# Some thoughts about discussing the martial arts



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 12, 2014)

I've been noticing repeated discussions in this forum along the lines of the following ...

Training method x sucks.

No it doesn't, you just don't understand it right. Here's how it works.

I've heard all that before, and my experience/observations says that it doesn't work.

Well, you're just ignorant then. Or a troll.  It does too work.

Does not.

Uh huh.

Nuh huh.

(Repeat for 20 pages, then start over in the next thread.)

Now, I've been training long enough that I have my own opinions about the efficacy of different training methods. I definitely consider certain training methods suboptimal compared to others. I've seen some training methods that I consider downright detrimental. I'm sure there are people on this forum whose training methods I might have some harsh words for if they asked for my blunt opinion. That said, there are some things I try to keep in mind before getting sucked too far into these kinds of arguments.

There are martial artists I deeply respect who are firm advocates for training methods that I don't care for.
There are plenty of people who could kick my butt who train with methods I don't care for.
I don't know everything. I've changed my mind about the best way to train over the years and I may very well do so again in the future.
I'm here to learn and enjoy the conversation, not to prove how much more I know than other people.
I will never, ever change anyone's mind by calling them ignorant or otherwise insulting them.
If someone doesn't seem to understand my point, I may try rephrasing it in a way that makes more sense to them.
Just because someone doesn't _agree _with me, doesn't mean they don't _understand _my point. (Or that they're stupid or ignorant or a troll)
If the person I'm talking to _does _understand my point, but still doesn't agree with me, it's a waste of time to take offense or to repeat myself endlessly.

Just my thoughts on the matter.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 12, 2014)

BTW, there's a helpful test you can try to determine whether you actually understand the other person's position in an argument (on any subject, not just martial arts).

If you really understand the other person's position, you should be able to restate it in your own words so that the other person will agree: "That's right. That's exactly what I'm saying." For bonus points, you should be able to answer objections to that position in such a way that the other person would agree with.

If you can't do this, then you probably don't understand what you're arguing against and might be better served asking questions to clarify instead.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Nov 12, 2014)

Good points Tony  it is a shame more people do not think like that.
But then where would all the fire and adrenalin infused battle of words go for some people.


----------



## donald1 (Nov 12, 2014)

Perhaps some things work better for some than others or a matter of perspective 
None the less it should still be important to stop arguing and avoid insulting others. 
Best of luck


----------



## Shai Hulud (Nov 12, 2014)

donald1 said:


> Perhaps some things work better for some than others or a matter of perspective
> None the less it should still be important to stop arguing and avoid insulting others.
> Best of luck


My thoughts exactly. Different strokes for different folks.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 12, 2014)

Its a Martial arts forum there is only so much you can talk about before you start t recycle old topics.  Thats one of the reasons I liked having other topic areas to discuss like politics ect it changes the pace.  Almost all martal arts forums have this.  Its the nature of the beast when you restrict a forum to one narrow line of discussion.  If nobody commented in the repeat discussions this place would be dead


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Nov 12, 2014)

donald1 said:


> Perhaps some things work better for some than others or a matter of perspective
> None the less it should still be important to stop arguing and avoid insulting others.
> Best of luck



I have no problem with arguing, necessarily. We can learn some good things through argument. I just don't think it's helpful to be insulting or to repeat the same argument endlessly without bringing something new to it.


----------



## EddieCyrax (Nov 12, 2014)

But you forgot that everyone "knows" they are an expert on all topics, and their opinion is the only one that counts.

Why doesn't the population see the world through my eyes...  Sure would make the world a scarier place.....ha ha ha


----------



## Buka (Nov 12, 2014)

The real question is - does the anti-grappling techniques hidden in the  kata of non-traditional martial arts have more to do with what God  wanted or is it a result of a wanna-be by-partisan elected official  working with a congress slanted against him dealing with the milieu of  gay marriage as it applies to illegal immigration and the use of GMOs in feeding said immigrants? 

Discuss amongst yourselves. 

I think we would all be better served listening to, and giving serious consideration, to what Tony has said. Just a thought.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 12, 2014)

Buka said:


> The real question is - does the anti-grappling techniques hidden in the  kata of non-traditional martial arts have more to do with what God  wanted or is it a result of a wanna-be by-partisan elected official  working with a congress slanted against him dealing with the milieu of  gay marriage as it applies to illegal immigration and the use of GMOs in feeding said immigrants?



well that would depend on whether or not you were talking organic on Tuesdays with a cheetah named Horatio who was rather fond of roasted plum pudding


----------



## Kung Fu Wang (Nov 12, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> Training method x sucks.
> 
> No it doesn't, you just don't understand it right. *Here's how it works.*



What should you do if someone doesn't like your training method? Should you spend 20 pages discussion to prove that your training method is valid?

