# Video Frustration



## PhotonGuy (Feb 20, 2019)

I recently had a post removed from the forum that had a link to a video because the video was monetized. On this site you cannot post monetized videos. I can see why they might not allow it but this is nonetheless frustrating because they're lots of very good, very informative videos out there that I would like to share but that happen to be monetized.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 20, 2019)

So become a supporting member.


----------



## jks9199 (Feb 21, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> I recently had a post removed from the forum that had a link to a video because the video was monetized. On this site you cannot post monetized videos. I can see why they might not allow it but this is nonetheless frustrating because they're lots of very good, very informative videos out there that I would like to share but that happen to be monetized.


But why should the board owners here send money their way? 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 21, 2019)

'monetized'...….. good grief. That's a mangling of the English language which puts the teeth on edge.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 21, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> 'monetized'...….. good grief. That's a mangling of the English language which puts the teeth on edge.



Take it up with YouTube. It's their word.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 21, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Take it up with YouTube. It's their word.




Ah well lots of things wrong with them. Bad martial arts videos being the least of the them.


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Feb 21, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> I would like to share ...


What's your purpose of sharing? Do you have anything that you are interested to discuss?


----------



## Steve (Feb 21, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> 'monetized'...….. good grief. That's a mangling of the English language which puts the teeth on edge.


I'm pretty sure the term "monetize" is older than anyone on this forum.  Even you.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Feb 21, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> 'monetized'...….. good grief. That's a mangling of the English language which puts the teeth on edge.





Steve said:


> I'm pretty sure the term "monetize" is older than anyone on this forum.  Even you.



I had to google it...I have no clue what's a reliable etymology site, so I checked about 10 different ones. They all put the word as coming from latin, in the mid to late 19th century.


----------



## Steve (Feb 21, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I had to google it...I have no clue what's a reliable etymology site, so I checked about 10 different ones. They all put the word as coming from latin, in the mid to late 19th century.


I think it became more popular in the mid 20th, but from Google, it was first used in the mid to late 1800s.  Either way, it predates YouTube.  It would be hilarious if it was coined by a Brit.  

This is a good reminder that typing with a British accent doesn't mean one is an expert on the language.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I had to google it...I have no clue what's a reliable etymology site, so I checked about 10 different ones. They all put the word as coming from latin, in the mid to late 19th century.




From the Latin moneta meaning money presumably, the Oxford English Dictionary ( a very reputable source doesn't have anything for monetized)There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days, 'paid for' would do better than monetize. If the OP had said his link was removed because you had to pay to watch the video it doesn't sound clunky and pretentious. 
This is a brilliant site for anything to do with the English language, I am a subscriber but you can use the dictionary and the other features for free. Home : Oxford English Dictionary


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days


Not an increase.  It's been happening for a while now. It's gotten worse sense the Internet.  Internet gave live to a bunch of things that needed to be named and marketed.  For me all videos are "monetized"  or at least hast the potential to be.  If you do martial arts and have a video of your school then you are marketing your school which help bring new students to your school.   Even if you don't have a school you can show a video that drives people to a website to see more videos and when you get to that website you get exposed to ads. So in that case the video is helping to create money.

The only real difference is who is taking advantage of the money potential of their videos and who isn't..  Here's a good example.  The more good videos that are posted to MT the more people will come to MT because it has good videos and cuts down on the time it would take to search for that type of video.  So the videos that are posted here draw people to the website and expose people to the adds on the website.   Video has just been "Monetized"  The question is.  Is MT taking advantage of that or is it just letting it go by.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> Not an increase.  It's been happening for a while now. It's gotten worse sense the Internet.  Internet gave live to a bunch of things that needed to be named and marketed.  For me all videos are "monetized"  or at least hast the potential to be.  If you do martial arts and have a video of your school then you are marketing your school which help bring new students to your school.   Even if you don't have a school you can show a video that drives people to a website to see more videos and when you get to that website you get exposed to ads. So in that case the video is helping to create money.
> 
> The only real difference is who is taking advantage of the money potential of their videos and who isn't..  Here's a good example.  The more good videos that are posted to MT the more people will come to MT because it has good videos and cuts down on the time it would take to search for that type of video.  So the videos that are posted here draw people to the website and expose people to the adds on the website.   Video has just been "Monetized"  The question is.  Is MT taking advantage of that or is it just letting it go by.




