Uncomfortable Conversations with a Black man

[rdwight]

Does leaving a link to a video mean no one should be able to question the content that is in it? While you have seen some level of contempt to videos being posted with little commentary on the subject within, I have seen that same energy towards people that ask simple questions in regards to them.

If you need to snarkly reply without answering a question, in a longer wall of text than it would take to answer it, then i dunno what to tell ya. Personally if I am on a forum like this, I enjoy a text based conversation when it comes to a topic. If the topic of a video is worth discussing, then it can be done without dedicating time to the video itself as well.

It becomes much easier to convince someone to watch something if the subject and contents inside it can be expressed easily and a quick blurb to convince that the presentation is worth the time.

 

[Mumbles]

FIrst: commenting on a video is one matter, preeneing about how great you are for not watching a video, in a thread about the video, is being proud of one's ignorance.

Second - dude was not in a bike crash, it's an analogy for not listening at all when someone warns you about oncoming trouble. Tupac makes a similar point in this video starting at 1:15 in...

 

[casebro]

...... Clearly UK issues are somewhat different to the US, but it would be interesting to know if there is a similar difference in e.g. educational achievement between Black Africans from Africa and those African-Americans who are descendants of slaves. What is the Canadian experience, as there was never (to any meaningful extent) slavery in Canada nor segregation?

Dunno about education, but there sure is a difference in my two neighbors so far as politics. One is Afro-American. He threw a party with the loud "**** Whitey" songs. So bad that the Chinese woman next door bought a gun the next day. (I took her to the range and taught her to shoot) His neighbor on the other side is recently from Ethiopia (5 years?) . He had me over to dinner (interesting food, and methods). We discussed the definition of facism. He knows first hand, Ethiopia has turned in to a Socialist sty. He has his own business, his wife is a nurse, His parents and kids live there too. The A-A? Cars and women come and go. His kids with the visiting Moms, I think. Tough to figure the family dynamic there. Who's kids do you think would have the better attitude towards education?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Same applies to ALL video content

....

Not even close...

You are telling me I should watch a video to see if it is something i would be interested in..

It really doesn't work like that..

I watch movies because I have an idea that it is something I am interested in..
I have read a book, watched a trailer, or read a review ..

 

[smartcooky]

Does leaving a link to a video mean no one should be able to question the content that is in it?

For mine, it is a given that you cannot rightly comment on anthing you haven't seen, read or heard, because, well, you haven't seen, read or heard it.

Would you comment on a book or article you have never read?
Would you comment on a post you haven't read?
Would you comment on a piece of music you have never heard?
Would you comment on a sports game/match you had not seen heard or read about?

For any reasonable person the answer to all four questions above is "No", so why should a video be treated any differently?

While you have seen some level of contempt to videos being posted with little commentary on the subject within, I have seen that same energy towards people that ask simple questions in regards to them.

If someone posts a link and makes no comment about it, fair enough, but PW posted a brief introduction. It, and the title of the post was all that needed to be said.

Personally if I am on a forum like this, I enjoy a text based conversation when it comes to a topic. If the topic of a video is worth discussing, then it can be done without dedicating time to the video itself as well.

How can you discuss a video you haven't seen?

It becomes much easier to convince someone to watch something if the subject and contents inside it can be expressed easily and a quick blurb to convince that the presentation is worth the time.

And PW did that. If some find that insufficient, they can click the link, go the the YT video itself and read the bloody description, and then decide whether or not they want to watch the video.

Why do people find this so hard to understand?

 

[smartcooky]

Not even close...

You are telling me I should watch a video to see if it is something i would be interested in..

No, I was commenting on your "summary"...suggestion - try reading the post I was replying to; in this case, your own

You could simply click on the video and read the description... did you think of that?

I watch movies because I have an idea that it is something I am interested in..

PW's introduction could have told you that. Did you read it?

