hbr said:
I found your comment to be neither extreme, nor unreasonable. You stated a position and explained it well with neutral language. I agree with what you said.
The internet is a hard place to avoid confusion. My comment was about the difficulties of having an electronic discussion when certain words mean different things to different people. This, coupled with the difficulties of expressing our feelings or subtleties with a keyboard, makes misunderstandings inevitable. We often do not express ourselves well.... and the fact that my post confused you makes me guilty myself....
Your posting was an example of how to converse well, and it brought to mind a lot of the recent posts that had descended into gainsaying and ruined several threads.
What I was trying to say, was that the emotional baggage of certain words can set the tone of the conversation. For example, look at AF points..... if one says that camera X has 45 points as opposed to the 65 points on camera Y, it is a fairly neutral statement that is undeniably correct. If you say the camera X was crippled with 45 points, it sets a negative tone which tends to encourage both the "Canon is doomed" crowd, and the "defenders of the realm" , setting up an argument that can never be resolved and before we know it, we are wading through 500 posts of insanity.....
Once the war has begun, it is hard to have a rational discussion. The truth is usually in the middle, but when people become polarized into extreme positions, it is impossible to get there. Attempts to rationally explain things tend to get lost in the noise, and sometimes attacked by all sides.
It is my hope that as a group, we forum users try to take things a bit less personally, try to avoid emotionally charged language, absolutely avoid calling each other names, not be so quick to hit "post", and get out there and take pictures....
Upvote
0