IMO, you are not trying to sell your train method online for money. Whether someone likes it or not will have nothing to do with your bank account. When you have spent more time and explain in more detail, if you find out that someone still doesn't like it, in Chinese term, it's called to "use your hot face to touch someone's cold butt". Why do you want to do that for? Will it be better to end like the following conversation?

A: Training method x sucks.
B: Let's just agree our disagreement.

This way, all arguments can be prevented in the early stage.


----------



## Buka (Nov 13, 2014)

Xue Sheng said:


> well that would depend on whether or not you were talking organic on Tuesdays with a cheetah named Horatio who was rather fond of roasted plum pudding



Maybe most names are fine for cheetahs, but I really like Horatio. Plum pudding....now we're talking.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 13, 2014)

Buka said:


> Maybe most names are fine for cheetahs, but I really like Horatio. Plum pudding....now we're talking.



How are you with bread pudding... I'm making that this weekend 

But to the topic at hand

I use to argue on sites but then I realized it was a complete waste of time and now I tend to go with "you can't argue with an idiot, they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience" :asian:


----------



## Elbowgrease (Nov 22, 2014)

If everyone knew that they don't know anything, the whole world would be perfect. 
Maybe. 
I generally try not to look at things that are going to get me heated that are completely out of my control, sometimes it's just better to remain ignorant. 
I've pounded my head against enough brick walls to believe that it's probably not the most effective training method, doesn't mean I don't still do it, sometimes brick walls can be pretty deceptive. I guess that for any individual, when the time is right, they may also decide that they've pursued this training method far enough.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 1, 2014)

I think some of the discussion would go quite a bit smoother around here if people weren't so sensitive about their art of choice. I've been in plenty of discussions where my art has been downplayed or its flaws pointed out, and I respectfully responded to either correct or disagree with the statements made.

Do the same thing to some other arts around here and a certain segment of people just go a little bit crazy. It's quite the spectacle to see. Sometimes I picture some posters foaming at the mouth while they type their responses. Always gets a little chuckle out of me.

Some consistency and far less hypocrisy would be nice.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 1, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Do the same thing to some other arts around here and a certain segment of people just go a little bit crazy. It's quite the spectacle to see. Sometimes I picture some posters foaming at the mouth while they type their responses. Always gets a little chuckle out of me.



And that kind of everyday smug sadism expressed on a forum is known as... ?
No reason to tiptoe around the issue, your intentions are an open book. Zip up and find something better to do for cripe`s sake.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 1, 2014)

The post above is a perfect illustration of my point.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

I think the problem often comes when people disbelieve posters when that poster gives either their opinion or their experience. For example if I post that I run five miles every morning I don't expect someone to then post that I don't/can't run five miles a day because it's not possible for anyone to run five miles. If I post up that in my opinion running five miles a day stops you catching colds, I'd expect someone to disagree, post up proof even but not call me a liar, I'm not lying, it's my opinion which can be wrong or mistaken but it is a genuinely held one. Likewise with any martial art, most of us hold genuine opinion about our arts, we certainly know what we've been taught, now that may not be what some consider correct teaching or  it may not be as effective as we hope but it doesn't make it impossible or a lie. I haven't found people sensitive over their arts, I have found that if a poster continuously pokes people it gets annoying. People don't froth at the mouth, they get frustrated and often rather sad that a decent discussion cannot be held. I get sad rather than angry that a potentially good discussion goes off into the wilderness.
We have to work on a certain trust here as we are all far away. We have to take it on trust that we do what we say we do, so when continuously asked for 'proof' of what we say in such a way that it seems like we are being accused of lying it _is_ provocative. We may be mistaken but we aren't lying.  
One thing to embrace is the huge variety of styles and training methods the posters on here have. Take karate for example we have posters from many different 'groups' with different training styles, different thoughts and different opinions on their styles, they have different aims when they train but all under the umbrella of Karate. Not one of them represents how it 'must/should' be, you watch one train it doesn't mean all train that way, there is no representative that does the totally 'correct' Karate, it's all Karate! Some look similar, some look as if they are something else.  Accepting differences is part of being able to debate, accepting that because one place does Bo training doesn't mean that all have to or that there is no Bo training in Karate. If someone tells me that in their club/school it's the norm to train with the Bo, I cannot then tell him he _doesn't_ can I because he obviously does.  I don't know whether it's a part of their style or whether it was in days gone by but I don't disbelieve he does it.

