EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Community Discussions & Forum News › The value and uniqueness of EpicSki
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The value and uniqueness of EpicSki - Page 4

post #91 of 112
Rick, I think the 101 or symbol identification is a good idea. The person posing the question should identify himself or herself and give some background of their skiing experience, if any.

I my opinion designating 'experts' to answer a new skiers question is counter productive. Take your question of "How do I get over the fear of steeps?" A skier who just recently overcame their fear of steeps might be better qualified to give insight than an expert. Answers by the experts my further intimidate the questioner by being diverse and even contradictory.

All in all a good idea because then the newbees would only have to read those threads and stay away from confusing high level technical discussions...

....Ott
post #92 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott Gangl
I my opinion designating 'experts' to answer a new skiers question is counter productive.
I agree Ott. The A-Team idea wasn't mine. Diversity of suggestions is good, as long as the content of the suggestions are composed at the appropriate 101 level, and side debates are discouraged. Besides, this is a voluntary effort here, how could we saddle specified pros with such responsibility. Sounds more like a job.
post #93 of 112
Quote:
I have been asked the following question as part of a job application, I think the answer is absorb but just wanting to check.
When you reach the end of a ski turn long or short radius do you flex/bend your ankles to apply pressure to the skis or to absorb pressure from the skis?
Thanks
A simple question. I was the next poster: I said, yep, you are right. Still, to my amazement, the thread is now at 59 posts! And you think we can create a voluntary system to keep these answers clear and simple for new people? As the anti-hero of the classic Aussie flick The Castle would say, You're dreamin' mate!
post #94 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ott
The person posing the question should identify himself or herself and give some background of their skiing experience, if any.
Excellent suggestion.

The person offering expert advice should do the same or include that information in their profile.
post #95 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
A simple question. I was the next poster: I said, yep, you are right. Still, to my amazement, the thread is now at 59 posts! And you think we can create a voluntary system to keep these answers clear and simple for new people? As the anti-hero of the classic Aussie flick The Castle would say, You're dreamin' mate!
Simple, sure. But respectfully is it always so? As a veteran instructor I had my bag of tricks ready to dispense to help the student breakthrough. Example - if my goal was to achieve the magical breakthrough from level 5 to 6 where the student feels the belly or arc of the turn for the first time I might try many different approaches. Falling leaf, thousand steps, standing on the outside ski, preturns or combinations of any or more demos/drills might work differently for each student to find the elusive breakthrough. My task was to find the right button to push and hammer it home.I suggest the same might be true here. If it takes 5 posts or 59 or 500 posts of tips and comments from bears and the asker is willing to wade through it all so what? Perhaps my little nugget of gold might be the magical ticket...even tho yours is equally valid or may be more technically correct. Isn't that why we are here? 59 posts, so what...gatekeepers nah....gonzo said it - annoying....let the discussions flo.....if I ask a question I want the pleasure of hearing from anyone who sincerely wants to take it on. Please don't mess with the beautiful thing we have here.
post #96 of 112
I love this conversation because it really speaks to the soul of this group. It is elegant and caring and wise--both the conversation and the soul.

I think Nolo's concept of gatekeeper is great. It is not a censor, but somewhat of a force with some experience/authority. The beauty of it is that YOU can decide who is your personal gatekeeper. There are some techy's and teachers here who I have designated for myself as gatekeepers--those that I feel are on the right track and have the right kind of input to be helpful. Nolo is one. Martin Bell is one. And Bonni is one--not because of her skiing expertise (although I give that maybe a year!) but because of her stunning ability to call BS when it's necessary. And there are many others.

I bail from some of those conversations for the same reason Bonni does and the same reason Lars does. However, I'm still pleased that they go on, because for me, anything that makes you happy about skiing is great.

