A posting lesson learned

paulkish

Premium User
When bob's was down I went over to the darkside to feed my addiction. I went and butted in thinking I knew something about a subject and found out I had never before even heard about what was being asked. So I did my usual dumb stuff and went on and threw my 2cents worth in, which turned out to be not even worth a penny. Along the way I made some new friends, yeah sure if you believe that I have this bridge I can't seem to sell.

I think I learned a couple of new lessons there.

1. Only present your own thoughts and only address the questions and comments of the original poster, without any referencing anything anyone else’s posted.

Any time you reference or use anything anyone other then the original poster wrote, you are running the risk of angering others and you are hijacking the thread and taking it in a different direction.

I think one lesson learned was enough for me and I don't want to experience all that much more learning, of that kind, in the near future.

I'm going to try my best to only answer only what is posed by who first started a thread. I'm going to try to do it unless the starter takes it in a different direction or specifically asks for debate on what they post. If read something of interest someone has shifted the thread too, I'm going to make my comments within a new thread, hopefully correctly aimed at the new subject.

Yes sometimes it seems to end up as a good thing to shift a thread to a new subject and learn from it. But it's just not courteous to do so. It also may make the original poster think twice before posting again and it is hijacking a thread for your own personal gain without regard for others.

Don't know if I can 100% stick to it, probably not, but I'm going to try.


I think it's especially rude, crude, uncouth and totally un-ethical, when the reply on here includes a sales pitch, not requested in the post. Or worse yet is a comment in the course of a reply, by one supplier knocking another. If you sell goods or services promote what you can do. There's a fine line between comparing what you offer to others and degrading and disparaging competitors. I will never buy a product or service from anyone, who during their sales pitch to me in what ever form it takes, uses down grading others to promote themselves. Guess I just hijacked my own thread.

Another thought on it. It's just as wrong but way more subtle and even more underhanded, for a supplier to promote some suppliers over others. One way to attack a competitor is to put yourself in an exclusive club and promote the relationship, which does not include those your attacking.
 

old-timer

New member
I think we're all a little guilty of that, at least I know I am . Not meaning to but sometimes answering the OPs question with another. This in turn will sometimes take the thread in another direction not intended by the OP.

Like you, I'm trying to curb this by trying to stay on the original subject of the poster.
Sometimes it's easier said than done, but as you said, you can always start your own thread and go from there.

Just my 2 cents
Vic
 

DarthDuck

New member
When bob's was down I went over to the darkside to feed my addiction. I went and butted in thinking I knew something about a subject and found out I had never before even heard about what was being asked. So I did my usual dumb stuff and went on and threw my 2cents worth in, which turned out to be not even worth a penny. Along the way I made some new friends, yeah sure if you believe that I have this bridge I can't seem to sell.

I think I learned a couple of new lessons there.

1. Only present your own thoughts and only address the questions and comments of the original poster, without any referencing anything anyone else’s posted.

Any time you reference or use anything anyone other then the original poster wrote, you are running the risk of angering others and you are hijacking the thread and taking it in a different direction.

I think one lesson learned was enough for me and I don't want to experience all that much more learning, of that kind, in the near future.

I'm going to try my best to only answer only what is posed by who first started a thread. I'm going to try to do it unless the starter takes it in a different direction or specifically asks for debate on what they post. I read something of interest someone has shifted the thread too, I'm going to make my comments within a new thread, hopefully correctly aimed at the new subject.

Yes sometimes it seems to end up as a good thing to shift a thread to a new subject and learn from it. But it's just not courteous to do so. It also may make the original poster think twice before posting again and it is hijacking a thread for your own personal gain without regard for others.

Don't know if I can 100% stick to it, probably not, but I'm going to try.


I think it's especially rude, crude, uncouth and totally un-ethical, when the reply on here includes a sales pitch, not requested in the post. Or worse yet is a comment in the course of a reply, by one supplier knocking another. If you sell goods or services promote what you can do. There's a fine line between comparing what you offer to others and degrading and disparaging competitors. I will never buy a product or service from anyone, who during their sales pitch to me in what ever form it takes, uses down grading others to promote themselves. Guess I just hijacked my own thread.

Another thought on it. It's just as wrong but way more subtle and even more underhanded, for a supplier to promote some suppliers over others. One way to attack a competitor is to put yourself in an exclusive club and promote the relationship, which does not include those your attacking.
With all it's social refinements.......one would tend to think that site would be far more popular than 4cycle.com.
 

paulkish

Premium User
With all it's social refinements.......one would tend to think that site would be far more popular than 4cycle.com.