Failing that you could, err, you know, click on the video and read the description

 

[rdwight]

He knows first hand, Ethiopia has turned in to a Socialist sty. He has his own business, his wife is a nurse, His parents and kids live there too. The A-A? Cars and women come and go. His kids with the visiting Moms, I think. Tough to figure the family dynamic there. Who's kids do you think would have the better attitude towards education?

Seems like a discussion for it's own thread, but that is a very small subset to draw anything from. The non-immigrant black families I know are hard workers in trade jobs generally. They hark on education for their children. I find this anti-trade career a bit odd (they all do pretty well overall) as it's common for most trade workers I know, but they fall in with that same attitude of don't destroy your body when you can just use your mind.

For mine, it is a given that you cannot rightly comment on anthing you haven't seen, read or heard, because, well, you haven't seen, read or heard it.

So if I post a link to a video that is an hour long on a topic that would otherwise be a good discussion based on that same topic, no one should comment or ask for specifics in regards to the video until they have personally put in the time I have to watch it? Since there are multiple topics by the same content creator, maybe some videos would be more enticing to users here, and a small introduction to the contents that those videos go into wouldn't be so much of a bother for the poster to give a sentence or two explaining?

It's an open forum, so you can drop your suggestions and let people make their own decisions. I just don't understand the disdain for any questions in regards to the stuff inside the video. Don't want to answer questions? Say that. But it makes a forum based discussion pretty weird if we are just going to start sharing our playlist and complaining if people ask what is in it.

 

[smartcooky]

So if I post a link to a video that is an hour long on a topic that would otherwise be a good discussion based on that same topic, no one should comment or ask for specifics in regards to the video until they have personally put in the time I have to watch it?

That would be up to you. I would not be prepared to comment on the CONTENT of the video unless I have seen it. For mine, that is just a given minimum standard for any debate.

My objection, however, is the knee-jerk criticism of the OP for not presenting everything on a silver platter for the potential viewer, and then, as Mumbles said the preening about how great they are for not watching a video, in a thread about the video.

Since there are multiple topics by the same content creator, maybe some videos would be more enticing to users here, and a small introduction to the contents that those videos go into wouldn't be so much of a bother for the poster to give a sentence or two explaining?

Err, did you actually read the OP?

 

[psionl0]

Same applies to ALL video content

Titanic (all the movies and documentaries)
Summary: Big boat hits iceberg and sinks. Many people die.

Wonders of Life (Prof Brian Cox)
Summary: 4.5 billion years ago, the solar system is formed, then life starts.

Even in pure fiction...

The Martian
Summary: Fictional astronaut gets stranded on mars, and they rescue him.

So yeah, so all that story about how Watney was supposed to have got stranded, how he did the science and the math to enable him to survive, how he and the science guys figure out how to communicate and how to get him back, all clickbait, right?

A summary might give you the bare basics of what happened, but it does not truly represent the substance of the video. The joy of video is not just the information it imparts, its the way that information is presented.

If that is the best you can do when summarizing videos then you might as well not bother posting YouTube links at all.

yt;dw didn't become a meme in this forum for nothing. Too many people post links without drawing attention to the salient points they want to discuss. Some even post just the YouTube without any comment whatsoever.

It's as bad as linking to a lengthy document without any comment (except that you can't even scan YouTube). I have even seen worse. One poster linked to a web site full of documents and refused to even name the document he wanted to discuss!

 

[zooterkin]

While I agree 100% with you that the guy behind was an arrogant tool, you should never, ever be out on the road on a bike wearing headphones.

At our Pony Club, we have banned the wearing of head phones and ear buds on our grounds, because a 98 lb teenage child who does not hear the shouted warnings to get out of the way of a 2000lb galloping horse is a very dangerous situation, and if there is a collision, it will be no contest.

Who in the story is wearing headphones whilst riding a bike?

 

[smartcooky]

Who in the story is wearing headphones whilst riding a bike?

