What's with all the Lurkers??

[Matrix]

I can see that there are 18 people currently viewing this forum and yet I'm the only one whose name is visible. I've always noticed this type of lurking, and have wondered; What are you folks hiding from?
We're friendly......... for the most part. :)

[Ernie]

I can see that there are 18 people currently viewing this forum and yet I'm the only one whose name is visible. I've always noticed this type of lurking, and have wondered; What are you folks hiding from?
We're friendly......... for the most part. :)
you scare me :rolleyes:

[Chango]

Maybe it's practice or try outs for big brother! See I told you we are all one family! LOL!
No but seriously I think some threads concern more then others. I think it's great that we have so many people interested in Wing Chun! ;)

[canglong]

Bill,
It seems it akin to your practice of walking on rice paper ;) you want to be seen and heard at the time and place of your own choosing.

[PaulH]

A Ninja must not reveal himself! :D

[AmanuJRY]

I admit, I like going to the library and setting all the cpu's to browse the forum annonimously. Actually, I do it every time I pass any public terminal...:D

[Kassandra]

I lurk largely because I don't believe that there's a lot worth commenting on. Any martial arts forum I've ever cared to read follows a similar format - someone posts an thread which may or may not have merit.

Regardless of this, there's a vehment scamble of internet warriors who go through the thread with a fine tooth comb looking for any flaw - typo or otherwise - that they can seize upon and rip to shreds. One person in the recent Wing Chun video's thread claimed that he "didn't have time to comment properly," yet seemed to have time to go through the entire website that the videos were on looking for quotes.

Its a pity, because many threads start out with good intent and are ruined by idiots who think that martial arts forums are some sort of *****-measuring contest. I note also that the majority of these objectors are normally from different styles or systems and just like nothing better than comparing their own (and vastly superior style) to the thread in question.

There are of course exceptions to any rule, and these come in the form of the little cliques that form between different stylists, the only ground rule seeming to be "i won't slag your style off if you don't slag my style off. Let's team up and and slag someone else off."

It would be wrong to blame all "different" styles, however. Practitioners of the same art are no better - Wing Chun stylists being the worst. I am sure that the Wing Chun equivalent of the Dim Mak is for someone to admit that a different school is good without adding some qualifying derogatory comment. I'm confident that they think they'll keel over and die.

So - why I lurk - I like to read the commentaries before they are ruined by people who are largely unqualified to comment on anything. I note also that these commentators normally have post numbers that run into the thousands which leads me to believe that they spend the majority of their time posting on internet forums than actually practising martial arts.

[kj]

Touché and ouch.

Regards,
- kj

[stonecrusher69]

word up:) ok is this tem characters long?

[Mr Punch]

One person in the recent Wing Chun video's thread claimed that he "didn't have time to comment properly," yet seemed to have time to go through the entire website that the videos were on looking for quotes...Well, I guess that'd be me since there's nobody else on that thread who I believe said they were short of time and quoting things from the site. What I said was that I didn't have time to be diplomatic. BTW I find quotes/discrepancies the first time I read anything, however fast, as my job is teaching English, and proofing copy and speeches, so it really doesn't take any time. I don't think I was unreasonable on that thread or unqualified to comment... but then I wouldn't! And generally I don't have a lot of time... but please, don't use that as an excuse, if YOU have something useful to say, please go ahead.

BTW, I used to be a lurker for the same reasons. Now, at 3000 plus posts I often wonder what the hell I was doing, and what I could have been doing that was more constructive... and I suspect given that as there is not very often anything useful/entertaining round here these days, that I will lurk again, possibly for a long time. For a while I found it useful (sometimes) and entertaining to post. All I can say is, if it's beyond you, don't bother :rolleyes:

[Kassandra]

Your comment that you didn't have time to be diplomatic merely adds weight to the main thrust of my original post. Your comments in the “Wing Chun videos” thread are a pathetic attempt to make yourself appear as if you know what you’re talking about - at the expense of martial artists. At least these people are actually walking the walk – not typing the talk.