Interesting observation Duck.

I've had a special interest for the last few years watching Winged Sprint Car qualifying, trying to figure out what might be some specific things which make one car faster then another. Let's say there are 40 cars there and it's a big show either Allstar or WoO. If there are 40 cars there at least 10 of them are going to have top equipment and an experienced crew. So what makes the difference? For years it has amazed me how one car can look so fast and another just so-so, yet the slower appearing car times in very much faster over the fast looking car. To be racing top stuff with a top crew or setup person, you either have to be good or have lots of cash.

I think I found a major thing which can separate the fast from the super fast. I've been trying for awhile to relate it on here and get discussion on it. I think it's one of those things so obvious nobody pays any attention to it. I think it has all to do with a specific learned driver skill. I think weather or not drivers who have learned the skill, knowingly use it or not depends on if they just came by it or were taught it.

Specifically it's the ability to put and 'arc' into your driving line after entry and prior to your final acceleration onto the straight. What's special about it and what needs to be learned is the 'arc' portion of your line through the turn which immediately follows the end of entry deceleration, can be taken at a speed higher then entry speed. The driver can learn to slightly increase their speed through the 'arc' portion and then maintain it through out the 'arc'.

They can physically do it because once deceleration has ended, weight is instantly redistributed to the outside tires and will provide the potential for an increased constant speed through the inserted 'arc'. Depending on the turn and the length of the 'arc', the round 'arc' will also provide them the possibility for an exit line, they could not have had if they were constantly increasing acceleration and creating a gradually opening up line to the straight. Also because of the nature of how an 'arc' can effect your exit line, it can also provide the possibility to drive farther into the corner before you complete your deceleration. I also feel it's another tool in the tool belt of some skilled drivers, they can use when the situation warrants it during a race.

What I think happened on the other site is in general, they cannot comprehend any line which does not include both an immediate shift from deceleration to acceleration and a continuously opening line to the straight. What's really interesting is how they are so reliant on referencing an apex for when acceleration starts.

anyway... I pretty much tried to bring the same discussion over here to see if it would fly. It didn't fly here either and I received no replies on it. I guess it can only mean my observations are wrong, my thinking it's totally a driver skill is wrong because it does not exist, it can't be done, it can't be an advantage and so forth.

What's really confusing to me is this is the first time ever I've gone out of the box thinking there could be a specific driver skill, which is not a setup given item and totally a driver thing. ... I'd better stop and rethink it because one site cannot see it as a possibility ... no it's two sites not having anyone reading who see it as a possibility? Odds are as usual, I'm just wrong about it.





... I don't think so. ... :)



but then again, I never do ... think
 

Outrider

Member
I don't think you're wrong Paul; I've seen what amounts to what you describe many times during qualifying at the sprint car tracks around here, including a few sessions watching at least part of time trials from the turn 3-4 infield portion of Williams Grove and Lincoln where you can really hear what the engine is doing as well as watch the line and what their suspension is doing. But time trialing is a bit of an art, and some that aren't consistant at doing it well haven't realized the implications of your description - you can see the difference in their line when they hit a good lap, using the approach you describe, and merely a mediocre one. I remember years ago when Elmer Stoltzfuss was running a 410 around here (on a shoestring in those days) and he would run low on money and sit out a couple of races; we were lucky; he used to sit up in the grandstands where we sat at Lincoln, so I could pick his brain about things like that. One thing he told me one night in response to a setup question was that time trialing was a special case - you were out there by yourself and could use as much or as little of the track as you needed, so you needed the setup to be toward the tight side of the OK range because that allowed you to put the car anywhere on the track you wanted, which dovetails right into running the type of line you describe. I do think that, at least early in a sprint car driver's career, a big portion of time trialling well is mental, having to do with having fewer points of reference (until they learn to use the reference points the track itself provides exclusively) than when other cars are on the track. Ever notice how some pretty fast racers seldom time trial well but do great racing with other cars on the track, especially the ones that have a mediocre or worse time trial time, then go out and finish 1st or 2nd in their heat?

Another thing that's sort of cool is that not all of the drivers that are consistantly good time trialers are running for high dollar teams with newer, supposedly top drawer equipment; some of the good ones come out of the group that does it well on a limited budget - always nice to see those guys in the top 6 or 8 when time trials are done.
 
Top