Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
I haven't been here in quite a while. With advanced (end state,
metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. Regardless, I see that little has changed here. The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. Members rib one another, but all in good fun. New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 in hopes of resurection ;-) Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a pahse nuber 8 (Fight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote:
I haven't been here in quite a while. With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. Regardless, I see that little has changed here. The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. Members rib one another, but all in good fun. New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 1998 to 2001 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. Flight to the nanny forum. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 in hopes of resurection ;-) People these days are not satisfied with plain text, despite Usenet being my better to use than web-based forums. Less is indeed more. Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a pahse nuber 8 (Fight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Most of the former posters seem happier in an environment when a moderator steps in and squelches things at the first sign of spirited discourse. One cannot also ignore most ISPs dropping Usenet out of liability concerns, which limits new participation, and is responsible for much of the decline in Usenet. This was a foolish decision, as the binary groups (containing "pr0n" and "warez") could have been dropped, while retaining the text only groups. [1] Cross-posted to rec.bicycles.soc, since it seems unfair to talk about a person behind his back. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 2, 1:43*pm, JimmyMac wrote:
I haven't been here in quite a while. *With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. *I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. *Regardless, I see that little has changed here. *The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. *ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. *Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. *I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. *It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. *Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. *The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. *Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. *Members rib one another, but all in good fun. *New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. *Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. *Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic *threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. *Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. *Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. *Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. *Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. *Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. *SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. *Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. *Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. *Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 *in hopes of ressurection ;-) Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a phase number 8 (Flight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Sorry about the typos in the last sentence above now corrected. - Jim McNamara |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 3, 2:35*pm, Tºm Shermªn °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote: I haven't been here in quite a while. *With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. *I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. *Regardless, I see that little has changed here. *The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. *ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. *Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. *I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. *It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. *Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. *The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. *Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. *Members rib one another, but all in good fun. *New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. *Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 1998 to 2001 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. *Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic *threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. *Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. *Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. *Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. *Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. *Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. *SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. *Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. *Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. *Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. Flight to the nanny forum. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 *in hopes of resurrection ;-) People these days are not satisfied with plain text, despite Usenet being my better to use than web-based forums. Less is indeed more. Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a phase number 8 (Flight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Most of the former posters seem happier in an environment when a moderator steps in and squelches things at the first sign of spirited discourse. One cannot also ignore most ISPs dropping Usenet out of liability concerns, which limits new participation, and is responsible for much of the decline in Usenet. *This was a foolish decision, as the binary groups (containing "pr0n" and "warez") could have been dropped, while retaining the text only groups. [1] Cross-posted to rec.bicycles.soc, since it seems unfair to talk about a person behind his back. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 5, 12:33*pm, JimmyMac wrote:
On Jul 2, 1:43*pm, JimmyMac wrote: I haven't been here in quite a while. *With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. *I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. *Regardless, I see that little has changed here. *The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. *ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. *Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. *I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. *It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. *Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. *The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. *Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. *Members rib one another, but all in good fun. *New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. *Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. *Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic *threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. *Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. *Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. *Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. *Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. *Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. *SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. *Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. *Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. *Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 *in hopes of resurrection ;-) Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a phase number 8 (Flight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Sorry about the typos in my initial post, now fully corrected (I hope) . *- Jim McNamara |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 3, 2:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote: I haven't been here in quite a while. With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. Regardless, I see that little has changed here. The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. Members rib one another, but all in good fun. New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 1998 to 2001 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. Flight to the nanny forum. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 in hopes of resurrection ;-) People these days are not satisfied with plain text, despite Usenet being my better to use than web-based forums. Less is indeed more. Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a phase number 8 (Flight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Most of the former posters seem happier in an environment when a moderator steps in and squelches things at the first sign of spirited discourse. One cannot also ignore most ISPs dropping Usenet out of liability concerns, which limits new participation, and is responsible for much of the decline in Usenet. This was a foolish decision, as the binary groups (containing "pr0n" and "warez") could have been dropped, while retaining the text only groups. [1] Cross-posted to rec.bicycles.soc, since it seems unfair to talk about a person behind his back. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I read it, agree with Tom, the same can be said of most Usenet groups. Good wishes on your health issues. Mike |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... [...] Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I responded at length, but it apparently disappeared into cyber space. The computer, the Internet and Usenet are all terribly flawed and I can't be bothered repeating my words of wisdom because of a ****ed-up technology. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/5/2011 10:47 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