I very rarely watch martial arts videos, preferring to watch things live. I have never come onto MT looking to watch videos either. I think they are mostly a waste of time but then I'm not a visual learner, I can't learn anything from just watching. 
Anyway I was complaining about using the word not the actual practice of earning money from videos.


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

You guys sound like every old person ever complaining about change.  Go ahead and refer to something as newfangled gobbledygook, and we can wrap this thread up. 

Until someone knocks William Shakespeare off the top of the hill for inventing new words, I remain both unimpressed and unworried about the consistent, continual evolution of the English language.


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> From the Latin moneta meaning money presumably, the Oxford English Dictionary ( a very reputable source doesn't have anything for monetized)There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days, 'paid for' would do better than monetize. If the OP had said his link was removed because you had to pay to watch the video it doesn't sound clunky and pretentious.
> This is a brilliant site for anything to do with the English language, I am a subscriber but you can use the dictionary and the other features for free. Home : Oxford English Dictionary


Home : Oxford English Dictionary

From the OED, it looks like your beloved dictionary references the term being used as early as 1867.  Perhaps your issue is that you are using the dictionary incorrectly.

*monetize, v.*
*Pronunciation:*
Brit. /ˈmʌnᵻtʌɪz/
,
U.S. /ˈmɑnəˌtaɪz/
*Forms:*  18– *monetise*, 18– *monetize*. (Show More)
*Frequency (in current use):
Origin: *A borrowing from Latin, combined with an English element. *Etymons:* Latin _monēta_  , -ize suffix.
*Etymology: * < classical Latin _monēta_ money n.   + -ize suffix. Compare French _monétiser_   (1818 in sense ‘to make (paper money) into legal tender’). Compare also monetization n., and slightly earlier demonetize v.
_N.E.D._ (1907) gives only the pronunciation (m_ǫ_·n_ĭ_təiz) /ˈmɒnɪtaɪz/.
... (Show More)
_Economics_.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Ah well lots of things wrong with them. Bad martial arts videos being the least of the them.


Yes there are tons of bad martial arts videos on youtube, but there's the good ones too. If you're an experienced martial artist and if you dig deep enough you can find them.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 22, 2019)

Kung Fu Wang said:


> What's your purpose of sharing? Do you have anything that you are interested to discuss?


Yes there is lots of stuff Im interested in discussing but sometimes it works much better if I show something with a video rather than trying to explain it. I like to share because sometimes you do find really good videos on youtube, and not necessarily martial arts videos, videos about other stuff too. Also I like to get feedback on videos from other users on this site.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> I very rarely watch martial arts videos, preferring to watch things live. I have never come onto MT looking to watch videos either. I think they are mostly a waste of time but then I'm not a visual learner, I can't learn anything from just watching.
> Anyway I was complaining about using the word not the actual practice of earning money from videos.


Same thing. Word doesn't match or make sense when you break it down.  Like monitizing drawing skills or teaching skills.  It's not accurate just catchy.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> If you're an experienced martial artist and if you dig deep enough you can find them.



Why would I want to spend hours looking for videos when I could be training?


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

Steve said:


> You guys sound like every old person ever complaining about change.  Go ahead and refer to something as newfangled gobbledygook, and we can wrap this thread up.
> 
> Until someone knocks William Shakespeare off the top of the hill for inventing new words, I remain both unimpressed and unworried about the consistent, continual evolution of the English language.




When people who don't know any better are using the wrong words, new or not, which don't mean what they think they do, then they are asking to be ripped. Making up new words is fine but using words, new or otherwise incorrectly ( ie different from the accepted meaning of the word) gives the impression that the writer is an ignoramus and conveys totally the wrong context to the reader. Make up a word by all means, decide what it means but don't then use it to mean something completely different.
25 Common Words That You’ve Got Wrong


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> When people who don't know any better are using the wrong words, new or not, which don't mean what they think they do, then they are asking to be ripped. Making up new words is fine but using words, new or otherwise incorrectly ( ie different from the accepted meaning of the word) gives the impression that the writer is an ignoramus and conveys totally the wrong context to the reader. Make up a word by all means, decide what it means but don't then use it to mean something completely different.
> 25 Common Words That You’ve Got Wrong


I'm glad you acknowledge the term and are now arguing it is just being misapplied.  So, let's talk about that. 