Sheesh mate. Watch the video and read the bloody post I was responding to!!!

If you BOTHERED to watch the video, you would have heard him talking about how she had headphones on

Its about 2 min in

(You see, this is what happens when you comment on a video without watching first - you make a fool of yourself)

 

[smartcooky]

yt;dw didn't become a meme in this forum for nothing. Too many people post links without drawing attention to the salient points they want to discuss. Some even post just the YouTube without any comment whatsoever.

It's as bad as linking to a lengthy document without any comment (except that you can't even scan YouTube). I have even seen worse. One poster linked to a web site full of documents and refused to even name the document he wanted to discuss!

None of that happened here, so your post is irrelevant!

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Sheesh mate. Watch the video and read the bloody post I was responding to!!!

If you BOTHERED to watch the video, you would have heard him talking about how she had headphones on

Its about 2 min in

(You see, this is what happens when you comment on a video without watching first - you make a fool of yourself)

Check it out again. He was on the bike and ran down a pedestrian who had headphones on. He was riding the bike. She was on foot.

 

[psionl0]

None of that happened here, so your post is irrelevant!

Yes I know, there is no OP. This thread starts at post #2.

 

[smartcooky]

Check it out again. He was on the bike and ran down a pedestrian who had headphones on. He was riding the bike. She was on foot.

Yep, exactly... she had headphones on.

At no stage did he say she was a pedestrian, I understand her to also be on bike (as did planigale, the person I was responding to).

 

[Thermal]

Yep, exactly... she had headphones on.

At no stage did he say she was a pedestrian, I understand her to also be on bike (as did planigale, the person I was responding to).

No, she was a jogger. I think that's what's causing the confusion. You said:

While I agree 100% with you that the guy behind was an arrogant tool, you should never, ever be out on the road on a bike wearing headphones.

She was not on a bike, but he was. Also, I think they were on a narrow bike/jogging path, not a road, because he said he had no choice but to hit her because there was not enough room for him to pass her.

eta: actually, he doesn't say she was a jogger, or on a bike, or anything. I must have assumed she was jogging because he overtook her and collided with her, being on a faster moving vehicle. He would have had no reason to collide with another bike coming up from behind, although he might with a slower moving person on foot.

 

[smartcooky]

She was not on a bike, but he was. Also, I think they were on a narrow bike/jogging path, not a road, because he said he had no choice but to hit her because there was not enough room for him to pass her.

eta: actually, he doesn't say she was a jogger, or on a bike, or anything. I must have assumed she was jogging because he overtook her and collided with her, being on a faster moving vehicle. He would have had no reason to collide with another bike coming up from behind, although he might with a slower moving person on foot.

I assumed she was on a bike and he was catching her because of the dynamics of the story he was telling. If she was a jogger, and he only started calling out 15m away, he would have crashed into her in a couple of seconds, and certainly, so quickly that he could not have called out another three times.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

What.... 15m is 45 feet, I can do a lot of yelling in the time it takes me to ride 45 feet.

 

[smartcooky]

What.... 15m is 45 feet, I can do a lot of yelling in the time it takes me to ride 45 feet.

Well, he did not say she was jogging, you just assumed that, and I assumed she was on a bike like he was.

Neither of us is wrong, and neither of us is right. Its not important to me, but if its important to you, just write him and ask... I don't really care one way or the other.

 

[zooterkin]

Sheesh mate. Watch the video and read the bloody post I was responding to!!!

If you BOTHERED to watch the video, you would have heard him talking about how she had headphones on

Its about 2 min in

(You see, this is what happens when you comment on a video without watching first - you make a fool of yourself)

Yes, the runner was possibly wearing headphones, not the (idiotic) bike rider who rode into her.

ETA: You’re right, it isn’t stated that she is running, nor that she’s on a bike. However, I don’t think the story makes any sense if she’s also on a bike (not that it makes a lot of sense otherwise).