wrote in message ... [...] Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I responded at length, but it apparently disappeared into cyber space. The computer, the Internet and Usenet are all terribly flawed and I can't be bothered repeating my words of wisdom because of a ****ed-up technology. Look in your "Sent" and "Drafts" email folders. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 7/5/2011 10:47 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: wrote in message ... [...] Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I responded at length, but it apparently disappeared into cyber space. The computer, the Internet and Usenet are all terribly flawed and I can't be bothered repeating my words of wisdom because of a ****ed-up technology. Look in your "Sent" and "Drafts" email folders. It was "Sent", so why did not Jim McNamara see it? If you saw it, why not say so instead of being so cryptic? -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 5, 5:42*pm, "ATP" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 3, 2:35 pm, Tºm Shermªn °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI $southslope.net" wrote: On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote: I haven't been here in quite a while. With advanced (end state, metastatic), clinical stage 4 prostate cancer, I've had to reassess my priorities, put hings in perspective and frankly ARBR was not at the top of the list. I have bigger fish to fry, so to speak. Regardless, I see that little has changed here. The forum has lost many of it members and is no longer about recumbent bicycles. ARBR has become the sounding board and soap box of the Tibetan Monkey who arguably has has far too much time on his hands. Even the crotchety Ed Dolan appears to have had enough and departed for other forums. I've seen this once useful forum hit the skids, degenerate and eventually rock bottom. It has gone through a regressive evolution that is unfortunate. Here are my thoughts in general regarding the Internet forum life cycle of which ARBR is a prime example... Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. Members rib one another, but all in good fun. New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 1998 to 2001 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. Flight to the nanny forum. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 in hopes of resurrection ;-) People these days are not satisfied with plain text, despite Usenet being my better to use than web-based forums. Less is indeed more. Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a phase number 8 (Flight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Most of the former posters seem happier in an environment when a moderator steps in and squelches things at the first sign of spirited discourse. One cannot also ignore most ISPs dropping Usenet out of liability concerns, which limits new participation, and is responsible for much of the decline in Usenet. This was a foolish decision, as the binary groups (containing "pr0n" and "warez") could have been dropped, while retaining the text only groups. [1] Cross-posted to rec.bicycles.soc, since it seems unfair to talk about a person behind his back. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. *Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I read it, agree with Tom, the same can be said of most Usenet groups. Good wishes on your health issues. Mike Thanks for the well wishing, Mike. I've come a long way since being diagnosed and I am now in a much better place than I was just a few months back. Unfortunately, prostate cancer becomes much more likely as the age. Primates who share 99.9% of our DNA and are vegetarians don't get prostate cancer. Canines in the wild don't get prostate cancer. The only mammal known to get a significant amount of prostate cancer is the dog, and who makes their food and feeds them table scraps? Japanese men rarely get prostate cancer, but when they move to places like Hawaii and California and change to consuming a Western diet, their male born children get the same amount of prostate cancer as other native born males. OK, this is all anecdotal but the evidence strongly suggests that there is a correlation between diet and the disease. If you or anyone else would care to read the details of my complete story, it can be found posted here... http://www.prostate.net/2011/survivo...-side-effects/ Jim McNamara |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/6/2011 7:14 AM, Edward Dolan wrote:
"T�m Sherm�n " wrote in message ... On 7/5/2011 10:47 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: wrote in message ... [...] Tom - I'm a bit surprised that only you replied. Typos from my previous post corrected here. - Jim. I responded at length, but it apparently disappeared into cyber space. The computer, the Internet and Usenet are all terribly flawed and I can't be bothered repeating my words of wisdom because of a ****ed-up technology. Look in your "Sent" and "Drafts" email folders. It was "Sent", so why did not Jim McNamara see it? If you saw it, why not say so instead of being so cryptic? I did not see the post in question. However, most email program save a copy of the message in a "Sent" or "Drafts" folder on your hard drive (accessible through your email program) when you send a message (some divert the message to "Drafts" if sending fails, others put the copy of the message in "Sent" in all cases). -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... [...] Thanks for the well wishing, Mike. I've come a long way since being diagnosed and I am now in a much better place than I was just a few months back. Unfortunately, prostate cancer becomes much more likely as the age. Primates who share 99.9% of our DNA and are vegetarians don't get prostate cancer. Canines in the wild don't get prostate cancer. The only mammal known to get a significant amount of prostate cancer is the dog, and who makes their food and feeds them table scraps? Japanese men rarely get prostate cancer, but when they move to places like Hawaii and California and change to consuming a Western diet, their male born children get the same amount of prostate cancer as other native born males. OK, this is all anecdotal but the evidence strongly suggests that there is a correlation between diet and the disease. If you or anyone else would care to read the details of my complete story, it can be found posted here... http://www.prostate.net/2011/survivo...-side-effects/ Jim McNamara The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Every American male over the age of about 50 should have a PSA test every year to check for prostate cancer. It is easily cured if caught early, although there are no good treatments for it without complications. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote: [...] Like it or not, Internet forums commonly undergo an evolutionary process regardless of whether they are moderated or unmoderated. The natural life cycle of an Internet forum, with its various phases, might be best summed up as follows: 1. Declaration of Enthusiasm - Subscribers introduce themselves and gush over how wonderful it is to have encountered kindred spirits. 2. Origin of Evangelism - Participants moan about how the forum consists of far too few members and brainstorming ensues to initiate recruitment strategies. 3. Expansion of Community - An ever increasing number of interested parties subscribe and contribute to the forum. Lengthy threads develop (some more relevant than others). 4. Emergence of Camaraderie - Information and advice is exchanged (some empirically founded ... some just anecdotal nonsense). Friendships are forged. Members rib one another, but all in good fun. New subscribers are welcomed and newbies. Both newcomers and veterans alike are receptive to asking questions, providing answers, and sharing experiences. 1998 to 2001 The above will never occur again on ANY forums. The computer, the Internet and Usenet are now old and tired and we are all disillusioned and revolted to say the least. 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. 6. Stagnation of Growth - The purists castigate members who ask an old question or respond humorously to a serious post. Newcomers are rebuffed and discouraged. SPAM posts, trolls and stalkers dominate the forum. Traffic volume subsides considerably and is generally confined to minor topics. Many relevant issues are communicated via private emails. Some members turn in their membership cards in a huff and the remaining members continue to participate in phases #4 and/or #5 above. Flight to the nanny forum. Phases 5 and 6 is all I have ever known. 7. Salvation from Destruction - Someone like me pounds away at the keyboard composing a post such as this one in an effort to stir the juices of those members who find themselves entrenched in the quagmire of phase #4 and/or #5 above ... mostly #5 in hopes of resurection ;-) No resurrection is possible since everyone is old and tired, disgusted, disillusioned and revolted. People these days are not satisfied with plain text, despite Usenet being my better to use than web-based forums. Less is indeed more. Well, at least this posting should prove to be a thought provoking departure from the norm and hopefully sheds some light on the nature of the beast we have come to love and hate ... the internet forum. Perhaps I should have added a pahse nuber 8 (Fight of Forum), when hope is abandoned, forum flight ensues and membership dwindles. Most of the former posters seem happier in an environment when a moderator steps in and squelches things at the first sign of spirited discourse. One cannot also ignore most ISPs dropping Usenet out of liability concerns, which limits new participation, and is responsible for much of the decline in Usenet. This was a foolish decision, as the binary groups (containing "pr0n" and "warez") could have been dropped, while retaining the text only groups. [1] Cross-posted to rec.bicycles.soc, since it seems unfair to talk about a person behind his back. ARBR was always a small group and TM ruined what was left of it with his nonsense. I only monitor RBS now since Mr. Vandeman posts to this group. Between the two of us we manage to keep the mountain bikers off balance. Mr. Sherman is also kind enough to post to RBS which means I continue to have the pleasure of kicking his dumb ass. Life is good! -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 7/2/2011 1:43 PM, JimmyMac wrote: [...] 5. Genesis of Disenchantment - The volume of postings increases dramatically. Not all threads are of interest to all participants. Members pitch a bitch about signal-to-noise ratio, off-topic threads, me too posts, forged and spoofed identities, forwarding of private emails, and other violations of internet forum netiquette. Member #1 threatens to unsubscribe if things don't change for the better. Member #2 aligns himself with Member #1. Member #3 disagrees with both Members #1 and #2. Member #4 suggests that Members #1, #2, and #3 should lighten up. Flame wars erupt and adversaries emerge. Bandwidth is sacrificed as an abundance of postings proliferate in an effort to resolve differences and restore some semblance of order. During this particular phase, many a delete key gets more than its share of abuse and filtering and killfiles are implemented. The general attitude in the US after the false-flag attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 and the arrival of Ed Dolan [1]. When I first came to ARBR it was a hotbed of liberal political posts which mainly went unchallenged. Once I challenged those posts, things rapidly went to Hell. Liberals do not know how to take ****; they only know how to give ****. Tom Sherman was only half on-topic in those days. He was half off-topic with his liberal political screeds. But even so, ARBR was destroyed by Ed Gin and Associates, criminal vandal trolls whom no one had the stomach to fight except for Jim McNamara and myself. Small newsgroups are easily destroyed by criminal vandal trolls, most especially when others of the group have no guts to fight the good fight. When good men do nothing, evil men prevail. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/6/2011 12:25 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