Reviewing the Oxford English Dictionary, the correct definition is number 3, which has been in common use for only 20 years.   But in fairness, can be seen as a slightly different interpretation of the primary definition.  So, in terms of the history of the English language, sure this definition is young.  But it's still 20 years.  What's your threshold?


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Why would I want to spend hours looking for videos when I could be training?


It doesn't always take hours to find a good MA video.
Besides, as awesome as it might be you just can't train all the time, got to rest and recover.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> Besides, as awesome as it might be you just can't train all the time, got to rest and recover.



Mmm let me think about this, I train and coach, ref and judge, I take one Rainbow unit, two Brownie and one Guide one. I have a fund raising coffee morning on Thursday, planning meeting on Friday, Division meeting the next Monday I have the garden to sort, shopping to do, housework, I like reading, I knit, I'm waiting for my granddaughter to arrive in a couple of weeks so I've been knitting blankets, shawls and baby clothes. I also knit toys to sell. I take my 91 year old father out to do his shopping, banking etc, I travel three hours to see my daughter and son in law, I go to the gym, I help with security and related matters in Jewish schools/homes etc.

Just when do you think I have the time to sit and trawl through tacky martial arts videos to look for a rare grain of gold??


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Mmm let me think about this, I train and coach, ref and judge, I take one Rainbow unit, two Brownie and one Guide one. I have a fund raising coffee morning on Thursday, planning meeting on Friday, Division meeting the next Monday I have the garden to sort, shopping to do, housework, I like reading, I knit, I'm waiting for my granddaughter to arrive in a couple of weeks so I've been knitting blankets, shawls and baby clothes. I also knit toys to sell. I take my 91 year old father out to do his shopping, banking etc, I travel three hours to see my daughter and son in law, I go to the gym, I help with security and related matters in Jewish schools/homes etc.
> 
> Just when do you think I have the time to sit and trawl through tacky martial arts videos to look for a rare grain of gold??


it looks like you might have some time Thursday afternoons, between the coffee fundraiser and the planning meeting on Friday.  And at some point whatever you are planning each Friday will be planned which will give you almost an entire day to watch tacky videos.

Also, I think you are misusing "trawl."  I looked in the OED, and your application of the term is fishy.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Feb 22, 2019)

As mentioned previously just become a supporting member and then post the videos that you want.


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> As mentioned previously just become a supporting member and then post the videos that you want.


Serious question, there have been folks in the past who have tried to become supporting members, and encountered technical issues.  Are those all cleared up now?


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 22, 2019)

Steve said:


> it looks like you might have some time Thursday afternoons, between the coffee fundraiser and the planning meeting on Friday.  And at some point whatever you are planning each Friday will be planned which will give you almost an entire day to watch tacky videos.
> 
> Also, I think you are misusing "trawl."  I looked in the OED, and your application of the term is fishy.



Nope, second definition..... ie 'search thoroughly'  trawl | Definition of trawl in English by Oxford Dictionaries

I have a husband with a heart condition to keep an eye on especially at the moment with England playing the Windies. ( cricket)


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 22, 2019)

Steve said:


> Serious question, there have been folks in the past who have tried to become supporting members, and encountered technical issues.  Are those all cleared up now?



The new owners have, historically, been slower about dealing with things like supporting memberships, but I have not heard of any problems recently.


----------



## CB Jones (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days, 'paid for' would do better than monetize. If the OP had said his link was removed because you had to pay to watch the video it doesn't sound clunky and pretentious.



You dont have to pay to watch the video.

You are paid for posting the video by Youtube....viewing is free

A monetized video is a video you YouTube pays the owner

So he would have had to say....the video was removed because the the owner of the video is being paid by YouTube for its content.

Seems like saying it is monetized is simpler


----------



## Steve (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Nope, second definition..... ie 'search thoroughly'  trawl | Definition of trawl in English by Oxford Dictionaries
> 
> I have a husband with a heart condition to keep an eye on especially at the moment with England playing the Windies. ( cricket)


Oh sure.   Now you're using the living dictionary.   Well, according to Urban dictionary, trawl means...  Well, better not say. 

Besides, the definition you're using has only been recognized by OED since 1980 or so.  Surely that's too new for you.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Why would I want to spend hours looking for videos when I could be training?


Videos can be helpful.  Especially when certain things are being explained.  Videos are just another way to share knowledge.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> ust when do you think I have the time to sit and trawl through tacky martial arts videos to look for a rare grain of gold??