Also, I don't always pick up on the tech conversations because I've got other stuff keeping me busy, so I miss a lot of them. But if I were in one, and tended to ramble (like I'm doing now!), then I would respond instantly to a pm or public request for simplification. What I'm saying here to newer skiers, is don't be shy or intimidated or bored by the rambles. If I were a less experienced skier and wanted to ask a question, I would certainly add a line like "Please, no tech babble. Keep it simple, thanks." Ask the question you want, and press for it.

If anybody flames you for that, I'll find out where they live!
post #97 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
Gonzo, I'm afraid that you and others misunderstand my use of the word "gatekeeper." You rightly condemn what you imagine my meaning to be, but I would like to take one more stab at sharing understanding with you.

The way I understand it, a gatekeeper is not a censor, but a person with enough knowledge of the subject to challenge statements that may appear sensible to one not so knowledgeable, and thereby assist the not so knowledgeable to avoid "stinking thinking."

I came to this idea of gatekeeper from reading Nancy Dixon's Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know, 2000, Harvard Business School Press.
eh, okay, I retract. and qualify to say that such a "gatekeeper" would be fine with me as long as public opinion gets aired. I like the free marketplace of ideas. but I also like to ensure that participants have the ability to say that someone is full of shee-ite when they are so. if that's the "gatekeeper" role, then so be it. I'm just cautious and wary of centralized power/authority.
post #98 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzostrike
I'm just cautious and wary of centralized power/authority.
No shee-ite?!!
post #99 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzostrike
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo
Gonzo, I'm afraid that you and others misunderstand my use of the word "gatekeeper." You rightly condemn what you imagine my meaning to be, but I would like to take one more stab at sharing understanding with you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nolo

The way I understand it, a gatekeeper is not a censor, but a person with enough knowledge of the subject to challenge statements that may appear sensible to one not so knowledgeable, and thereby assist the not so knowledgeable to avoid "stinking thinking."

I came to this idea of gatekeeper from reading Nancy Dixon's Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know, 2000, Harvard Business School Press.



eh, okay, I retract. and qualify to say that such a "gatekeeper" would be fine with me as long as public opinion gets aired. I like the free marketplace of ideas. but I also like to ensure that participants have the ability to say that someone is full of shee-ite when they are so. if that's the "gatekeeper" role, then so be it. I'm just cautious and wary of centralized power/authority.
Ditto.

I'm fine with this definition also. Sorta seems like where we are now! As Weems pointed out, we each get to decide who our gatekeepers are.
post #100 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by weems
No shee-ite?!!
howling at the desk here. howling.
post #101 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzostrike
howling at the desk here. howling.
Bullshyte.
post #102 of 112
Quote:
we each get to decide who our gatekeepers are.
That is the value and uniqueness of EpicSki, all are welcome and encouraged to participate, but that doesn't mean anything goes around here. The forums are largely moderated by members and supporters who report offensive content to the administrator, who performs their proxy (or not, in some cases). I've long been impressed at what an efficient system we have for maintaining the value and uniqueness of EpicSki, and because it is spontaneous and natural (that is, self-interested), would be reluctant to adopt a change to anything "managed."
post #103 of 112
As I am my "own" gatekeeper and have been for quite a few years now. I have probably had the last word on too many topics, well, maybe Bonnie has, between the two of us, we sometimes have had enough and go off on some rant. Gonzo is the ultimate gatekeeper,whose tongue is mightier than any swoard. None of us qualified for the Technique forum.

Reguardless, I will be my own gatekeeper.

What does everybody have in mind, Nolo?
post #104 of 112
1)why not simply have a Question and answer section - would probably be easier for newbies to post a QUESTION in a section labelled "questions" without feeling like a goose.....

2) if you woory about the possibilty of being confused as to the level of answers provided why not simply change the "designation" of some of the members.....

so instead of "member" and "epicski supporter" we could add a few other labels

Physics man could be
"resident Physics guru" or "physics lecturer" or something else that he would approve that makes clear his expertise....

perhaps the epicski instructor list members could have "epicski instructor xxxx" where xxx is their ski resort....

patrollers could carry designation as such...

