ephbot wrote:I'm conflicted, though not necessarily with the topic at hand.
I'm conflicted about whether or not this particular column was successful/good idea in the first place. On the one hand, there are clearly people responding to the original topic, but those responses are fairly limited; there are about three options: yes, I hate the internet too; no, the internet has been great for the hobby; there are good and bad aspects. To be sure, the actual responses are a little bit more nuanced than that, but they do fall into one of these three camps.
That this distribution exists isn't an issue. That any response must lie within one of these categories beforehand is the issue.
Well, that's one of the problems with the post. I don't think our opinions matter much anyway...
ephbot wrote:Part of the problem is with the topic itself. There's the element of futility that like it or not, the internet is here to stay and there is no going back. Unless you take it upon yourself to print Sears Christmas Catalogs, you're not going to see those again (I was a kid during the early-mid-90's and I only vaguely remember seeing comprehensive Christmas catalogs then). Unless you launch continuous DDOS attacks on all Transformers fan sites, general toy hobby sites, Hasbro, and eBay, you're going to get spoilers. So while complaints about the topic are valid, there really is little to nothing that any discussion or complaining will do.
Even if nothing can be done, he's still entitled to not like it, he's even entitled to voice his opinion about it. This went above and beyond that, however.
ephbot wrote:There's the relativity of the argument, that any opinion really only applies "to me"; any conclusions that I make, or that I draw in the course of the discussion are only applicable to me, because there's not really any right or wrong answer to it. Now it's fine if I can't convince you to agree with my position after a fruitful discussion, because we'll still have gained something from talking to one another. But here, where it's preordained, then we are only talking past each other, and just spewing out our own talking points.
Like I said, I don't think our opinion matters much. He says he wrote it to start discussion, and to raise questions, but it didn't work out that way. It was intentional, too. This was something that would be more suitable for a blog. Seibertron is definitely not a blog.
ephbot wrote:Then there's the issue of execution. I think it's safe to say that Mkall wanted to create a discussion through controversy--after all, he wrote, "Got an idea for Mkall to rant and rave about ... he may just do so, for better or for worse."--but controversy for the sake of controversy is just not that conducive to rational discourse. I can probably get people talking if I yelled "HEIL!" while goosestepping down Main Street, but what would be the nature of that discourse? Would it be the reasonable, rational discourse I wanted to stimulate? I don't think so.
*claps* I completely agree. He definitely started this with the intention of poking a hornet's nest with a big stick. Blurrz's post was opinion based, but he handled it correctly. He gave his point of view, laid out some facts, and never labeled anyone or called them on the carpet for liking PCC. Even if they disagreed with his point of view, he never got nasty about it. His was an excellent post. Mkall's was definitely confrontational and intentional. A lot of poking and prodding, for no good reason.
Lumping people together, as he did, wasn't a good thing to do.
I'm still mystified by the whole reviewer issue. I mean, he was basically one step away from saying "You reviewer people suck, and I hate you for it."
Forget the labels, forget the closeminded nature of the post... the "attack" on the reviewers was a bit overboard. I understand where he's coming from, because there have been some real snoozefest reviews, but wow.
ephbot wrote:So Mkall, 1) I understand that your intentions were good. 2) I hope they are better executed next time, because reasonable discourse is a rare thing these days. But 3) stop blaming the internet for your problems.
1.) I don't think so. You can get a feel for the post and tell there was some rage behind it.
2.) The execution was handled exactly as he had hoped. Don't fool yourself into thinking otherwise. And don't let him, either.
3.) Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.