  You wouldn't, but if there was a place that offered quality videos.  This is why youtube has a subscriber feature that allows people to subscribe to videos from sources that the user feels is high quality.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> From the Latin moneta meaning money presumably, the Oxford English Dictionary ( a very reputable source doesn't have anything for monetized)There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days, 'paid for' would do better than monetize. If the OP had said his link was removed because you had to pay to watch the video it doesn't sound clunky and pretentious.
> This is a brilliant site for anything to do with the English language, I am a subscriber but you can use the dictionary and the other features for free. Home : Oxford English Dictionary


Except that's not what "monetized" means. You don't have to pay to watch the video.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 22, 2019)

Steve said:


> Serious question, there have been folks in the past who have tried to become supporting members, and encountered technical issues.  Are those all cleared up now?


I had to have help from an Admin to get it done. I haven't heard from anyone attempting recently, one way or the other.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 22, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Mmm let me think about this, I train and coach, ref and judge, I take one Rainbow unit, two Brownie and one Guide one. I have a fund raising coffee morning on Thursday, planning meeting on Friday, Division meeting the next Monday I have the garden to sort, shopping to do, housework, I like reading, I knit, I'm waiting for my granddaughter to arrive in a couple of weeks so I've been knitting blankets, shawls and baby clothes. I also knit toys to sell. I take my 91 year old father out to do his shopping, banking etc, I travel three hours to see my daughter and son in law, I go to the gym, I help with security and related matters in Jewish schools/homes etc.
> 
> Just when do you think I have the time to sit and trawl through tacky martial arts videos to look for a rare grain of gold??


Well if I could post videos than you could watch them and you wouldn't have to trawl through videos.

The problem is I can't post videos if they're monetized, and most of the good ones are.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 22, 2019)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> As mentioned previously just become a supporting member and then post the videos that you want.


That would no doubt involve making a financial commitment, I spend enough money as it is, as a matter of fact I've been spending too much and have had to cut back.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Except that's not what "monetized" means. You don't have to pay to watch the video.





PhotonGuy said:


> Well if I could post videos than you could watch them and you wouldn't have to trawl through videos.
> 
> The problem is I can't post videos if they're monetized, and most of the good ones are.





PhotonGuy said:


> That would no doubt involve making a financial commitment, I spend enough money as it is, as a matter of fact I've been spending too much and have had to cut back.




Someone thinks you do hence the problem of using the word.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> You wouldn't, but if there was a place that offered quality videos.  This is why youtube has a subscriber feature that allows people to subscribe to videos from sources that the user feels is high quality.



Still don't have time, and I don't learn anything from videos, I'm not a visual learner so complete waste of time for me.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Someone thinks you do hence the problem of using the word.


You only think that because you're not clear on the definition of the word.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> Still don't have time, and I don't learn anything from videos, I'm not a visual learner so complete waste of time for me.


Education research shows that everyone learns more or less the same way for a given task. It's the type of material (information, task ,etc.) being learned that dictates what modality works best. A visual learner is juts someone who tends to do somewhat better where that modality is more useful.

So, while I'm a kinesthetic learner (meaning I'll do a bit better than some folks when kinesthetic learning is being used), verbal delivery (writing/speaking) is still the best way to teach information to me.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> Education research shows that everyone learns more or less the same way for a given task. It's the type of material (information, task ,etc.) being learned that dictates what modality works best. A visual learner is juts someone who tends to do somewhat better where that modality is more useful.
> 
> So, while I'm a kinesthetic learner (meaning I'll do a bit better than some folks when kinesthetic learning is being used), verbal delivery (writing/speaking) is still the best way to teach information to me.




So you think I'm lying about not being able to learn from just watching? Mmm thanks for that.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 23, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> That would no doubt involve making a financial commitment, I spend enough money as it is, as a matter of fact I've been spending too much and have had to cut back.



It's $19.95 a year. If that's going to break the bank, then you probably need to cut back a lot more.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> So you think I'm lying about not being able to learn from just watching? Mmm thanks for that.




so it amuses you to call me a liar, it doesn't get any better doesn't it. I am really disappointed in you.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> so it amuses you to call me a liar, it doesn't get any better doesn't it. I am really disappointed in you.


What amuses me is that you missed everything I said. Really, every part.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Feb 23, 2019)

Steve said:


> Serious question, there have been folks in the past who have tried to become supporting members, and encountered technical issues.  Are those all cleared up now?



I assume so but the supporting membership is run by the ownership ForumFoundry.