I'm very '_aware'_ how much I don't know, it's one of the reasons I come here, I love martial arts, all the ones I know about, I'm sure there's plenty I haven't heard about too. I like finding the differences and I like seeing the familiarities, my '_English_' respect  is not a derogatory one.


----------



## MJS (Dec 1, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I've been noticing repeated discussions in this forum along the lines of the following ...
> 
> Training method x sucks.
> 
> ...



Yup, in a nutshell.   Speaking for myself, there are some arts out there, that I am just not fond of, and highly doubt I ever will be.  So much to the point, that if "X" art was THE only art left to train in, I'd probably quit training.  However, I don't, or at least try not to run around, and bash "X" art.  Hey, if someone wants to train in it, rock on! LOL!


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> The post above is a perfect illustration of my point.




You were being provocative in sneering at posters on here, Cirdan isn't being 'sensitive'. You have admitted you like to
laugh at posters you have wound up.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

MJS said:


> Yup, in a nutshell.   Speaking for myself, there are some arts out there, that I am just not fond of, and highly doubt I ever will be.  So much to the point, that if "X" art was THE only art left to train in, I'd probably quit training.  However, I don't, or at least try not to run around, and bash "X" art.  Hey, if someone wants to train in it, rock on! LOL!




There's some arts I'd like to have tried like Capoeira, I'm not built for it and I don't have rhythm lol but it would have been fun I think. I've no idea whether it's any good for SD or fighting, never had a chance to study it.
I think the problem would be if I started bashing Capoeira from that basis of ignorance, that's when arguments happen because quite rightly a Capoeira stylist would want to take issue with what I said. Always wanted to try Kendo too, here it's expensive and it's a bit far away from where I am. Is there an old person's style anywhere


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

If the posts were simply 'your training style sucks, my way is best' it would be easier to understand but when the posts are 'no you don't train that' it's harder to find a common ground for discussion.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

I think the problems are that we're all focused on how bad everyone else is at writing posts, and don't consider our own contributions to the ongoing arguments.  A little more introspection and a lot less finger pointing would do us all some good, I think. That includes me. 

It's certainly not all Hanzou, Tez, Ballen, Drop Bear or K-man, either. We all snipe and get petty and perpetuate the arguments.  Being a little more accountable for our own words, and presuming good intent when someone doesn't understand something will really help.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 1, 2014)

Thanks for the dislike Steve, you were saying what about finger pointing? 

Anyway I doubt anyone here is getting wound up about anyone disagreeing or having different point of view. As has been pointed out there is an incredible variety in the arts. Pure falsehoods however deserves to be pointed out and corrected.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Thanks for the dislike Steve, you were saying what about finger pointing?
> 
> Anyway I doubt anyone here is getting wound up about anyone disagreeing or having different point of view. As has been pointed out there is an incredible variety in the arts. Pure falsehoods however deserves to be pointed out and corrected.



Tis true, we've all seen the 'my style is best' arguments, they tend to descend into a school child spat, what we've had recently is a different kettle of fish, the 'no you don't do that' and the 'your style doesn't do that' argument. It's bound to have people feeling exasperated because when they *know *they are doing something it's difficult to understand why someone would say they aren't.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Thanks for the dislike Steve, you were saying what about finger pointing?
> 
> Anyway I doubt anyone here is getting wound up about anyone disagreeing or having different point of view. As has been pointed out there is an incredible variety in the arts. Pure falsehoods however deserves to be pointed out and corrected.


I disliked your post.  But, it doesn't mean I dislike you. 

Apparently, I wasn't clear.  My post had nothing to do with finger pointing.  My opinion is that when you don't get the response you were expecting, rather than attack the messenger, maybe ask yourself a few questions: 

Do I really understand the other person's post?
Is there any merit to his position?
Was I as clear as I intended? 
Am I being a jerk?
Really, there are a gazillion good questions to ask yourself, provided the key pronouns being used are "I" or "me."


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 1, 2014)

Steve said:


> I disliked your post.  But, it doesn't mean I dislike you.
> 
> Apparently, I wasn't clear.  My post had nothing to do with finger pointing.  My opinion is that when you don't get the response you were expecting, rather than attack the messenger, maybe ask yourself a few questions:
> 
> ...