wrote in message ... [...] Thanks for the well wishing, Mike. I've come a long way since being diagnosed and I am now in a much better place than I was just a few months back. Unfortunately, prostate cancer becomes much more likely as the age. Primates who share 99.9% of our DNA and are vegetarians don't get prostate cancer. Canines in the wild don't get prostate cancer. The only mammal known to get a significant amount of prostate cancer is the dog, and who makes their food and feeds them table scraps? Japanese men rarely get prostate cancer, but when they move to places like Hawaii and California and change to consuming a Western diet, their male born children get the same amount of prostate cancer as other native born males. OK, this is all anecdotal but the evidence strongly suggests that there is a correlation between diet and the disease. If you or anyone else would care to read the details of my complete story, it can be found posted here... http://www.prostate.net/2011/survivo...-side-effects/ Jim McNamara The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Indeed. I have stopped eating [1] highly processed foods and have minimized intake of refined carbohydrates, meat [2] and dairy products. A few months will tell if my cholesterol and blood glucose levels improve. I also try to consume adequate amounts of dihydrogen monoxide. There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. [5] Yes, I think I will get an animal that will grow to 150 to 200 pounds, be 3 to 5 times as strong as a human with jaws that can bite through bone, have near human intelligence, and will be naturally agressive (and sexually frustrated) as a pet. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message ... On 7/6/2011 12:25 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: wrote in message ... [...] Thanks for the well wishing, Mike. I've come a long way since being diagnosed and I am now in a much better place than I was just a few months back. Unfortunately, prostate cancer becomes much more likely as the age. Primates who share 99.9% of our DNA and are vegetarians don't get prostate cancer. Canines in the wild don't get prostate cancer. The only mammal known to get a significant amount of prostate cancer is the dog, and who makes their food and feeds them table scraps? Japanese men rarely get prostate cancer, but when they move to places like Hawaii and California and change to consuming a Western diet, their male born children get the same amount of prostate cancer as other native born males. OK, this is all anecdotal but the evidence strongly suggests that there is a correlation between diet and the disease. If you or anyone else would care to read the details of my complete story, it can be found posted here... http://www.prostate.net/2011/survivo...-side-effects/ Jim McNamara The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Indeed. I have stopped eating [1] highly processed foods and have minimized intake of refined carbohydrates, meat [2] and dairy products. A few months will tell if my cholesterol and blood glucose levels improve. I also try to consume adequate amounts of dihydrogen monoxide. There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. Although surgeons recently reattached Charla's face- reportedly with Gorilla Glue........... |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 7/6/2011 12:25 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: [...] The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Indeed. I have stopped eating [1] highly processed foods and have minimized intake of refined carbohydrates, meat [2] and dairy products. A few months will tell if my cholesterol and blood glucose levels improve. I also try to consume adequate amounts of dihydrogen monoxide. The average American will never be able to modify their diet like you have. Even so, it may not make any difference. It has not been proven that diet has anything to do with prostate cancer. There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. I think all humans would like to consume more meat. The only thing that prevents it is a scarcity of resources. All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. [5] Yes, I think I will get an animal that will grow to 150 to 200 pounds, be 3 to 5 times as strong as a human with jaws that can bite through bone, have near human intelligence, and will be naturally agressive (and sexually frustrated) as a pet. If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
OT - Felis Catus
On 7/7/2011 9:27 AM, Edward Dolan wrote:
[...] If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. Two barely leave me enough space in the bed to sleep. Here is an excellent example of sleeping with cats: http://www.thecatshouse.com/sleep/index.html. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. |
OT - Felis Catus
"Tºm Shermªn °_°" " wrote in message
... On 7/7/2011 9:27 AM, Edward Dolan wrote: [...] If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. Two barely leave me enough space in the bed to sleep. Here is an excellent example of sleeping with cats: http://www.thecatshouse.com/sleep/index.html. My cats are confined to certain areas of the house and do not include my bedroom! -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 7, 1:02*am, Tºm Shermªn °_° ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 7/6/2011 12:25 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: *wrote in message .... [...] Thanks for the well wishing, Mike. *I've come a long way since being diagnosed and I am now in a much better place than I was just a few months back. *Unfortunately, prostate cancer becomes much more likely as the age. *Primates who share 99.9% of our DNA and are vegetarians don't get prostate cancer. *Canines in the wild don't get prostate cancer. *The only mammal known to get a significant amount of prostate cancer is the dog, and who makes their food and feeds them table scraps? *Japanese men rarely get prostate cancer, but when they move to places like Hawaii and California and change to consuming a Western diet, their male born children get the same amount of prostate cancer as other native born males. *OK, this is all anecdotal but the evidence strongly suggests that there is a correlation between diet and the disease. *If you or anyone else would care to read the details of my complete story, it can be found posted here... http://www.prostate.net/2011/survivo...ara-hormone-th.... Jim McNamara The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Indeed. *I have stopped eating [1] highly processed foods and have minimized intake of refined carbohydrates, meat [2] and dairy products. * A few months will tell if my cholesterol and blood glucose levels improve. *I also try to consume adequate amounts of dihydrogen monoxide.. There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. *In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. [5] Yes, I think I will get an animal that will grow to 150 to 200 pounds, be 3 to 5 times as strong as a human with jaws that can bite through bone, have near human intelligence, and will be naturally agressive (and sexually frustrated) as a pet. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731,-83.985007 I am a vehicular cyclist. Tom, if you read my posted link, you will note that you are eating somewhat along the lines that I do, although I may be a bit more strict about it. I failed to make note of the meat eating primate ... the chimp, since they stans out as an exception, but right you are regarding our observations. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 7, 9:27*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"T m Sherm n _ " " wrote in ... On 7/6/2011 12:25 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: [...] The Western diet has been a disaster for my entire lifetime and it keeps on getting worse ever year. Unfortunately, the rest of the world aspires to our diet if and when they can ever afford it. Indeed. *I have stopped eating [1] highly processed foods and have minimized intake of refined carbohydrates, meat [2] and dairy products. A few months will tell if my cholesterol and blood glucose levels improve.. I also try to consume adequate amounts of dihydrogen monoxide. The average American will never be able to modify their diet like you have. I guess I'm not average then as I have. Even so, it may not make any difference. It has not been proven that diet has anything to do with prostate cancer. Has it been disproved? It has been proven that can activate deactivate genes that cause prostate cancer and the anecdotal and statistical evidence is overwhelming that diet is certainly a factor linked to prostate cancer. There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. *In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. I think all humans would like to consume more meat. The only thing that prevents it is a scarcity of resources. Ed, you really should to stop using the emphatically inclusive "ALL" when not applicable. Surely it is a given that vegetarians and vegans are humans who have chosen not to consume meat. Your conclusion does not follow from your premise (logical fallacy - non sequitor). Scarcity of resource is not the ONLY thing the prevent ALL humans from consuming more meat. You are disregarding the matter of conscious choice not to consume meat. Some humans have no such desire. All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. I don't believe that either Tom or myself implied that. Since you brought the topic up though, back then we got exercise hunting game instead of driving to the butcher and animals roamed freely eating natural substance rather than genetically modified feed grown in fields where herbicides and pesticides are employed. Hormones and antibiotics had yet to be invented that are found in the meat we consume and these are all reason enough to consider how much meat one consumes. There are more reasons, but don't even get me started. The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. [5] Yes, I think I will get an animal that will grow to 150 to 200 pounds, be 3 to 5 times as