And unless you can provide some video footage of yourself in combat, your comments are theoretical, aren't they? Prove to me – and the forum at large - that you can do better than those people on the video clips, and I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

It's another thing about these forums; many are quick to dissect a video clip/post but as soon as they are asked to provide some comparable evidence, the comments are usually "I don't own a video camera have no way of getting hold of one."

Which - in the 21st century - is utter balderdash, and really means that the internet warrior doesn't want to add clips of him or herself in action for it's guaranteed that they will come in for exactly the same treatment that they have been dishing out. Indeed, I've seen a similar forum to this one where people are actually banned for challenging their detractors to respond with clips of their own.

And by the way - I'm a journalist, so your English teaching/proof reading credentials don't impress me in the slightest, nor does your laughable "challenge" at the end of your previous message.

In closing, this response is another reason why I lurk. I curse myself for breaking my own rule as I have far better things to do than argue with pompous twats in Tokyo.

So spare me the hard-thought, “witty” riposte; I doubt if I’ll read it, let alone bother to respond.

[Ernie]

banned[/i] for challenging their detractors to respond with clips of their own.

.


so were are your clips super fly;)

[Kassandra]

so were are your clips super fly;)

What comment of mine has suggested that I'm some sort of super martial artist who can kick the tar out of everyone and can do so much better than those in the clips?

You should read the post before commenting.

Pillock.

[AmanuJRY]

What the heck does 'Pillock' mean?:confused:

[ghostofwingchun]

What the heck does 'Pillock' mean?:confused:

http://english2american.com/dictionary/p.html

I hope this answers your question . . . google is amazing tool.

[Fajing]

What comment of mine has suggested that I'm some sort of super martial artist who can kick the tar out of everyone and can do so much better than those in the clips?

You should read the post before commenting.

Pillock.

WOW, why so much anger and hostility? Are you into martial arts at all, or do you simply enjoy starting arguments on random forums? You elaborate on the macho attitude others present on this forum, but are you any different? And NO, I don't post on here often. To state the obvious, you, like many others, would never resort to such a diatribe when facing the recipient. Are you that WING CHUN KITTEN by any chance, who posted for a short time?:D Anywho, good thing this is merely a chat forum, because if it weren't, not much would be said or argued, I suppose. :rolleyes:

[AmanuJRY]

http://english2american.com/dictionary/p.html

I hope this answers your question . . . google is amazing tool.

Yes, sorry for my laziness in not searching myself.

So, basically she is resorting to name-calling and the like. Could this be the next BloomingLotus incarnate?...

[Ernie]

What comment of mine has suggested that I'm some sort of super martial artist who can kick the tar out of everyone and can do so much better than those in the clips?

You should read the post before commenting.

Pillock.

stones and glass houses super star :eek:

[anerlich]

I hope this answers your question . . . google is amazing tool.

Good stuff. As a long time British comedy admirer, I've heard the world often and wondered at its meaning and etymology (though not enough to pick up the dictionary). My guess was pretty close to the mark, FWIW.

I see this place as like a pub or bar. Lots of pretentious tosh and twaddle, the occasional good thread, like a diamond in a sea of sludge, but coming here or to any other internet forum expecting to find pearls of wisdom on every thread will only lead to disappointment. Getting upset over it is even more foolish, the joke's on you. It's essentially a place to hang out and shoot the breeze.

If it DOES bother you, either learn to deal with it or add some posts yourself to raise the tone of the debate. Criticising others for criticising others makes you no better than they are.

I don't have such a mission, flame ahead, make my day.

FWIW, I hardly ever post on video threads, I can't see the point. I see way too many people on holiday with video cameras obsessed with recording their lives rather than living them.

[Mr Punch]

Your comment that you didn't have time to be diplomatic merely adds weight to the main thrust of my original post. Your comments in the “Wing Chun videos” thread are a pathetic attempt to make yourself appear as if you know what you’re talking about - at the expense of martial artists. At least these people are actually walking the walk – not typing the talk.