Wrong your post definately had a lot to do with finger pointing. Read it again and apply the words "I" and "me" as well as some of that good old introspection.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 1, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> Tis true, we've all seen the 'my style is best' arguments, they tend to descend into a school child spat, what we've had recently is a different kettle of fish, the 'no you don't do that' and the 'your style doesn't do that' argument. It's bound to have people feeling exasperated because when they *know *they are doing something it's difficult to understand why someone would say they aren't.



It is very easy to deny something when it doesn`t fit into one`s little neat view of the world. Taking off the blinders is part of what you have to grow as a martial artist methinks.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2014)

Steve said:


> I disliked your post.  But, it doesn't mean I dislike you.
> 
> Apparently, I wasn't clear.  My post had nothing to do with finger pointing.  My opinion is that when you don't get the response you were expecting, rather than attack the messenger, maybe ask yourself a few questions:
> 
> ...


Sometimes however people are just wrong.  No amount of asking yourself question can change that


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 1, 2014)

We must all remember that our experiences in the arts are different and have different lengths of time involved. Our time of entering the arts is also different. Thereby what our perception   will be different depending on these facts.
Now we all sometimes make statements that are incorrect and it is only human for someone to try to explain our mistakes but we should understand that sometimes no one wins and argument or is able to change another point of view.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2014)

tshadowchaser said:


> We must all remember that our experiences in the arts are different and have different lengths of time involved. Our time of entering the arts is also different. Thereby what our perception   will be different depending on these facts.
> Now we all sometimes make statements that are incorrect and it is only human for someone to try to explain our mistakes but we should understand that sometimes no one wins and argument or is able to change another point of view.


I agree you cant change someones opinion.  When someone is just factually wrong and refuses to acknowledge is where we run into problems.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Wrong your post definately had a lot to do with finger pointing. Read it again and apply the words "I" and "me" as well as some of that good old introspection.


I clicked the "dislike" button on your post, because I dislike it.  I tried to explain why, but I'm not sure I understand what makes you think I am finger pointing.    Could you help me understand how I was finger pointing? I don't see it. 


ballen0351 said:


> Sometimes however people are just wrong.  No amount of asking yourself question can change that


Of course, you're right.  I would say, though, that the discussions we have here are on topics that are nuanced.  It's entirely possible for two people to be saying contradictory things and both be right.  Think about the parable of the blind men and the elephant.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 1, 2014)

My style *is* best.

Best for *me*, though, and it's *my style*-a suit fashioned from a variety of cloths:Judo, Miyama ryu jujutsu, Yoshinkan Aikido, Kyokushin karate, Sosuishitsu Ryu jujutsu, western boxing, Wing Chun, JKD,   some sort of kali I'm just not going to mention (think of that as the suit's lining) and Muay Thai, Tae Kwon Do , Hapkido , a smattering of Kenpo (with dan grades signed by no less than John McSweeney, thank you!)and Brazilian *Zhoozheetsoo* ...maybe a few other things, and maybe not that last one so much (it's *B*asically *J*ust *J*udo  ) but those are the basics. It won't fit _you_-it's tailor made for *me-the famous congenital klutz, * and it suits me just fine

 If people come to me for lessons,I tell them: we're making _their_ suit, with what meager cloth I'm authorized to provide  them. 

And if that seems like "a lot," start martial arts when you're 8, formal lessons when you're 11, and just keep going-move around some so you *have* to change styles a few times, meet friends in other martial arts who want to share, and then get to be 54, and see where you are, 43 years later.....:lfao:-still can't believe I made 3rd dan at anything, never mind anything else.....(and these smileys still suck)

Arguments about which style is best, or which training methods are best, are rather silly-what's best for you, is best for you-people managed to learn and use karate, jujutsu, myriad forms of gung fu and weapons of all kinds, without "fighting" anyone until, well, they _fought_ someone, in the only kind of *fight* that really matters, very often: the sort where the winner walks away drenched with the loser's blood. Discussions about what we see in videos or photographs-especially photographs-are equally silly and pointless-all too often, we don't know what else was going on, though some videos can be obviously good.....or obviously bad. People also study martial arts for a variety of different reasons: an aesthetic might appeal- I actually know someone who achieved dan grading in aikido because they wanted to wear a hakama!


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> It is very easy to deny something when it doesn`t fit into one`s little neat view of the world. Taking off the blinders is part of what you have to grow as a martial artist methinks.


I completely agree.  Where I think we (humans) often fail is we apply a standard to others we ourselves cannot sustain.  We judge others by what they do say (or write) and we judge ourselves by what we meant to say.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> I agree you cant change someones opinion.  When someone is just factually wrong and refuses to acknowledge is where we run into problems.




