|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
byrddogs
Joined: 19 Jun 2009 Location: Shanghai
|
Posted: Fri Apr 18, 2014 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Zyzyfer wrote: |
TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
If I were to say something like "Zyzyfer, why are you always complaining that this board is full of racists" (which was more or less what Black Cat's comment to me was about) wouldn't you be annoyed? Particularly if you'd never said that?
Come on now. |
I'm not even referring to something like that.
On another thread, you just wrote this:
TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
And I never said the majority of KOREANS and neither did he. He simply said "Koreans in Korea have overwhelmingly called out this program out as racist, misogynistic and shitty" |
Now that was in response to something Mr. BlackCat wrote. Your whole refutation hinges around the fact that you and this writer didn't say "majority". No, you both said "Koreans in Korea". Now I didn't closely read the exchange between you two prior to that, and maybe in this instance, there was clear reasoning to highlight the nuanced difference which exists there, based on what Mr. BlackCat had written.
But here's the thing. When I read your first post, I sided with the case you were making, that there were some Koreans who hated on the MBC program. I know I am not every poster, but as far as I was concerned, that was game, set and match. It didn't matter where Mr. BlackCat went from there in my opinion. Nevertheless, you counter his next point by leading with semantics.
Like I said, it may well have been a valid stance to take in that particular instance. But I have often seen you build your entire argument around a stringent request for statistical evidence from your opponent to prove their point before the discussion is able to go any further. Or you get hung up on the lack of qualifiers in someone's writing. One of your more classic catch-all comebacks to Korea "bashers" is mentioning that the poster couldn't have possibly met every single Korean in the country, and therefore their opinion has been invalidated because of that. It's correct, but it's rather pedantic, in my opinion, and these sorts of pithy discussions drive casual users and lurkers away. No, I am not digging up statistics for that. It will have to stand as an anecdotal opinion and nothing more.
I get that it's a two-way street. Someone has to post something that could be considered in poor taste to begin with in order to evoke responses like that from you, or Steelrails novellas which are perfectly suited for political/military discussions but come off as excessive when talking about Korean superficiality or lack of responsibility. If stupid people didn't post stupid things then you lot in the "apologist" camp wouldn't write the things you write. Steelrails was great over on Gorf's short-lived board; the vibe was different from here and it was much easier to approach his posts. He was also far less prolific of a poster there.
But things like the ferry thread? That isn't some chatty and inevitably meaningless thread that should get pigeon-holed into an argument over Korean culture. If something deemed offensive was written there, why not report it to the mods and let them decide, and keep the thread a little cleaner? Or the exchange rate thread. It was only about how exchanging Korean won to Canadian dollars is profitable at the moment. And yet the first post was about where the won should be. Where the won should be is a different discussion.
I've said my piece enough already. Other users are starting to speak up as well. These tiresome arguments that both sides are propelling detract from the enjoyment and/or usefulness that can be derived from those of us who read and post here who have no clear-cut agenda. It would be nice if people would tone down the agenda-laden posts (on both sides) so that discussions can be discussions instead of pithy counter-arguments. The only reason I have singled the "apologists" out is because I tend to agree with your key points. But the way you argue your points makes it harder for people who want to agree with your main point to do that.
But it's up to you (all) to listen me or not. It's just a suggestion from a fellow poster on this board. And I've come to realize that I've let myself get sucked in too far and am contributing to the problem as well, so this is my last comment on this issue, and I am going to revert to lurking or maybe even less than that for a little while, as I've become jaded with the place all over again. |
That was a good read. Thanks.
I'd like to add that when it comes to TUM, I get his angle, but digging up out of date studies/links or referencing to a blog seems to be a common occurrence when he provides "stats" to back up his position. I fail to see how that is proving anything when that happens. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|