’s better to learn for yourself than to simply be told something.  I would imagine a post is easier to qualify or disqualify than a profile, and the journey much more enjoyable and noble. 

So very true.  Unfortunately, you don't want to make all the facts known.  You don't pose any credentials, so you don't really have credibility.  Like you say, "I couldn't be bothered wasting my time."

Any professional who is a “professional” will not take internet dialogue as doctrine.  They will research the topic for themselves.  Any non-medical professional, any reasonable person for that matter seeking information here should not take internet discussion as fact, and should research the topic for themselves.  What if my profile said Dr. Bloggins?  Does that mean that my posts are fact, and that all the Medics can go use fentanyl lollypops (how would they get them)?  No, because they are on the internet.  This is a discussion forum, not a doctrinal writing board.  The topics are meant to generate discussion and instigate research and learning.  These are not official documents or Medical Journals.  If I was writing a medical paper, then I would put my credentials.  There is a big difference.  This is a forum to discuss new idea’s and new concepts. 

What if someone slips and works on an opinion expressed by someone posing as a Professional?  I guess that means that we shouldn't consider you a Professional and 'qualified' person, but a somewhat learned outsider.

"There are legitimate worries that some people will read this paper and assume that, having read it, they are experienced enough to begin practicing tactical medicine.  That is something we want to discourage.  This publication is an attempt to convey that fact as well as identify new approaches and equipment requirements.”

....  I think there are some similarities here. 

We agree and that is what we are saying to you.  You, with not credentials, are posting some very serious matters in this forum.  For all we know you could be a Rainman.

If you want credentials read my posts and research the topics.  Research them with the proper authorities.

You could be quoting anyone from a numerous amount of Medical Journals and Libraries. 

.  If you can’t find the information, ask for help, ask me for a reference, I given them in the past when asked.

Again, why would we value your credibility to give references?

  If I have to make footnotes for all my posts, that would take some time, that I don’t have.  I will assure you, and this is as good a profile as you are going to get, that I do have field experience, and as worded before, I have “gotten my hands dirty”. 

We know no such thing. 

If you don't have the time......do we?

 

[Gouki]

Profiles and credibility? Right, I think I will change my profile to show myself as the VCDS and post a couple of thousand posts so that I can now be taken seriously by the "old timers" on this site! : A profile can be made to say anything and number of posts does not make you an expert!

Yes, by all means lets remove anything that I don't agree/like! : Self importance of some on this site is astounding!

Completely agree. It is sad that a disturbing amount of people here somehow equate no. of posts with experience or credibility, when one could make the argument that the person with less posts makes far more contributions and intelligent discussion than someone with twice the amount of posts which contain jack all.

What's that proverb ... A fool speaks loudly and a wise man not at all? I probably butchered it but it's along those lines.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Completely agree. It is sad that a disturbing amount of people here somehow equate no. of posts with experience or credibility, when one could make the argument that the person with less posts makes far more contributions and intelligent discussion than someone with twice the amount of posts which contain jack all.

What's that proverb ... A fool speaks loudly and a wise man not at all? I probably butchered it but it's along those lines.

Wow, that was quite loud.

dileas

tess

 

[Gouki]

Yeah yeah, aren't you clever for making such a reply. Ten points for you for thinking that up on your own.

I was agreeing with 2Cdo, don't get your panties in a twist over it.

 

[the 48th regulator]

I will say nothing.

Since my large post count does not quantify me for anything in your books.

dileas

tess

 

[George Wallace]

Completely agree. It is sad that a disturbing amount of people here somehow equate no. of posts with experience or credibility, when one could make the argument that the person with less posts makes far more contributions and intelligent discussion than someone with twice the amount of posts which contain jack all.

What's that proverb ... A fool speaks loudly and a wise man not at all? I probably butchered it but it's along those lines.

Should I therefore accept your quoting from the M242 25mm Gunnery Manual, that you can access in the next hangar, or online, the fact that you are indeed a RCD Coyote Gunner?  The same could be said about many who post things that sound almost right, but aren't.  Do we have to truly accept 2Cdo as a former Airborne soldier, just because he can get some of the talk correct and likes the Airborne Regiment Badge?  As he said, he could make his profile look like that of the VCDS.  Posers step on their dicks eventually.  2Cdo has posted and is accepted for what his profile says he is.  People in the Medical Branch are questioning JANES, and JANES doesn't want to clarify where JANES is coming from.  JANES is just a faceless entity, with not credentials to back up what (s)he is posting.  JANES arrogance and ego is getting the best of him/her.

Now do I have to ring up the QM or RQ and have one of them get up and out of their office to slap you off the back of the head?  Get back to work!   ;D

 

[2 Cdo]

Wow, that was quite loud.