strong as a human with jaws that can bite through bone, have near human intelligence, and will be naturally agressive (and sexually frustrated) as a pet. If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. As for dogs, two is a good idea, since they're pack animals. Cats are not pack animals, so more that one is unnecessary. Multiples qualify your house as a cat house ;^) -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 7, 9:27 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Even so, it may not make any difference. It has not been proven that diet has anything to do with prostate cancer. Has it been disproved? It has been proven that can activate deactivate genes that cause prostate cancer and the anecdotal and statistical evidence is overwhelming that diet is certainly a factor linked to prostate cancer. I never place any confidence in anecdotal 'evidence'. Even statistical 'evidence ' is highly suspect. Either do the science or forget about it. Tom Sherman wrote: There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do. In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. I think all humans would like to consume more meat. The only thing that prevents it is a scarcity of resources. Ed, you really should to stop using the emphatically inclusive "ALL" when not applicable. Surely it is a given that vegetarians and vegans are humans who have chosen not to consume meat. Your conclusion does not follow from your premise (logical fallacy - non sequitor). Scarcity of resource is not the ONLY thing the prevent ALL humans from consuming more meat. You are disregarding the matter of conscious choice not to consume meat. Some humans have no such desire. There are only a few folks in this world who choose not to eat meat. In fact, it is so rare that it borders on eccentricity. All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. I don't believe that either Tom or myself implied that. Since you brought the topic up though, back then we got exercise hunting game instead of driving to the butcher and animals roamed freely eating natural substance rather than genetically modified feed grown in fields where herbicides and pesticides are employed. Hormones and antibiotics had yet to be invented that are found in the meat we consume and these are all reason enough to consider how much meat one consumes. There are more reasons, but don't even get me started. Then you are saying human activity (exercise) is another element that must be considered? All animal organisms are evolved to combat a variety of situations, especially as regards diet. [...] If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. As for dogs, two is a good idea, since they're pack animals. Cats are not pack animals, so more that one is unnecessary. Multiples qualify your house as a cat house ;^) Cats may not be pack animals, but they are social animals to a limited extent. It is cruel to keep just one cat. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 8, 5:42*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 7, 9:27 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Even so, it may not make any difference. It has not been proven that diet has anything to do with prostate cancer. Has it been disproved? *It has been proven that can activate deactivate genes that cause prostate cancer and the anecdotal and statistical evidence is overwhelming that diet is certainly a factor linked to prostate cancer. I never place any confidence in anecdotal 'evidence'. Even statistical 'evidence ' is highly suspect. Either do the science or forget about it. The science is there and if you do the research as I have you will realize that. More further down. Tom Sherman wrote: There is not enough grain raised in the world for everyone in China alone, much less 7 billion plus, to eat as much meat per capita as USians do.. In most places meat is more of a condiment than a staple. I think all humans would like to consume more meat. The only thing that prevents it is a scarcity of resources. Ed, you really should to stop using the emphatically inclusive "ALL" when not applicable. *Surely it is a given that vegetarians and vegans are humans who have chosen not to consume meat. *Your conclusion does not follow from your premise (logical fallacy - non sequitor). Scarcity of resource is not the ONLY thing the prevent ALL humans from consuming more meat. *You are disregarding the matter of conscious choice not to consume meat. *Some humans have no such desire. There are only a few folks in this world who choose not to eat meat. In fact, it is so rare that it borders on eccentricity. The vegan/vegetarian populace is not the rareity it once was. All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. I don't believe that either Tom or myself implied that. *Since you brought the topic up though, back then we got exercise hunting game instead of driving to the butcher and animals roamed freely eating natural substance rather than genetically modified feed grown in fields where herbicides and pesticides are employed. *Hormones and antibiotics had yet to be invented that are found in the meat we consume and these are all reason enough to consider how much meat one consumes. *There are more reasons, but don't even get me started. Then you are saying human activity (exercise) is another element that must be considered? All animal organisms are evolved to combat a variety of situations, especially as regards diet. [...] You are somewhat putting words in my mouth here. First off biological organisms take time to evolve and combat what is thrown at them, especially at the cellular lever, but evolution is a slow process and often not fast enough for adaptation ans survival. That is why there are extinction events. Secondly a biological organism can only fend of so much before being overcome or diseases would not be as commonplace as they are. Now getting back on topic, although exercise is arguably of benefit, what I was saying is that the meat you suggest that all humans want to eat more of is not as safe as it was back when mankind were hunter gathers. Furthermore it was never safe to consume in large quantity quantity. I said not to get me started, but just knew I'd get sucked into at least explaining the rudimentary basics, but will nonetheless restrict my commentary and only briefly touch on things. Here is an example that men who commonly get prostate cancer should take notice of. Laboratory research focused on the reason why a diet high in animal fat appears to foster progression in prostate cancer demonstrated that a fatty acid, arachidonic acid, common in meat, dairy products, and egg yolks promotes the survival and growth of human prostate cancer cells. Arachidonic acid is converted to a hormone, 5-HETE, which appears to foster the spread of prostate cancer. This is sufficient reason to restrict the consumption of meat, eggs, and diary products. I'll not elaborate further on this subject. If you want to verify or learn more in this regard, that's what Google is for. I just don't have the time to reinvent the wheel and lay it all out for you. Regardless, suffice it to say that the scientific research and evidence is there to indicate that diet does indeed play a role in prostate cancer despite what you have said to the contrary. If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. As for dogs, two is a good idea, since they're pack animals. *Cats are not pack animals, so more that one is unnecessary. *Multiples qualify your house as a cat house ;^) Cats may not be pack animals, but they are social animals to a limited extent. It is cruel to keep just one cat. The operative words here are "TO A LIMITED EXTENT". I have had both cats and dogs, even at the same time. There is no way that a cat is as social an animal as is the dog. Far more independent, most (but not all) cats are more attached to their residence than to a person ... their owner. At least that has been my personal experience. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
OT - Felis Catus
On 7/8/2011 4:29 PM, JimmyMac wrote:
On Jul 7, 9:27�am, "Edward wrote: [...] If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. As for dogs, two is a good idea, since they're pack animals. Cats are not pack animals, so more that one is unnecessary. Multiples qualify your house as a cat house ;^) butbutbut, kitties like each other! http://www.flickr.com/photos/19704682@N08/5203260302/in/set-72157625331406609 Unless one is retired or works at home, a kitty needs at least one other kitty for companionship. As for the cat house idea, I need to get to work on interior modifications: http://www.thecatshouse.com/catshouse/tour.htm. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
OT - Kitty-Cats
On 7/9/2011 7:45 PM, JimmyMac wrote:
On Jul 8, 5:42�pm, "Edward wrote: wrote in message ... On Jul 7, 9:27 am, "Edward wrote: [...] If we want to keep a pet, a dog or cat should do just fine. I suggest limiting them however to just a few. No one in this world needs as many cats as I have. As for dogs, two is a good idea, since they're pack animals. �Cats are not pack animals, so more that one is unnecessary. �Multiples qualify your house as a cat house ;^) Cats may not be pack animals, but they are social animals to a limited extent. It is cruel to keep just one cat. The operative words here are "TO A LIMITED EXTENT". I have had both cats and dogs, even at the same time. There is no way that a cat is as social an animal as is the dog. Far more independent, most (but not all) cats are more attached to their residence than to a person ... their owner. At least that has been my personal experience. My kitties run up to greet me when I come home, and spend most of their time in the same room I am in. When my little one was gone for a week (recovery from surgery), my orange tabby became extremely clingy. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
OT - Chimpanzee Attacks
On 7/7/2011 5:54 AM, ATP wrote:
"T�m Sherm�n " wrote in message ... [...] The only other primates to eat meat are chimpanzees, and it is only a small part of their diet, monkeys [3] being hard to catch and kill. However, it is valued enough that male chimpanzees will give meat to females in exchange for sex. [1] Unless social circumstances dictate otherwise. [2] Free range and fish only. [3] Chimpanzees have been known to steal and eat human babies [4], which typically ends up in the chimpanzee being hunted down and killed in short order. [4] Or parts of adult humans, in a few cases of morons [5] who keep them as pets. Although surgeons recently reattached Charla's face- reportedly with Gorilla Glue........... Before surgery (not for the squeamish): http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/117986/original.jpg. Another attack: http://www.esquire.com/features/chimpanzee-attack-0409-3. Thankfully no one has a pet chimpanzee in my neighborhood, but if someone did, I would adopt a shoot first, ask questions later policy. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 8, 5:42 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. I don't believe that either Tom or myself implied that. Since you brought the topic up though, back then we got exercise hunting game instead of driving to the butcher and animals roamed freely eating natural substance rather than genetically modified feed grown in fields where herbicides and pesticides are employed. Hormones and antibiotics had yet to be invented that are found in the meat we consume and these are all reason enough to consider how much meat one consumes. There are more reasons, but don't even get me started. Then you are saying human activity (exercise) is another element that must be considered? All animal organisms are evolved to combat a variety of situations, especially as regards diet. [...] You are somewhat putting words in my mouth here. First off biological organisms take time to evolve and combat what is thrown at them, especially at the cellular lever, but evolution is a slow process and often not fast enough for adaptation ans survival. That is why there are extinction events. Only too true! Secondly a biological organism can only fend of so much before being overcome or diseases would not be as commonplace as they are. Now getting back on topic, although exercise is arguably of benefit, what I was saying is that the meat you suggest that all humans want to eat more of is not as safe as it was back when mankind were hunter gathers. Furthermore it was never safe to consume in large quantity quantity. Only too true! I said not to get me started, but just knew I'd get sucked into at least explaining the rudimentary basics, but will nonetheless restrict my commentary and only briefly touch on things. Here is an example that men who commonly get prostate cancer should take notice of. Laboratory research focused on the reason why a diet high in animal fat appears to foster progression in prostate cancer demonstrated that a fatty acid, arachidonic acid, common in meat, dairy products, and egg yolks promotes the survival and growth of human prostate cancer cells. Arachidonic acid is converted to a hormone, 5-HETE, which appears to foster the spread of prostate cancer. This is sufficient reason to restrict the consumption of meat, eggs, and diary products. I'll not elaborate further on this subject. If you want to verify or learn more in this regard, that's what Google is for. I just don't have the time to reinvent the wheel and lay it all out for you. Regardless, suffice it to say that the scientific research and evidence is there to indicate that diet does indeed play a role in prostate cancer despite what you have said to the contrary. Regarding an animal's ability to adapt in order to survive, some are much better at this than others. Those who are not good at this do indeed become extinct. The panda is an example of an animal that is specialized and in danger of extinction. The human is an example of an animal that is generalized and not in any danger of extinction. We can survive environmental assaults whether of nature or of our own creation far better than most other animals. I will repeat what I have already hinted at before. The science on what causes prostate cancer is not solidly grounded. It is mostly speculation based on very thin slivers of research. I would not base what I eat on those speculations. Entire cultures based solely on meat and dairy products do not seem to have particularly high rates of prostate cancer. Eat a variety of foods in moderation is still the best and most sensible regimen. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 10, 12:51*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 8, 5:42 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] All early human cultures (before agriculture) were based on hunting and gathering. I don't think it can be argued that humans were ever like some other primates who are strictly vegetarians. I don't believe that either Tom or myself implied that. Since you brought the topic up though, back then we got exercise hunting game instead of driving to the butcher and animals roamed freely eating natural substance rather than genetically modified feed grown in fields where herbicides and pesticides are employed. Hormones and antibiotics had yet to be invented that are found in the meat we consume and these are all reason enough to consider how much meat one consumes. There are more reasons, but don't even get me started. Then you are saying human activity (exercise) is another element that must be considered? All animal organisms are evolved to combat a variety of situations, especially as regards diet. [...] You are somewhat putting words in my mouth here. *First off biological organisms take time to evolve and combat what is thrown at them, especially at the cellular lever, but evolution is a slow process and often not fast enough for adaptation ans survival. *That is why there are extinction events. Only too true! Secondly a biological organism can only fend of so much before being overcome or diseases would not be as commonplace as they are. *Now getting back on topic, although exercise is arguably of benefit, what I was saying is that the meat you suggest that all humans want to eat more of is not as safe as it was back when mankind were hunter gathers. *Furthermore it was never safe to consume in large quantity quantity. Only too true! I said not to get me started, but just knew I'd get sucked into at least explaining the rudimentary basics, but will nonetheless restrict my commentary and only briefly touch on things. *Here is an example that men who commonly get prostate cancer should take notice of. * Laboratory research focused on the reason why a diet high in animal fat appears to foster progression in prostate cancer demonstrated that a fatty acid, arachidonic acid, common in meat, dairy products, and egg yolks promotes the survival and growth of human prostate cancer cells. *Arachidonic acid is converted to a hormone, 5-HETE, which appears to foster the spread of prostate cancer. *This is sufficient reason to restrict the consumption of meat, eggs, and diary products. *I'll not elaborate further on this subject. If you want to verify or learn more in this regard, that's what Google is for. * I just don't have the time to reinvent the wheel and lay it all out for you. *Regardless, suffice it to say that the scientific research and evidence is there to indicate that diet does indeed play a role in prostate cancer despite what you have said to the contrary. Regarding an animal's ability to adapt in order to survive, some are much better at this than others. Those who are not good at this do indeed become extinct. The panda is an example of an animal that is specialized and in danger of extinction. The human is an example of an animal that is generalized and not in any danger of extinction. We can survive environmental assaults whether of nature or of our own creation far better than most other animals. I will repeat what I have already hinted at before. The science on what causes prostate cancer is not solidly grounded. On what do you base this assertion? It would be more appropriate to state that there is there is still much yet to learn about the causes and even the biology of the disease. It is mostly speculation based on very thin slivers of research. Your statement is itself speculation. Much research has been done, but progress has been slow due it part to the complexity of the disease itself. I would not base what I eat on those speculations. *Entire cultures based solely on meat and dairy products do not seem to have particularly high rates of prostate cancer. Saying something does not make it so. Yours is merely an expression of an opinion stated as though it were fact and an opinion I might add for which you offered no substantiation to support your contention. This is an all too common practice that you employ when debating an issue. Granted, many complex and interrelated factors contribute to contracting prostate cancer and a Western diet consisting of consumption of meat, eggs and dairy products is one of those contributing factors. I just looked up the mortality incidence data and wealthier, more developed countries (Northern and Western Europe, North America, New Zealand and Australia) have the highest rates. Southern Europe fairs better than Western and Northern Europe. This is likely due to the heart/cancer healthy Mediterranean diet. Asian countries fair the best. Their diet is much different that the typical Western diet. Eat a variety of foods in moderation is still the best and most sensible regimen. This is generally a good rule of thumb provide the variety does no consist of foods know to be causally linked to disease or foods know to advance a disease one already has. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 10, 12:51 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] I will repeat what I have already hinted at before. The science on what causes prostate cancer is not solidly grounded. On what do you base this assertion? It would be more appropriate to state that there is there is still much yet to learn about the causes and even the biology of the disease. It is mostly speculation based on very thin slivers of research. Your statement is itself speculation. Much research has been done, but progress has been slow due it part to the complexity of the disease itself. It is not just the complexity of the disease, but the complexity of the human organism and his culture. Scientific studies are not able to take into account all the variables. They are usually controlled for only a few variables, neglecting hundreds of other variables which may or may not have a bearing. Junk science reigns supreme in the area of diet and health. For instance, is wine good for one's health? Is coffee good for one's health? Who the hell knows? The research studies are all over the place and contradict themselves. The reason for this is because the science itself is flawed. That is because it is being done by academic types who are nincompoops! What I know for sure based on my own experience is that too much wine and too much coffee make me feel bad. However in small amounts, they probably do no harm. Most foods are like wine and coffee. I have never understood gourmets and food faddists. I would not base what I eat on those speculations. Entire cultures based solely on meat and dairy products do not seem to have particularly high rates of prostate cancer. Saying something does not make it so. Yours is merely an expression of an opinion stated as though it were fact and an opinion I might add for which you offered no substantiation to support your contention. This is an all too common practice that you employ when debating an issue. Granted, many complex and interrelated factors contribute to contracting prostate cancer and a Western diet consisting of consumption of meat, eggs and dairy products is one of those contributing factors. I just looked up the mortality incidence data and wealthier, more developed countries (Northern and Western Europe, North America, New Zealand and Australia) have the highest rates. Southern Europe fairs better than Western and Northern Europe. This is likely due to the heart/cancer healthy Mediterranean diet. Asian countries fair the best. Their diet is much different that the typical Western diet. Have you checked the incidence of prostate cancer among Eskimos? Their traditional diet was almost exclusively based on meat. Various pastoral peoples of East Africa fall into the same category. Eat a variety of foods in moderation is still the best and most sensible regimen. This is generally a good rule of thumb provide the variety does not consist of foods known to be causally linked to disease or foods known to advance a disease one already has. It is difficult to say what foods do that. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 12, 2:17*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 10, 12:51 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] I will repeat what I have already hinted at before. The science on what causes prostate cancer is not solidly grounded. On what do you base this assertion? *It would be more appropriate to state that there is there is still much yet to learn about the causes and even the biology of the disease. It is mostly speculation based on very thin slivers of research. Your statement is itself speculation. *Much research has been done, but progress has been slow due it part to the complexity of the disease itself. It is not just the complexity of the disease, but the complexity of the human organism and his culture. Well, yes the biological complexity of the host and the cellular complexity of the disease itself both make research a cuanting task. Scientific studies are not able to take into account all the variables. They are usually controlled for only a few variables, neglecting hundreds of other variables which may or may not have a bearing. Junk science reigns supreme in the area of diet and health. For instance, is wine good for one's health? Is coffee good for one's health? Who the hell knows? The research studies are all over the place and contradict themselves. The reason for this is because the science itself is flawed. That is because it is being done by academic types who are nincompoops! What I know for sure based on my own experience is that too much wine and too much coffee make me feel bad. However in small amounts, they probably do no harm. Most foods are like wine and coffee. I have never understood gourmets and food faddists. I would not base what I eat on those speculations. Entire cultures based solely on meat and dairy products do not seem to have particularly high rates of prostate cancer. Saying something does not make it so. *Yours is merely an expression of an opinion stated as though it were fact and an opinion I might add for which you offered no substantiation to support your contention. This is an all too common practice that you employ when debating an issue. *Granted, many complex and interrelated factors contribute to contracting prostate cancer and a Western diet consisting of consumption of meat, eggs and dairy products is one of those contributing factors. *I just looked up the mortality incidence data and wealthier, more developed countries (Northern and Western Europe, North America, New Zealand and Australia) have the highest rates. Southern Europe fairs better than Western and Northern Europe. *This is likely due to the heart/cancer healthy Mediterranean diet. *Asian countries fair the best. *Their diet is much different that the typical Western diet. Have you checked the incidence of prostate cancer among Eskimos? Yes and thi\eir is a rather unique meat diet not to be confused with consumption of beef and chick the is predominant in Western diets, but their diets are changins and so is the rates of cancer right along with it. I'd suggets tyou go back an re-do you research. Begin here, for starters... http://www.cancermonthly.com/iNP/view.asp?ID=228 http://www.theiflife.com/the-inuit-p...ase-and-cancer Their traditional diet was almost exclusively based on meat. Various pastoral peoples of East Africa fall into the same category. Eat a variety of foods in moderation is still the best and most sensible regimen. This is generally a good rule of thumb provide the variety does not consist of foods known to be causally linked to disease or foods known to advance a disease one already has. It is difficult to say what foods do that. Well know it isn't actually, but I have delved into this much more deeply than you have. I till have three more books yet to read a DVD to view regarding this very topic. I don't want to waste too much more of my time bringing you up to speed when you can do that on your own. Jim -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 12, 2:17 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Have you checked the incidence of prostate cancer among Eskimos? Yes and thi\eir is a rather unique meat diet not to be confused with consumption of beef and chick the is predominant in Western diets, but their diets are changins and so is the rates of cancer right along with it. I'd suggets tyou go back an re-do you research. Begin here, for starters... Yes, traditional diets are going the way of the Dodo Bird all over the world. Still, meat is meat. [...] It is difficult to say what foods do that. Well know it isn't actually, but I have delved into this much more deeply than you have. I till have three more books yet to read a DVD to view regarding this very topic. I don't want to waste too much more of my time bringing you up to speed when you can do that on your own. I doubt that you will find out anything better than "... eat a variety of foods in moderation." If it is all the same to you, I will not waste my time reading anything about what to eat or what not to eat. I leave that sort of thing to food faddists. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 16, 5:07 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Yes, traditional diets are going the way of the Dodo Bird all over the world. Still, meat is meat. Well me is meat? Anothtr opinion stated as fact? Did you ever hear the saying that you are what you eat. There is some truth to it . Is meat form a vegetarian animal the same as that of a carnivore? Is red meat the same as white meat? Meat from organic free range grass fed beef and and meat form genetically modified corn fed beef laced with hormones, antibiotics, herbicides and pesticides are hardly the same now are they? Nope, they are all basically the same. Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market. In the plant world, so called organic foods are nothing but a rip-off! Some folks apparently just like to pay a premium for hocus-pocus. [...] I doubt that you will find out anything better than "... eat a variety of foods in moderation." If it is all the same to you, I will not waste my time reading anything about what to eat or what not to eat. I leave that sort of thing to food faddists. What is it like knowing all that there is to know about anything and everything? You really should get up to speed before offering opinions that contradict what science has learned about the food we consume. Although eating a variety of foods in moderation is a generally a good rule of thumb, there are some foods that I will not eat even in moderation since such foods adversely impact one's health over time. What I have read thus far contradicts yous assertion that you doubt I will find out anything better than "... eat a variety of foods in moderation." People often have to tailor a diet because of a particular disease that they have be it high cholesterol, high blood pressure, diabetes, lactose intolerance coeliac disease, cancer. etc. I have cancer and knowing what to eat and what not eat is essential. There are a number of good books that secifically address the issue of foods and diet for the cancer patient like ... Anti Cancer A new Way of Life, Nature's Cancer Fighting Foods, Food to Fight Cancer, Natural Strategies for Patients to name a few good ones. I have done lots of my own research about food and diet. What foods to eat and what foods not to eat in regard to cancer is based on voodoo science. It is why doctors don't bother with any of it. Nutrition stores are another royal rip-off. You will get all the minerals and vitamins you need by eating a variety of foods in moderation. Here are just a few links to get you up to speed: No thanks! I have better things to do with my time ... like contemplating my navel for instance. [...] FACT: I have wasted entirely too much time on you. You are uninformed, opinionated and have nothing to base your opinions on and are not even open to being enlightened. Nor will you invest the time. Labeling as "food faddists", a person who is concerned for their health and endeavors to make healthy choices in the foods they consume is an absurdity. How can you be so ignorant? You can lead a hosre to water, but... Eat a variety of foods in moderation and you will live as long and healthy as Nature and Civilization intended. Until just a hundred years ago, most folks, even in civilized countries, did not live much past their 60's. Third world peoples still die in their 40's and 50's. If truth be told, I don't think any of us would live much past 40 if we had to exist in a pure state of nature (a hunting and food gathering culture). Do you know what the average age of those buried in the Roman catacombs from the 1st and 2nd centuries was? They were in their late 20's! Death was an every day event until fairly recently. Those of us who make it into our 70's have achieved some kind of miracle in the light of human history on this planet. I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 20, 11:41*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 16, 5:07 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Yes, traditional diets are going the way of the Dodo Bird all over the world. Still, meat is meat. Well me is meat? Another opinion stated as fact? *Did you ever hear the saying that you are what you eat? *There is some truth to it . *Is meat form a vegetarian animal the same as that of a carnivore? *Is red meat the same as white meat? *Meat from organic free range grass fed beef and and meat form genetically *modified corn fed beef laced with hormones, antibiotics, herbicides and pesticides are hardly the same now are they? Nope, they are all basically the same. What we have here is a logical fallacy know as Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust; i.e., by repetition). This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again, but no matter how many times one repeats something, it will not become any more true than it was with the first utterance. Repetition is no substitute for argumentation. I gave specific example to substantiate what I said. You merely repeated your fallacious opinion without offering any substantiation in support of your position ... typical!!! Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market. If you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you. The FDA has approved many a drug on the market alleged to be safe.thalidomide being an example. I rest my case.. In the plant world, so called organic foods are nothing but a rip-off! Some folks apparently just like to pay a premium for hocus-pocus. [...] I think you forgot to precede you opinion stated as fact with ... "In my opinion". Apparently, you have much to learn about organic food. I doubt that you will find out anything better than "... eat a variety of foods in moderation." If it is all the same to you, I will not waste my time reading anything about what to eat or what not to eat. I leave that sort of thing to food faddists. What is it like knowing all that there is to know about anything and everything? *You really should get up to speed before offering opinions that contradict what science has learned about the food we consume. *Although eating a variety of foods in moderation is a generally a good rule of thumb, there are some foods that I will not eat even in moderation since such foods adversely impact one's health over time. *What I have read thus far contradicts yous assertion that you doubt I will find out anything better than *"... eat a variety of foods in moderation." *People often have to tailor a diet because of a particular disease that they have be it high cholesterol, high blood pressure, diabetes, lactose intolerance coeliac disease, cancer. etc. I have cancer and knowing what to eat and what not eat is essential. There are a number of good books that specifically address the issue of foods and diet for the cancer patient like ... Anti Cancer A new Way of Life, Nature's Cancer Fighting Foods, Food to Fight Cancer, Natural Strategies for Patients to name a few good ones. *I have done lots of my own research about food and diet. What foods to eat and what foods not to eat in regard to cancer is based on voodoo science. You are in much need of an education, but you cant educate someone who thinks he already know all that there is to know. It is why doctors don't bother with any of it. What we have her is a logical fallacy know as a Non Sequitur ("It does not follow"). This is the of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from a premise. Actually, many doctors don't bother with nutrition because many doctors know little about it. One of the unfortunate intellectual vacuums in conventional medical training is nutrition. The vast majority of doctors don’t know a great deal about nutrition because most medical schools don’t teach nutrition. Nutrition stores are another royal rip-off. You will get all the minerals and vitamins you need by eating a variety of foods in moderation. Must all you unsubstantiated opinion be stated as though factual? Some of our over farmed soils are known to be depleted of phytonutrients. Here are just a few links to get you up to speed: No thanks! I have better things to do with my time ... like contemplating my navel for instance. [...] Thanks for proving my point that you think you know all that is worth knowing and are not open to enlightment. You prove that with almost every post that you make. FACT: I have wasted entirely too much time on you. *You are uninformed, opinionated and have nothing to base your opinions on and are not even open to being enlightened. *Nor will you invest the time. Labeling *as "food faddists", a person who is concerned for their health and endeavors to make healthy choices in the foods they consume is an absurdity. *How can you be so ignorant? *You can lead a horse to water, but... Eat a variety of foods in moderation and you will live as long and healthy as Nature and Civilization intended. Until just a hundred years ago, most folks, even in civilized countries, did not live much past their 60's. Third world peoples still die in their 40's and 50's. If truth be told, I don't think any of us would live much past 40 if we had to exist in a pure state of nature (a hunting and food gathering culture). You are entitle to your opinion as long as it is not stated as unsubstantiated fact. Do you know what the average age of those buried in the Roman catacombs from the 1st and 2nd centuries was? They were in their late 20's! Death was an every day event until fairly recently. Those of us who make it into our 70's have achieved some kind of miracle in the light of human history on this planet. You are entitle to your opinion as long as it is not stated as unsubstantiated fact. I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. Whatever. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 20, 11:41 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market. If you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you. The FDA has approved many a drug on the market alleged to be safe.thalidomide being an example. I rest my case.. Our FDA is the model for every other country in the world to get up to speed on food and drug safety. Is it perfect? Of course not, but then what or who is! In the plant world, so called organic foods are nothing but a rip-off! Some folks apparently just like to pay a premium for hocus-pocus. [...] I think you forgot to precede you opinion stated as fact with ... "In my opinion". Apparently, you have much to learn about organic food. I know it is more expensive than regular grown food. Billions of people would starve to death if they had to depend on organic grown food. [...] What foods to eat and what foods not to eat in regard to cancer is based on voodoo science. You are in much need of an education, but you cant educate someone who thinks he already know all that there is to know. I stopped learning anything new several decades ago. It must be awful to be a student all of your life! It is why doctors don't bother with any of it. What we have her is a logical fallacy know as a Non Sequitur ("It does not follow"). This is the of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from a premise. Actually, many doctors don't bother with nutrition because many doctors know little about it. One of the unfortunate intellectual vacuums in conventional medical training is nutrition. The vast majority of doctors don’t know a great deal about nutrition because most medical schools don’t teach nutrition. Nutrition would be taught in medical schools if it was thought it mattered. Most folks who concern themselves with food overly much seem like screwballs to me. I note that Tom Sherman thinks what you eat is important too - and it is well known by everyone in the universe that Tom Sherman is a screwball! Nutrition stores are another royal rip-off. You will get all the minerals and vitamins you need by eating a variety of foods in moderation. Must all you unsubstantiated opinion be stated as though factual? Some of our over farmed soils are known to be depleted of phytonutrients. Animal organisms, especially hardy humans, are able to overcome whatever slight nutritional defeciencies may exist here and there. It is why I recommend eating a variety of foods in moderation. Here are just a few links to get you up to speed: No thanks! I have better things to do with my time ... like contemplating my navel for instance. [...] Thanks for proving my point that you think you know all that is worth knowing and are not open to enlightment [enlightenment]. You prove that with almost every post that you make. It is all part of My Greatness! I even amaze Myself at times! Think of me as the Oracle of Minnesota! [...] I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. Whatever. You also are going to die of something other than prostate cancer. That is because you have availed yourself of the standard medical treatments, not because of your pursuit of cancer unfriendly foods. But of course, you know more than all the experts in the world combined. Maybe you are planning to open your own cancer clinic one of these days? -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 22, 4:05*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 20, 11:41 pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market. If you believe that, I've a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you. The FDA has approved many a drug on the market alleged to be safe.thalidomide being an example. *I rest my case.. Our FDA is the model for every other country in the world to get up to speed on food and drug safety. Is it perfect? Of course not, but then what or who is! In the plant world, so called organic foods are nothing but a rip-off! Some folks apparently just like to pay a premium for hocus-pocus. [...] I think you forgot to precede you opinion stated as fact with ... "In my opinion". *Apparently, you have much to learn about organic food. I know it is more expensive than regular grown food. Billions of people would starve to death if they had to depend on organic grown food. [...] What foods to eat and what foods not to eat in regard to cancer is based on voodoo science. You are in much need of an education, but you cant educate someone who thinks he already know all that there is to know. I stopped learning anything new several decades ago. It must be awful to be a student all of your life! Wise men become wise men by continuing the learning process throughout their entire life. You have opted for academic stagnation ... an unfortunate choice. .. It is why doctors don't bother with any of it. What we have her is a logical fallacy know as a Non Sequitur ("It does not follow"). This is the *of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from a premise. *Actually, many doctors don't bother with nutrition because many doctors know little about it. *One of the unfortunate intellectual vacuums in conventional medical training is nutrition. The vast majority of doctors don’t know a great deal about nutrition because most medical schools don’t teach nutrition. Nutrition would be taught in medical schools if it was thought it mattered. In your opinion your opinion you meant to say. Most folks who concern themselves with food overly much