And unless you can provide some video footage of yourself in combat, your comments are theoretical, aren't they? Prove to me – and the forum at large - that you can do better than those people on the video clips, and I'll bow to your superior knowledge.

It's another thing about these forums; many are quick to dissect a video clip/post but as soon as they are asked to provide some comparable evidence, the comments are usually "I don't own a video camera have no way of getting hold of one."

Which - in the 21st century - is utter balderdash, and really means that the internet warrior doesn't want to add clips of him or herself in action for it's guaranteed that they will come in for exactly the same treatment that they have been dishing out. Indeed, I've seen a similar forum to this one where people are actually banned for challenging their detractors to respond with clips of their own.

And by the way - I'm a journalist, so your English teaching/proof reading credentials don't impress me in the slightest, nor does your laughable "challenge" at the end of your previous message.

In closing, this response is another reason why I lurk. I curse myself for breaking my own rule as I have far better things to do than argue with pompous twats in Tokyo.

So spare me the hard-thought, “witty” riposte; I doubt if I’ll read it, let alone bother to respond.No hard-thought witty riposte, just a quick, immediate response from the heart as usual.

I don't know quite why you took it upon yourself to decide that I'd decided I was some kind of beat-everyone martial hero based on my responding to a thread reasonably I thought, a thread whose original poster asked for criticism. That's all I was doing.

I also don't know how you've deemed me not to be walking the walk, but only 'typing the talk' (like responding in the way that somebody has asked me to to is somehow bad... :rolleyes: )... it makes me laugh that you are judging me based on a couple of honest responses without knowing anything about who I am or what I do. The people that know me know my MA and my character and I'm not interested in the impossibility of proving who I am or what I can do to someone I've never met, especially someone who has already resorted to calling me a pompous twat based on... what? Not liking my writing style?

Well, I just write pretty much as I speak, and I maybe sometimes speak a little on the pompous side too in an attempt to be as clear as possible... Maybe that's a cross I have to bear, but I'm quite grown-up so your petty pointless ill-informed insults are hardly going to affect me one way or the other.

And no, I don't see why I should 'prove' myself to you or anyone by video how my MAs are. For a start as you've already hinted (without actually telling me why you've been so vitriolically defensive of the original video or even why you disagree with my assessment - instead choosing to be snide about me on another thread entirely) video is an imperfect medium, and doesn't show you anything accurately. And secondly, cos I don't give a ****. If you don't like what I say, like I said, don't respond, or, if you respond tell me why you don't agree. That is a discussion, which is all we have on discussion boards!:p

No challenge, just as there was no challenge in the previous post. Just that if you're so defensive then lurking is definitely the best course of action for you.

The only reason I would make myself the time in my very long working week and training time to find, buy and start using and posting vids is precisely to gain feedback from other people. I have nothing to hide and think it may be very useful. Sorry if you believe that I think I have something to lose - again, your inference, your problem, not mine!

And I wasn't trying to impress anyone with my 'credentials' merely trying to tell you why it was I had time to spot the mistakes on the site without poring over it for hours, and by the same token, this response has been written as quickly as I can, in my normal tone... so it's up to you if you take it that I'm carefully poring over my words to put you down or something: you can infer that if you like, doesn't make it true.

But incidentally, since you appear to be trying to impress me with your being a journalist, I've edited plenty of journalists too!:p :D

So, as neither of us like wasting our time on this BS, if you have a problem with some of my assessment of the video, I suggest you say what it is on that thread instead of b!tching about me on this. Then we can discuss.

And like I said, I don't think the vid was bad, but regardless if the poster didn't want it criticised he shouldn't have put it up and asked for criticism!

[Mr Punch]

Dunno why I even bothered to reply to your ****. Or so politely...

I'd forgotten I'd started the post on the vid thread with this:
OK, fisrt: not bad. not bad at all.