----------



## Steve (Feb 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What amuses me is that you missed everything I said. Really, every part.


What amuses me are cat videos.  There are many on YouTube.   I'd post a link to one, but it has been monetized.

Boom, and we are full circle.  You're welcome for getting this back on topic.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What amuses me is that you missed everything I said. Really, every part.



oh course I did, you are never wrong these days, you are now condescending and patronising because, sunshine,  you didn't understand a word of what I wrote instead choosing to post what you thought was a put down about how you 'understand learning' but I obviously don't. It must be fun for you to sit there now laughing at people you used to be one of the guys, it's a shame you aren't now. Well that's you for the ignore bin now. Bye.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 23, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> What amuses me is that you missed everything I said. Really, every part.



oh haha, standard response for the condescending, 'oh I am so amused because you didn't understand what I wrote because I'm so clever' person. No sunshine I didn't misunderstand it, I ignored it totally and took issue with your mansplaining and patronising attitude and look you can use your Mod 'powers on me to shut me up too, isn't that fun.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> oh course I did, you are never wrong these days, you are now condescending and patronising because, sunshine,  you didn't understand a word of what I wrote instead choosing to post what you thought was a put down about how you 'understand learning' but I obviously don't. It must be fun for you to sit there now laughing at people you used to be one of the guys, it's a shame you aren't now. Well that's you for the ignore bin now. Bye.


If that suits you, fine. You seem to think something about me changed when they made me a mod. It didn't, except I'm occasionally a bit slower to enter the fray.


----------



## Steve (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> oh course I did, you are never wrong these days, you are now condescending and patronising because, sunshine,  you didn't understand a word of what I wrote instead choosing to post what you thought was a put down about how you 'understand learning' but I obviously don't. It must be fun for you to sit there now laughing at people you used to be one of the guys, it's a shame you aren't now. Well that's you for the ignore bin now. Bye.


unfortunately you cannot ignore a moderator.  Mechanically, the site doesn't allow it.


----------



## Martial D (Feb 23, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> From the Latin moneta meaning money presumably, the Oxford English Dictionary ( a very reputable source doesn't have anything for monetized)There seems to be an increase of using words wrongly to make what is said sound grander these days, 'paid for' would do better than monetize. If the OP had said his link was removed because you had to pay to watch the video it doesn't sound clunky and pretentious.
> This is a brilliant site for anything to do with the English language, I am a subscriber but you can use the dictionary and the other features for free. Home : Oxford English Dictionary


Language is a living thing. Dictionaries reflect usage, not vice versa.

Horse..then cart.


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> If that suits you, fine. You seem to think something about me changed when they made me a mod. It didn't, except I'm occasionally a bit slower to enter the fray.




so the fact that people are disagreeing with you more now has nothing to do with it, you may not think your posts have changed but they have. You would not have posted up a lecture on how people learn to someone who said they can't learn by watching before you became a Mod, that you did indicates you think you are now superior. Before it would have been 'yeah some people are like that it would have been understanding, now it's just condescending, you've done it to several posters now, as I said it's disappointing. And before you say anything else, it's not a personal attack, it's me saying it's often what happens when people police other people.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> so the fact that people are disagreeing with you more now has nothing to do with it, you may not think your posts have changed but they have. You would not have posted up a lecture on how people learn to someone who said they can't learn by watching before you became a Mod, that you did indicates you think you are now superior. Before it would have been 'yeah some people are like that it would have been understanding, now it's just condescending, you've done it to several posters now, as I said it's disappointing. And before you say anything else, it's not a personal attack, it's me saying it's often what happens when people police other people.


No, you took issue with similar posts of mine long before I became a mod, Tez. You've often referred to any explanation that happens to come from a man, and which happens to have a woman as the intended audience, as "mansplaining". Is it mansplaining when I take the same tone with Jobo (which you can find me doing quite a lot, and he just argues back if he disagrees with what I'm saying, rather than taking offense). And I'm wrong plenty...and am as blind as anyone to when I am.

If you think I've failed to argue with folks in the past, I don't know what to do wit that. I doubt Steve and Drop bear see my past actions that way.