Fox could be
"Guiness expert"
post #105 of 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
1) why not simply change the "designation" of some of the members.....

so instead of "member" and "epicski supporter" we could add a few other labels

Physics man could be
"resident Physics guru" or "physics lecturer" or something else that he would approve that makes clear his expertise....

perhaps the epicski instructor list members could have "epicski instructor xxxx" where xxx is their ski resort....

patrollers could carry designation as such...
I can see how this would come up, but respectfully disagree. that the site is egalitarian is one of its appeals. I hope it's kept that way. I'm fairly new here, but have not found it too difficult to weed out the experts from the "experts"
post #106 of 112

Ditto What MOM said

Being a High School dropout / I had to look this one up
Egalitarianism is the moral doctrine that equality ought to prevail throughout society
According to material egalitarianism, everyone ought to be equal with respect to material possessions. According to legal egalitarianism, everyone ought to be considered equal under the law. According to moral egalitarianism, each person is of equal moral worth. According to democratic egalitarianism, everyone ought to have an equal voice in public affairs. According to political egalitarianism, everyone ought to be equal in political power. According to opportunity egalitarianism everyone ought to be equal in economic opportunity.

//They start talking about communism further down in the description.
Gatekeeper = Comunist? = Authority figure that may for personal reasons, restrict the free flow of information
MTT
post #107 of 112
You guys are really talking about discouraging people from making pro Harald Harb/ PMTS posts, right?
post #108 of 112
Edit: This is the best forum on the web. Don't Fix it!

I'm with Gonzo on this.

We don't need no shtinking gatekeepers iff by gatekeepers we mean censors, but let's not censor the gatekeepers. We can and do appreciate it when someone we have come to respect, from having read their previous posts, exposes the "junk science" and fallacious logic in posts by ill-informed or simply perverted posters.

As to keeping it simple (skip to last paragraph if this is too complex ), one has to take into account that often a simple question or the answer to that question can give rise to a discussion that is valuable to a whole new audience than just the original poster. We should not prevent that discussion from evolving naturally. In most cases the original question is sufficiently answered by the time the discussion turns technical.

The level101 heading in the post is a good way to indicate to forum that the original poster is looking for a simple answer, and that people should post a simple answer or leave the thread alone until that need has been satisfied.

I don't think we should limit our responses to a simple question and answer format; that would eliminate many of the fascinating discussions I come here for (I hope your not trying to get rid of me). I suppose that some of us posters have more trouble than others, and don't even realize that we are typing at too high a level of sophistication. I think the solution is twofold. For our part as responders, we should try and make it as clear as possible that clarification questions are more than welcome, and especially do our best to make newbies feel that their questions are welcome. The original poster should of course ask for clarification when needed, and shouldn't be shy about asking for it in simple terms. I love explaining things, the simpler the explanation the better it is.

In other words, Posters, if you want a simple answer to a simple question, put 101 in your heading. If our answer is too complicated, ask us to make it simpler; we won't mind. . Let's keep the wide open format we have come to love.

PS. As to limiting the discussion to the experts, ; I want to have my say too!
post #109 of 112
Thread Starter 
Sorry I haven't been around to participate in this thread once I started it. I've been on vacation for the last couple of weeks & returned late last night. I probably shouldn't have started a thread when I knew I was about to leave.

Anyway, really great thoughts everyone. I'm glad people care about Epic. I'll give more detailed comments when I get a chance to read all 4 pages.

Sincere thanks,

Tom / PM

PS - The worst has happened. I fell in love with a soft-tail bike while tooling around the highlands of WVA on vacation. I definitely do NOT need another sink for money & time. : : : :
post #110 of 112
Please forgive the uninitiated, but what is a soft-tail bike and how does it differ from a "regular" (presumably hard-tail?) bike. Sorry, I know my ignorance is showing, but my curiosity is piqued.
post #111 of 112
It's a bicycle with rear suspension.
post #112 of 112
Ah, thanks jstraw.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › EpicSki Community › Community Discussions & Forum News › The value and uniqueness of EpicSki