This is true also, what we keep running into is something we can't adjust to. We can understand another's point of view re training and style, we can say 'yes I can see you do that but we do this', we can discuss much and agree to differ. Where it all goes pear shaped is when a poster refuses categorically to accept that we do something the way we do it. We could well be wrong in the way we do  techniques, we may do it differently, we may be mistaken in why we do it, it may not work in the way we want it to, all good areas for discussion BUT we cannot discuss anything when the poster just says 'no you don't do it'. There is no room for discussion if someone flatly refuses to believe you do what you do. This is leading to frustration, combined with the constant badgering to 'prove it' is destroying the chances of having a discussion.
It's not a case of the majority of us not understanding, we read the posts and consider how to reply, we do so explaining what we do and our thinking behind it. When that's not accepted we explain again, perhaps from a  different angle, perhaps someone will add more information, another a different experience and still it's all of who are 'wrong'. I think I can safely say that many of us feel we are being played with, that our genuine wish to communicate is being met with a wish for mischief for want of a better word.
It's not a case of one's right the other wrong but more of a case of cat and mouse, the cat is trying to see how far it can push the mice.
I could be wrong, I often am but this is certainly what it feels like.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2014)

Steve said:


> I would say, though, that the discussions we have here are on topics that are nuanced.  It's entirely possible for two people to be saying contradictory things and both be right.  Think about the parable of the blind men and the elephant.


I agree when the discussion is opinion based.  But when people made definitive statement like "Karate has no throws/Grappling"  Then 10 people with all different backgrounds in several styles of Karate say "no thats not true I do throws in my style."  Then your told no you dont, or well your throws suck so they dont count.  Thats where the issues start.  You can only politely disagree with someone so many times before it just gets silly then you cant tell if the guy really doesn't get it or is just trolling.  Then you look at the body of work and you see the same nonsense in every section of the forum , karate, TKD, Hapkido, MMA, Judo, General thats when you lean more towards trolling then trying to learn.  Like when you post about BJJ I respect your knowledge on the topic because its much greater then mine.  If I said Steve you have no arm bars in BJJ and you said well yes we do then Ill take that at face value.  Others dont give that same respect


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2014)

Steve said:


> I completely agree.  Where I think we (humans) often fail is we apply a standard to others we ourselves cannot sustain.  We judge others by what they do say (or write) and we judge ourselves by what we meant to say.


On a written form of communication what other way can we judge people?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> I agree when the discussion is opinion based.  But when people made definitive statement like "Karate has no throws/Grappling"  Then 10 people with all different backgrounds in several styles of Karate say "no thats not true I do throws in my style."  Then your told no you dont, or well your throws suck so they dont count.  Thats where the issues start.  You can only politely disagree with someone so many times before it just gets silly then you cant tell if the guy really doesn't get it or is just trolling.  Then you look at the body of work and you see the same nonsense in every section of the forum , karate, TKD, Hapkido, MMA, Judo, General thats when you lean more towards trolling then trying to learn.  Like when you post about BJJ I respect your knowledge on the topic because its much greater then mine.  If I said Steve you have no arm bars in BJJ and you said well yes we do then Ill take that at face value.  Others dont give that same respect



What's amusing about the above is that I never said that Karate had "no throws or grappling".

You and others read what you wanted to read and went from there, and continue to spread that mistruth into another discussion. Hence my earlier point.

However if I'm wrong, please find the post in the previous discussion where I "definitively" said that karate had no throws or grappling. Don't worry, I'll wait.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> On a written form of communication what other way can we judge people?


Rather than judge, couldn't we ask clarifying questions?   Cut people some slack and try to understand what they meant, even if it's not exactly what they said.  I can think of a recent example of a new poster who wrote something and was really taken to task.  In spite of his efforts to explain what he meant, he was vilified for one poorly worded post.  There should be room for someone to say, "Yeah, that wasn't what I meant.  Let me try again."

Maybe more importantly, where we run into some unintended conflict, I'm suggesting that we could try to look at our own posts from the outside in, to see if they actually say what we meant. 

Don't get me wrong.  Misunderstandings are bound to occur.  But aren't we talking about how to have more productive conversations?  I'm suggesting that a little more effort trying to understand what people intend will help.  Presume good intent.  Ask more questions.  And entertain the possibility that "we" aren't 100% right and "they" aren't 100% wrong.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> On a written form of communication what other way can we judge people?