Case in point! Large post count can simply mean way too much time on ones hands! :
Bruce please point out my posting on how important I am, because I can't seem to find it! The point I was making, and some failed to see themselves in it, is that there are people who base credibility solely on a profile and post count! If that is all it takes to be credible on this site then we have an incredibly large amount of suckers, maybe I have a bridge for sale! ???

 

[the 48th regulator]

Case in point! Large post count can simply mean way too much time on ones hands! :
Bruce please point out my posting on how important I am, because I can't seem to find it! The point I was making, and some failed to see themselves in it, is that there are people who base credibility solely on a profile and post count! If that is all it takes to be credible on this site then we have an incredibly large amount of suckers, maybe I have a bridge for sale! ???

I see, yet a small post count that consist of antagonistic statements is preferrable?

Oh I get it now...

dileas

tess

 

[Gouki]

I finished PT and am sitting here half dead.... Sports afternoon George!  ;D

That being said, I have no comment on what's going on with JANES, I think (as you pointed out) it will sort itself out eventually one way or the other. But, that wasn't really what I was getting at. Disregard everything involving Janes, I commented on how number of posts does not equal expertise, and I was expressing my agreement with 2Cdo's views. I've been seeing and thinking of it for a while now but didn't care enough (well until now) to say something, but it seems that too often now some (not mentioning names here) put a bit too much importance on a post count.

And 48th, I did not say that large post counts exclusively mean you contribute nothing, you took that ball and ran the court with it all on your own.

 

[George Wallace]

2 Cdo

I wouldn't exactly say that.  I put more credibility on the 'quality' of the posts and the profile, rather than on the 'Quantity' and the profile.  To me there is a big difference.

When a poser posts, they will be initially accepted for who they say they are.  Eventually, as they post, the people in the know (Trade, experience, etc.) will have a sixth sense kick in and say to themselves that "something isn't right here" and then give the poser all the rope necessary to hang themselves.  Should we give JANES all the rope (s)he wants?

There are a few very knowledgable people on the site, who have answered a lot of questions and contributed to many of the discussions, who by doing so have built up quite a few posts.  Others are 'C' Types and prefer to lurk.  (Using the DISC model)

 

[Scott]

Number of posts does not equal expertise, I am in full agreement.

I do not agree that there are a large number of people here who rely on their post count as a back up for debates.

The only complaint I have ever heard about someone equating post count to experience is 2 Cdo.

Maybe I have more time on my hands, maybe I get my work done faster - who are you to judge that?

I'll go back to staying out of this one now.

 

[the 48th regulator]

And 48th, I did not say that large post counts exclusively mean you contribute nothing, you took that ball and ran the court with it all on your own.

Completely agree. It is sad that a disturbing amount of people here somehow equate no. of posts with experience or credibility, when one could make the argument that the person with less posts makes far more contributions and intelligent discussion than someone with twice the amount of posts which contain jack all.

What's that proverb ... A fool speaks loudly and a wise man not at all? I probably butchered it but it's along those lines.

Oh Sorry Steve,

I should have read in between the lines.

dileas

tess

 

[Libre]

It never fails to amaze me how small minded people can make data mountains out of digital molehills...

Free discussion has never existed on this site; so don't get too bent out of shape when cohesive arguments result in 'hurt feelings' warnings.  :

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Oh, hello "Mo-litia".....good bye "Mo-litia."

Cant say it was fun.......

 

[2 Cdo]

I put more credibility on the 'quality' of the posts

I agree 100%!

The only complaint I have ever heard about someone equating post count to experience is 2 Cdo.

99% of the people who post here are good to go. The remaining 1% (who predominatly have large post counts) seem to think that their large post numbers gives their posts "more importance"! If you haven't seen it in their posts, then you haven't been looking!

I am not going to further this as it is just one mans observation. To the 1%, and you probably know who you are, I will avoid commenting on anything you post as you will come back with snide remarks about inexperience or "time on site" nonsense. I don't comment on things I don't have an understanding of, maybe some people here should consider that as well!

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It never fails to amaze me how small minded people can make data mountains out of digital molehills...

Free discussion has never existed on this site; so don't get too bent out of shape when cohesive arguments result in 'hurt feelings' warnings.  :

Was wondering how long it would take you to post in your new incarnation. Just can't get that army.ca monkey off your back eh mo-litia?

 

[the 48th regulator]

99% of the people who post here are good to go. The remaining 1% (who predominatly have large post counts) seem to think that their large post numbers gives their posts "more importance"! If you haven't seen it in their posts, then you haven't been looking!

I am not going to further this as it is just one mans observation. To the 1%, and you probably know who you are, I will avoid commenting on anything you post as you will come back with snide remarks about inexperience or "time on site" nonsense. I don't comment on things I don't have an understanding of, maybe some people here should consider that as well!

Yes,

That nameless, evil 1%, that causes problems for the rest.  Next thing you know they will start wearing patches.

So you had to talk about this myusterious group for a reason, but will not name them.

Thanks for the insight.

dileas

tess