----------



## Steve (Feb 24, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> so the fact that people are disagreeing with you more now has nothing to do with it, you may not think your posts have changed but they have. You would not have posted up a lecture on how people learn to someone who said they can't learn by watching before you became a Mod, that you did indicates you think you are now superior. Before it would have been 'yeah some people are like that it would have been understanding, now it's just condescending, you've done it to several posters now, as I said it's disappointing. And before you say anything else, it's not a personal attack, it's me saying it's often what happens when people police other people.


in your opinion.  You're presuming to speak on behalf of a lot of people here.  Gerry's pretty much the same chronic overexplainer he's always been.  

Also, gerry is a professional trainer, and has particular expertise in the area of adult learning.  I've learned a few things from him and hope he's learned from me, as well, in this area.  So, when he speaks on the topic, he may be mistaken, but I give him the benefit of the doubt because he has credibility in the field.   If you don't see the irony in your current rant, you must be too close to it.


----------



## Steve (Feb 24, 2019)

gpseymour said:


> No, you took issue with similar posts of mine long before I became a mod, Tez. You've often referred to any explanation that happens to come from a man, and which happens to have a woman as the intended audience, as "mansplaining". Is it mansplaining when I take the same tone with Jobo (which you can find me doing quite a lot, and he just argues back if he disagrees with what I'm saying, rather than taking offense). And I'm wrong plenty...and am as blind as anyone to when I am.
> 
> If you think I've failed to argue with folks in the past, I don't know what to do wit that. I doubt Steve and Drop bear see my past actions that way.


You're a jerk, Dent.  A real kneebiter.

I mean, you're a disagreeable cuss.  Always have been.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2019)

Steve said:


> Gerry's pretty much the same chronic overexplainer he's always been.


I think an eye roll would have been a more appropriate emoticon when talking about my chronic overexplaining, Steve. Because there's not an "obvious understatement" emoticon.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2019)

Steve said:


> You're a jerk, Dent.  A real kneebiter.
> 
> I mean, you're a disagreeable cuss.  Always have been.


Um...thanks?


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Feb 24, 2019)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:

Please, keep the conversation polite and respectful.

-Brian R. VanCise
-MartialTalk Moderator-*


----------



## Tez3 (Feb 24, 2019)

Steve said:


> in your opinion.  You're presuming to speak on behalf of a lot of people here.  Gerry's pretty much the same chronic overexplainer he's always been.
> 
> Also, gerry is a professional trainer, and has particular expertise in the area of adult learning.  I've learned a few things from him and hope he's learned from me, as well, in this area.  So, when he speaks on the topic, he may be mistaken, but I give him the benefit of the doubt because he has credibility in the field.   If you don't see the irony in your current rant, you must be too close to it.




My dear, it's not a rant, it's an explanation. Don't read into my words more than there is.  'Over explaining' to people is most often seen as patronising. If I want to know something I will ask, I don't mind not knowing about something and feel fine about asking so I can learn but please don't go on about something when not asked. 
 I'm also not speaking for people, I asked him to consider why people were arguing with him more than before which they actually are.

Please note chart and the bit that says 'did she ask you to explain?' I did not ask for an explanation and 'did you ask if she needed it explained.' I did not ask.




 

Please take this in the spirit it is offered, a light hearted nudge to chaps out there, it will help in all relationships.


----------



## PhotonGuy (Feb 24, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> It's $19.95 a year. If that's going to break the bank, then you probably need to cut back a lot more.


That might not sound like much but little expenses add up.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Feb 24, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> That might not sound like much but little expenses add up.


Out of curiosity, and bearing in mind that I have no say in the price, or gain from any changes, so this is pure curiosity: Considering the amount that you use this site, what would you consider a fair price? How much would you pay for something that you use the same amount you are on martialtalk, given your current budget?


----------



## Steve (Feb 24, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> My dear, it's not a rant, it's an explanation. Don't read into my words more than there is.  'Over explaining' to people is most often seen as patronising. If I want to know something I will ask, I don't mind not knowing about something and feel fine about asking so I can learn but please don't go on about something when not asked.
> I'm also not speaking for people, I asked him to consider why people were arguing with him more than before which they actually are.
> 
> Please note chart and the bit that says 'did she ask you to explain?' I did not ask for an explanation and 'did you ask if she needed it explained.' I did not ask.
> ...


come on, tez.   Don't momsplain mansplaining to me,.

Also, regarding the term mansplaining, I really hate it when people mangle the English language by making up or misusing words.


----------



## Steve (Feb 24, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Out of curiosity, and bearing in mind that I have no say in the price, or gain from any changes, so this is pure curiosity: Considering the amount that you use this site, what would you consider a fair price? How much would you pay for something that you use the same amount you are on martialtalk, given your current budget?


