If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
On Dec 20, 5:52 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 05:36:01 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: On Dec 19, 11:49 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 17:39:06 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: It's good to keep a running baseline. For instance, the new midlength skis might will all glide and float with various abilities relative to each other. I'll then want to know how those figures compare to the best of full-length skis from a few years ago. See why old is important? It may be that ski building skill of awhile ago was more advanced than it is today. Maybe highest quality isn't cost effective. Why was my top of line touring ski lighter 17 years ago than the comparable ski today? It was very strong and performed perfectly. Maybe the new midlength skis have measurable benefits. Let's evaluate them...in light of previous best art, as the innovators say. They don't make em like they used to, the good old days, real craftsmanship is dead, blah, blah blah. I'm being specific. You're acting weird. I'm perfectly happy when improvements come along: NNN is better than 75. Carbon poles are better than bamboo.) JFT: If you would post CIVILLY then RSN would be a better place. If people would not say SILLY things like "performed perfectly" about something and set that up as a reference to judge newer stuffl RSN would be a better place. Your obligation in posting is to advance the subject. If you can't add to it, don't. I have posted clearly about the features of the wonderful Fischer Touring Light ski. I take it as my own baseline ski. Anyone else is free to describe their own. They are NOT free to flame my descriptions unless they're comfortable with violating netiquette. Why don't you try to show that having a baseline optimal ski as a judge of newer skis is a bad idea. You can't just say it's a bad idea. I've described my "perfect" ski many times with plenty of detail. Others can describe their own ideals. In terms of specifics I've mentioned that my old skis had a lively double camber; they lasted 17 years of abuse and that they were a lot lighter in weight than the new ski of same dimension. I've posted exact weights in the past. I've tried to find pro's and con's for double vs. single camber. I'd love to see glide tests or head-to-head comparisons. Furthermore, subjective response is legit. If midlength skis have their fans, let em gush. Some people might just like a ski that turns more easily, others may prefer the glide and flotation of full-length. It's surely best to include both types in a comparison. The more types the better the comparison will be. I note that you've offered nothing on any level. And you call my efforts to find quality daytouring equipment silly? What a maroon. How much farther off base can you get? If people would not say such subjective and BIZARRE things as black clothes don't work RSN would be a better place. Again, I was clearly commenting on the boring range of colors. Subjective posts are totally fine. If someone can relate to them, fine. If not, netiquette doesn't allow flames. A discussion of fashion trends is fine. Your flames are not. They're bad form by definition--- look up netiquette. --JP |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:50:19 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of
OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: I take it as my own baseline ski. A baseline allows comarison, with the things being compared to it perhaps better and perhaps worse. If you have a ski you claim is perfect as your "baseline", then you've got a bias and are not doing real reviews. You're saying that the best anything else can be is the same and most things will be worse. Is that what you mean? If so, no one should trust your reviews. And if not, your language is sloppy. Which is it? Anyone else is free to describe their own. They are NOT free to flame my descriptions unless they're comfortable with violating netiquette. If you say nonsense you can expect criticism. That's the beauty of usenet. That's a good thing. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
On Dec 22, 1:48 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:50:19 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: I take it as my own baseline ski. A baseline allows comarison, with the things being compared to it perhaps better and perhaps worse. If you have a ski you claim is perfect as your "baseline", then you've got a bias and are not doing real reviews. You're saying that the best anything else can be is the same and most things will be worse. Is that what you mean? If so, no one should trust your reviews. And if not, your language is sloppy. All language is sloppy. No computer code is perfect. My reviews contain plenty of reliable, helpful content. Again, advance the subject or stay home. My grammar is off limits to you. This is yet another aspect of netiquette that you don't get. Your acceptable role in posting is to advance the subject. Correcting spelling, grammar, "language" and such is considered bad netiquette. Put your own experience/info with touring skis, boots and gloves up against mine as much as you like. That's what netiquette allows. Which is it? Anyone else is free to describe their own. They are NOT free to flame my descriptions unless they're comfortable with violating netiquette. If you say nonsense you can expect criticism. That's the beauty of usenet. That's a good thing. I don't post nonsense. And you don't criticize. No one minds criticism. You constantly are INSULTING in your posts. There's no excuse. --JP |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:29:23 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of
OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: On Dec 22, 1:48 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 06:50:19 -0800 (PST), "Jeff Potter (of OutYourBackdoor.com)" wrote: I take it as my own baseline ski. A baseline allows comarison, with the things being compared to it perhaps better and perhaps worse. If you have a ski you claim is perfect as your "baseline", then you've got a bias and are not doing real reviews. You're saying that the best anything else can be is the same and most things will be worse. Is that what you mean? If so, no one should trust your reviews. And if not, your language is sloppy. All language is sloppy. No computer code is perfect. My reviews contain plenty of reliable, helpful content. Again, advance the subject or stay home. Jeff, you don't understand the nature of group communications: pointing out when someone is wrong or mistaken is advancing the subjects. It's stopping the flow of disinformation. That's a good thing. If you don't want criticism of what you post, then don't post in public. Or if you just can't handle it, filter out my posts. My grammar is off limits to you. This is yet another aspect of netiquette that you don't get. Your acceptable role in posting is to advance the subject. Correcting spelling, grammar, "language" and such is considered bad netiquette. I haven't said anything about grammar or spelling -- I'm talking about the *meaning* of words, and about logic, which you don't have a firm grasp of. You don't understand the meaning of baseline. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
Please back off, JFT. Time to make the annual transition from those
nasty cycling newsgroups to the usually kinder and gentler rsn. One of the great things about rsn is that people are allowed to say silly and smart and all sorts of in-between things here, including you, and get decent treatment until proven otherwise. Jeff has been contributing to rsn for much longer than you, generating various sorts of discussions of the past and present, some idiosyncratic (so what!), publishing outdoor books other houses aren't interested in, and skiing awfully well and fast for many years (when he's in shape and interested in doing so). His taste in ski clothes may not be mine, but he is keeping a tradition going - and does look good in them. ;-) Roger M John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: If people would not say SILLY things like "performed perfectly" about something and set that up as a reference to judge newer stuffl RSN would be a better place. If people would not say such subjective and BIZARRE things as black clothes don't work RSN would be a better place. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
It's heartening to see that after several years here you remain just as
mean spirited and close minded as ever. rm John Forrest Tomlinson wrote: On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 20:59:18 -0600, wrote: Please back off, JFT. Time to make the annual transition from those nasty cycling newsgroups to the usually kinder and gentler rsn. One of the great things about rsn is that people are allowed to say silly and smart and all sorts of in-between things here, including you, and get decent treatment until proven otherwise. I'll back off in this thread only because as I'm repeating myself and Jeff doesn't get it But I fundamentally disagree with you that pointing out silliness is not decent. It's appropriate and I think we have a responsibility to do so if we have time. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
On Dec 26, 6:26*am, John Forrest Tomlinson
wrote: On Tue, 25 Dec 2007 20:59:18 -0600, wrote: Please back off, JFT. *Time to make the annual transition from those nasty cycling newsgroups to the usually kinder and gentler rsn. Yeah, keeping RSN a functional newsgroup is the main reason why I reject JFT's flames every time. I'll do what I can to keep this newsgroup a place where people feel welcome to contribute...and to question. [ ] But I fundamentally disagree with you that pointing out silliness is not decent. *It's appropriate and I think we have a responsibility to do so if we have time. You can post to RSN if you use netiquette. Derision isn't tolerated. Not by me anyway. John, my "silliness" is not your concern. Obviously, it's totally subjective. In these threads, I've shown that you're both wrong about your criticisms and that you're wrong in terms of netiquette. These two things are separate. I accept criticism. I reject insult. I pray for snow! --JP |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
PS: Thanks, you guys, for backing me up. And, JFT, I have nothing
against your criticisms as long as you skip the insults. --JP |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Serious reviews/discussion of Day Touring gear?
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Best BC touring gear for kids? | [email protected] | Backcountry Skiing | 0 | December 4th 07 07:36 AM |
Touring ski reviews/chat anywhere? | [email protected] | Nordic Skiing | 12 | March 13th 07 03:18 PM |
Touring gear - Grindelwald & Zermatt | SteveH | Backcountry Skiing | 12 | January 18th 06 09:27 AM |
Touring gear - Grindelwald & Zermatt | SteveH | European Ski Resorts | 13 | January 18th 06 09:27 AM |
Atomic missing from latest Skiing Mag Gear Reviews | Tom | Alpine Skiing | 4 | October 4th 05 05:41 PM |