But, you asked for constructive criticism so thats what I'm gonna try and give you... bear in mind the written word is sometimes a bit clumsy and I'm gonna have to be very nit-picky to get across a couple of simple points we'd be able to talk about and clear up very easily face to face.How the **** is that pompous or claiming to be superior MAist? Forget my previous response, you're a ****ing idiot.

[yenhoi]

wow!

:eek:

[hen]

Wow !!!

Never have thought that a simple post about "Lurking" can result in so many exchanges/responses. Nothing better to keep us warm in this cold winter's day.

And by the way,

*****************Merry X'mas to all!!!!!!****************

[Sekabin]

I'm presuming that he belongs to that school; maybe he's in the vids himself and consequently took it very personally when someone pointed out the bad points, as had been asked.

Unfortunately he did come across as a twat. :rolleyes:

[kj]

I can see that there are 18 people currently viewing this forum and yet I'm the only one whose name is visible. I've always noticed this type of lurking, and have wondered; What are you folks hiding from?
We're friendly......... for the most part. :)

I realize your actual question hasn't been addressed yet. Still, the more general issue of why people lurk appears to have been handily illustrated.

Regards,
- kj

[ghostofwingchun]

I realize your actual question hasn't been addressed yet. Still, the more general issue of why people lurk appears to have been handily illustrated.

Regards,
- kj

I am thinking that this is not a sound question in the first place . . . underlying it is assumption that people should not be lurking . . . and should instead by taking part in forum . . . and somehow not taking part is negative reflection. Lurkers may be asking question why would anyone post on these forums in first place . . . is there something wrong with people who do . . . lol. I am thinking forums are not just for posters but for anyone who wants to read it . . . anyone who wants to post . . . open to anyone . . . it is even the same on mailing lists and other groups . . . many people choose not to join in discussions. I am exlurker . . . and I can say that many times I learn more by keeping mouth shut and listening than by talking and giving opinions! On other hand if people didn't open mouth and give opinions there would not be much to learn . . . so I am grateful for them being willing to talk! Now I choose to ask questions in hope of getting better understanding of what people are saying. KJ seems to imply that rudeness to lurker is what causes people to lurk . . . this I am thinking is not the case . . . and lurker was just as rude as everyone else . . . lol . . . these are just ramblings of exlurker.

Thanks,
'
Ghost

[kj]

KJ seems to imply that rudeness to lurker is what causes people to lurk . . .

Warm, but not accurately what I was getting at. I wasn't commenting on who's-to-blame, but rather that a lot of good people will opt not to play in what they perceive as a soiled sandbox (regardless of who all can be blamed).

I digress, however, so back to my main point. I trust Bill to correct me on this if needed, but I believe what he was asking about is a technical nuance of the forum whereby a person can be logged in yet elect not to have one's identity shown while online, appearing instead merely as "anonymous." I think his question about this particular aspect of secrecy has so far been overlooked in the discussion.

Regards,
- kj

[stricker]

I see this place as like a pub or bar

from the definition of pub on that english->american dictionary page :

pub n. This is an abbrevation for "public house" and best equates to what Americans call a bar. However, in my experience, British pubs are generally far more sociable than American bars. While you would go into a pub to have a pleasant lunch with your family or one or two sociable beers with a couple of friends, you'd only go into a bar in order to get blind drunk and start a fight.

well is it a pub or a bar?? i think some people think its a pub, good for a talking ****e over a pint or two, and then other people come in blind drunk to start a fight :D

[stricker]

Warm, but not accurately what I was getting at. I wasn't commenting on who's-to-blame, but rather that a lot of good people will opt not to play in what they perceive as a soiled sandbox (regardless of who all can be blamed).

I digress, however, so back to my main point. I trust Bill to correct me on this if needed, but I believe what he was asking about is a technical nuance of the forum whereby a person can be logged in yet elect not to have one's identity shown while online, appearing instead merely as "anonymous." I think his question about this particular aspect of secrecy has so far been overlooked in the discussion.