seem like screwballs to me. I note that Tom Sherman thinks what you eat is important too - and it is well known by everyone in the universe that Tom Sherman is a screwball! Opinion stated as fact. Nutrition stores are another royal rip-off. You will get all the minerals and vitamins you need by eating a variety of foods in moderation. Must all you unsubstantiated opinion be stated as though factual? Some of our over farmed soils are known to be depleted of phytonutrients. Animal organisms, especially hardy humans, are able to overcome whatever slight nutritional defeciencies may exist here and there. It is why I recommend eating a variety of foods in moderation No matter what you say to the contrary, the biological organism cannot overcome nutritional deficiency form those nutrients that are required and are obtained from ingestion. Here are just a few links to get you up to speed: No thanks! I have better things to do with my time ... like contemplating my navel for instance. [...] Thanks for proving my point that you think you know all that is worth knowing and are not open to enlightment [enlightenment]. *You prove that with almost every post that you make. It is all part of My Greatness! I even amaze Myself at times! Think of me as the Oracle of Minnesota! [...] I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. Whatever. You also are going to die of something other than prostate cancer. That is because you have availed yourself of the standard medical treatments, not because of your pursuit of cancer unfriendly foods. You again forgot to state that this is you opinion. I have availed myself of standard medical treatments, but have not and will not overlook the importance of healing foods and the importance of foods that are know to cause or stimulate the spread of cancer.. From where do you think the majority of medicine are derived? Aspirin comes from tree bark and penicillin from bread bold, for instance. But of course, you know more than all the experts in the world combined. Maybe you are planning to open your own cancer clinic one of these days? What we have her is a coping mechanism at work ... projection. Although I certainly know more than do you in this regard, I haven't once pretended to "know more than all the experts in the world combined". I will reserve that accolade for you who chooses to ignore what the experts in the world have made known and whose advice I rely upon, but you dismiss. In a nutshell, that's that on that -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
"JimmyMac" wrote in message
... On Jul 22, 4:05 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] I stopped learning anything new several decades ago. It must be awful to be a student all of your life! Wise men become wise men by continuing the learning process throughout their entire life. You have opted for academic stagnation ... an unfortunate choice. I knew an academic type who decided to learn a new language at age 70. Why? Because he wanted to keep his mind sharp. He died a year later. He would have been better off contemplating the eternal verities like me instead of learning a new language which he would never use. [...] You also are going to die of something other than prostate cancer. That is because you have availed yourself of the standard medical treatments, not because of your pursuit of cancer unfriendly foods. You again forgot to state that this is you opinion. I have availed myself of standard medical treatments, but have not and will not overlook the importance of healing foods and the importance of foods that are know to cause or stimulate the spread of cancer.. From where do you think the majority of medicine are derived? Aspirin comes from tree bark and penicillin from bread bold, for instance. Your pursuit of alternative treatments will keep you mentally occupied and who knows, you may even hit on something. But the chances are that it will be a dead end. That is why they remain forever alternative treatments. But of course, you know more than all the experts in the world combined. Maybe you are planning to open your own cancer clinic one of these days? What we have her is a coping mechanism at work ... projection. Although I certainly know more than do you in this regard, I haven't once pretended to "know more than all the experts in the world combined". I will reserve that accolade for you who chooses to ignore what the experts in the world have made known and whose advice I rely upon, but you dismiss. In a nutshell, that's that on that You probably know more useless information than I know, but all the pertinent information relating to prostate cancer can be summed up in a rather small booklet. Read the small booklet and you will know all you need to know. Leave everything else to the medical researchers. If what they find out is any good, it will make its way into the booklet. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/20/2011 11:41 PM, Edward Dolan wrote:
[...] Nope, they are all basically the same. Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market.[...] Mr. Ed Dolan's confidence in the FDA is unwarranted by facts. [...] I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. Or you could suffer a case of terminal pigheadedness. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On 7/21/2011 10:07 PM, JimmyMac wrote:
[...] What we have here is a logical fallacy know as Argumentum ad nauseam (argument to the point of disgust; i.e., by repetition). This is the fallacy of trying to prove something by saying it again and again, but no matter how many times one repeats something, it will not become any more true than it was with the first utterance. Repetition is no substitute for argumentation. I gave specific example to substantiate what I said. You merely repeated your fallacious opinion without offering any substantiation in support of your position ... typical!!! [...] Please recall that Mr. Ed Dolan is a fan of Faux Noos, which uses the repetitive big lie technique (when it is not spying on and blackmailing public figures). -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 23, 7:44*pm, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"JimmyMac" wrote in message ... On Jul 22, 4:05 am, "Edward Dolan" wrote: [...] I stopped learning anything new several decades ago. It must be awful to be a student all of your life! Wise men become wise men by continuing the learning process throughout their entire life. You have opted for academic stagnation ... an unfortunate choice. I knew an academic type who decided to learn a new language at age 70. Why? Because he wanted to keep his mind sharp. He died a year later. He would have been better off contemplating the eternal verities like me instead of learning a new language which he would never use. [...] What we have here is the logical fallacy know as a red herring ... introducing irrelevant facts or arguments to distract from the question at hand. You also are going to die of something other than prostate cancer. That is because you have availed yourself of the standard medical treatments, not because of your pursuit of cancer unfriendly foods. You again forgot to state that this is you opinion. *I have availed myself of standard medical treatments, but have not and will not overlook the importance of healing foods and the importance of foods that are known to cause or stimulate the spread of cancer.. *From where do you think the majority of medicine are derived? *Aspirin comes from tree bark and penicillin from bread bold, for instance. Your pursuit of alternative treatments will keep you mentally occupied and who knows, you may even hit on something. But the chances are that it will be a dead end. That is why they remain forever alternative treatments. What we have here is a logical fallacy know as a non sequitor or fallacy of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from a premises. Many a conventional medical treatment is literally a "dead end" and that is what gave birth to and popularized alternatve treatments. Unfortunately, many are quackery that appeal to the desperate. I am not interested in alternative treatment, but rather complimentary means in a holistic approach to the treatment of my disease. I guess the subtlety of the none too subtle difference escaped your attention. But of course, you know more than all the experts in the world combined. Maybe you are planning to open your own cancer clinic one of these days? What we have her is a coping mechanism at work ... projection. Although I certainly know more than do you in this regard, I haven't once pretended to "know more than all the experts in the world combined". *I will reserve that accolade for you who chooses to ignore what the experts in the world have made known and whose advice I rely upon, but you dismiss. * In a nutshell, that's that on that You probably know more useless information than I know, but all the pertinent information relating to prostate cancer can be summed up in a rather small booklet. In your jaded, opinion based upon what litlle you know you forgot to add. I know more useful information than you do regarding prostate cancer. That much has become abundantly clear. Read the small booklet and you will know all you need to know. Leave everything else to the medical researchers. If what they find out is any good, it will make its way into the booklet. Saying something is so doesn't make it so, even if you are the ones saying ... especially if you are the one saying it. What never ceases to amaze me is your willingness to prove beyond question what an incredibly close minded block head you are. Little booklets are merely primers produced for people with your abysmal level of absorption. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Insight into the phases of the Internet forum life cycle: a perspective
On Jul 24, 1:36*pm, "T°m Sherm@n" ""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net" wrote: On 7/20/2011 11:41 PM, Edward Dolan wrote: [...] Nope, they are all basically the same. Meat is meat! If food is not safe, the FDA will not allow it on the market.[...] Mr. Ed Dolan's confidence in the FDA is unwarranted by facts. You think? ;^) Don't use that word (FACT) around Ed. He despises facts. Just ask him. He is all bout opinion no matter how errant and uncoroborated it is. Now thats a FACT! [...] I am planning to die of cardiovascular disease myself. In fact, I will be highly chagrined if cancer gets me first. Or you could suffer a case of terminal pigheadedness. I hear you, but unfortunatel the rest of us suffer because of Ed's terminal pigheadedness. -- Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W I am a vehicular cyclist. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:18 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com