I don't think this is the right question.   Martialtalk wouldn't exist without posters, and I doubt it would survive as a premium, subscription only site.  The right question is, what features would add enough value to the free experience to make it worth subscribing?  Right now, frankly, the only reason to pay is out of some sense of obligation. Posting vids isn't much value.  I can just post a URL instead.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Feb 24, 2019)

Steve said:


> I don't think this is the right question.   Martialtalk wouldn't exist without posters, and I doubt it would survive as a premium, subscription based site.  The right question is, what features would add enough value to the free experience to make it worth subscribing.  Right now, frankly, the only reason to pay is out of some sense of obligation.


Well, then I have two questions. 
1: What features would have to be added right now to make it worth it for you?
2: What current features would have to be placed behind a paywall for you to start paying for it? Or would you (assuming it would somehow survive) stop using the site rather than pay?

FWIW, so it doesn't seem like I'm trying to pitch anything: my answers are: 
1: Be able to sign up easily. I tried a couple time a few years back and couldn't, so I gave up on it. The main reason I was trying to sign up was not obligation, but as a way to show gratitude for the use I've gained from the site. I've since decided to find other ways to show my gratitude. I still think it's a good way to do it, assuming there aren't any issues doing so.
2: It would depend on the price, honestly. I can't say what price I would pay for it, until it happened. But I would get resentful to a site for being forced to pay for something that I used to have access to for free.


----------



## Steve (Feb 24, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Well, then I have two questions.
> 1: What features would have to be added right now to make it worth it for you?
> 2: What current features would have to be placed behind a paywall for you to start paying for it? Or would you (assuming it would somehow survive) stop using the site rather than pay?
> 
> ...


1: oh, I don't  know.  Quality, interesting original content?   Although if YouTube red couldn't get folks to subscribe, and Facebook is free to use, honestly, guilt might be the best hope.

2: nothing I can think of.  I'd probably take it as a hint and find a free site.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Feb 24, 2019)

Steve said:


> 1: oh, I don't  know.  Quality, interesting original content?   Although if YouTube red couldn't get folks to subscribe, and Facebook is free to use, honestly, guilt might be the best hope.


One of the people at my dojo, who practices BJJ, said there's a forum he pays for specifically because it has a library of different BJJ tech's, in a ton of different situations. He pays not for the forum, but for the specific knowledge he can get from it.

I could see myself paying readily for a site that offers a similar thing for a wide range of martial arts. Not necessarily entire systems, but good-quality, vetted videos on the basics of as many systems as they could, with core techniques/philosophies/methods, done by 'experts' in the system. I'm not sure how many people would share interest in something like that, though.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 24, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> Well, then I have two questions.
> 1: What features would have to be added right now to make it worth it for you?
> 2: What current features would have to be placed behind a paywall for you to start paying for it? Or would you (assuming it would somehow survive) stop using the site rather than pay?
> 
> ...


I paid for much the same reason, and agree that more folks would pay if it was easier. In fact, I know that to be true. How do I know? I can think of at least 4 people (current members) off the top of my head who are not "supporting members" who have mentioned trying to become one. So, for a significant minority, they'd pay if it worked like it's supposed to.

I would never have signed up if the site had much restriction on free membership. I think there was a better distinction in the past when this forum was REALLY busy (Bob seems to have gotten it up and running at a time when people felt more of a need for a specific forum), because there was an entire area where members discussed things that weren't open to all. With something like that, if the right people are members, significant value builds up in that content, without much effort. Some negotiated discounts, perhaps including some deals on MA gear, might be better enticements these days. Also, if there were any MT gatherings (like multi-discipline MA seminars), discounts there, or even supporting-members-only sessions would add value to the membership.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Feb 24, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> That might not sound like much but little expenses add up.



Sure. However, that's pretty much your issue. The rules haven't changed. If you want to make commercial posts, scrape up the $19.95. Or don't do it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Feb 25, 2019)

PhotonGuy said:


> That might not sound like much but little expenses add up.


I've been there. There have definitely been times when $20 was more than I was willing to spend on something like supporting a site, because it was $20 I'd have to not have for food or gas. That it would cover a year wouldn't have been material, because I'd have had to pay that $20 all at once.

It wasn't a fun place to be. I hope your current situation is less stressful for you than what I experienced.


----------