Regards,
- kjalso if your paranoid about internet security and clear cookies etc when your browser shuts down maybe you come up as anonymous next time you take a look. bit boring that one, everyone loves a good conspiracy theory!

[stricker]

aaaah i just realised what kj meant. you meant the "invisible mode" option.

hahaha stealth mode *on*

**** ive watched ghost dog too many times :D did knightrider have stealth mode or was that airwolf or something??

[anerlich]

This is an abbrevation for "public house" and best equates to what Americans call a bar. However, in my experience, British pubs are generally far more sociable than American bars. While you would go into a pub to have a pleasant lunch with your family or one or two sociable beers with a couple of friends, you'd only go into a bar in order to get blind drunk and start a fight.

Now, now, that's a nice bit of Yank bashing ;). Didn't you ever watch "Cheers"? Even Frasier was comfortable there, more or less.

Like you I'd imagine, I've been to more than a couple of English pubs and they vary greatly in the aggro stakes. Geoff Thomson's "Watch my Back" sort of knocks the generalisation on the head as well.

That aside, you're probably right, it's a bit of both.

[stricker]

yeah i remember cheers. sometimes you want to go, where everybody knows your name...

english pubs rule! i think my most memorable scary pub experience was this one time i helped a mate out roadie for a metal band playing this pub on a friday night. the bouncer on the door had a nazi german eagle flag thing tattoo on the side of his skinhead, got inside and it went downhill from there... unfortunately nowadays a lot are being turned into trendy wine bars :(

ive had nothing but a good time in american bars but thats prolly cos ive always had a guide. they lack the atmosphere of a proper english pub tho. hell my local is probably older than the yanks whole country!

[Matrix]

I realize your actual question hasn't been addressed yet. Still, the more general issue of why people lurk appears to have been handily illustrated.KJ,
The responses have been much more 'lively' than I expected. It's been interesting to watch the thread unfold. :)

[Samuel Fong]

As a lurker I dont post beacause most posters are only concerned with being right and showing how much they think they know. Therefore it is pointless to post something different unless you want to argue with a mule.

[Ernie]

As a lurker I dont post beacause most posters are only concerned with being right and showing how much they think they know. Therefore it is pointless to post something different unless you want to argue with a mule.


I disagree ;)

[Samuel Fong]

With that sway back he must be a Leung Ting student!

[Matrix]

As a lurker I dont post beacause most posters are only concerned with being right and showing how much they think they know. Therefore it is pointless to post something different unless you want to argue with a mule. This is true to a large degree, however, even when arguing you can learn something valuable. Sometimes you may have to work through a ton of dirt to get one ounce of gold.

[stricker]

As a lurker I dont post beacause most posters are only concerned with being right and showing how much they think they know. Therefore it is pointless to post something different unless you want to argue with a mule.hahaha id much rather be proven wrong or or whatever then you learn something. anyway to be honest my main interest here is finding out and sharing experiences with people who have either done or fought against other styles (mainly mma). personally i think discussion purely about wing chun is a bit pointless. if i have a question about wing chun id just ask my teacher.

[jesper]

But what if your teacher doesnt have all the answers, or what if you could get a new look on things by asking others ?

[Matrix]

Your comment that you didn't have time to be diplomatic merely adds weight to the main thrust of my original post. Your comments in the “Wing Chun videos” thread are a pathetic attempt to make yourself appear as if you know what you’re talking about - at the expense of martial artists. At least these people are actually walking the walk – not typing the talk. The problem here is that the person that started the "Wing Chun Videos" thread asked for constructive criticism. Now quite possibly some re
respondents were a little overzealous with comments on typos,etc.
If what you really want is praise, then ask for that. There may be some merit to the old adage that 'you get what you ask for'.
I can't guarantee the results however.

Peace,

[lawrenceofidaho]

But what if your teacher doesnt have all the answers, or what if you could get a new look on things by asking others ?
Jesper is correct, especially about getting a new look....... :)

-Lawrence