  Especially when something in said in _plain unambiguous_ English. Often people will write something they think is good but when they realise it is plain wrong such as ' you should strike women' they back peddle and say 'oh I didn't mean to say that' _even when they have_ _already said they know it sounds wrong_. Well sorry but *it is* plain wrong, no doubts about it, plain English and written with the rider that they know it sounds bad. No wiggle room I'm afraid.
Anyway that's digressing. The door is shut on any discussion or even debate when it's become clear that someone is deliberately being provocative so that all the effort in the world to be fair minded and respect opinions just gets you jeered at.


----------



## K-man (Dec 1, 2014)

As one of those guilty of getting heavily involved I guess it boils down to a sense of fairness and respect. 

Like Tony, there are many training systems that I would leave alone for one reason or another. I would hesitate to call them sub-optimal  because that doesn't take into account the reason a person is training that system.  I'll use Tai Chi as an example. I used to think Tai Chi was a bit of a wank. Good for your health etc but not a 'real' martial art. Over the years I've met several serious martial artists practising Tai Chi and they have changed my understanding. I doubt I will ever practise it myself but horses for courses.

Then you have a martial art that you have actually trained. Within those four walls you may know everything about that system as it is taught in that environment. But do you really know that system? Years ago I was certainly guilty of that. I thought I knew pretty much all there was to know about Goju. Now I am being exposed to a world I never knew existed. I am sure that the same applies to every other karate style out there. One advantage of a forum like MT is that you can explore some of those things with others. Where that comes unstuck is when a closed minded person who had little understanding steps in as an expert and destroys the whole discussion.

I have learned a lot from people here. I have watched interesting videos and been able to take bits and pieces away to try for myself. Long may that continue. Where someone genuinely is an expert it is nice to be able to ask them about the technical aspects of such a technique. I know from  Aikido there are no techniques that don't work. The secret is to be able to make them work for you. Sometimes that can take years of dedicated practise. Then someone comes along who did Aikido for a short time and claims definitively that such and such a technique doesn't work. So what do you do? I believe this to be a respected forum. If you allow something that is wrong to be put out there unchallenged it becomes fact. But in some cases it gets even worse when an individual continues to denigrate an entire system as worthless. That may discourage someone who may have benefitted considerably from a particular martial art from even trying it.

I don't really know the answer as so much is subjective, but I do think the mods could redirect some of these discussions before they get to the stage of being locked.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> Especially when something in said in _plain unambiguous_ English. Often people will write something they think is good but when they realise it is plain wrong such as ' you should strike women' they back peddle and say 'oh I didn't mean to say that' _even when they have_ _already said they know it sounds wrong_. Well sorry but *it is* plain wrong, no doubts about it, plain English and written with the rider that they know it sounds bad. No wiggle room I'm afraid.
> Anyway that's digressing. The door is shut on any discussion or even debate when it's become clear that someone is deliberately being provocative so that all the effort in the world to be fair minded and respect opinions just gets you jeered at.


I think this is a perfect example.  The first post was pretty iffy:  tonyjw86 said, " It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force."  Yikes.  Pretty inflammatory. 

However, a few days later, he clarified and it turns out, he was saying something that most of us, including you, Tez, have endorsed: using realistic pressure and treating training partners like an equal. 



tonyjw86 said:


> Whew boy I didn't mean to offend anyone. I see everyones point here. To clarify striking might not have been the best term maybe something more realistic pressure. Close to what you would with a male partner for the females advantage.


 


tonyjw86 said:


> My original post was taken a bit out of context. With this I was just trying to clarify that what I meant was women are at a disadvantage in class when not treated like and equal.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 1, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> What's amusing about the above is that I never said that Karate had "no throws or grappling".
> 
> You and others read what you wanted to read and went from there, and continue to spread that mistruth into another discussion. Hence my earlier point.
> 
> However if I'm wrong, please find the post in the previous discussion where I "definitively" said that karate had no throws or grappling. Don't worry, I'll wait.



How important is fighting in the Martial Arts?



			
				Hanzou said:
			
		

> Interesting that I pointed out the dearth of grappling in Karate, and I was called ignorant for it.





			
				Hanzou said:
			
		

> Um, I'm not calling anyone a liar. I'm simply curious and would like more information about a rarity. *If someone said they had pictures of Bigfoot wouldn't you like to see them?*





			
				the Grandmaster of Kiboredo said:
			
		

> I disagree. I'm certainly open to other people's perspectives, however if you're going to tell me that throws are widely taught in Shotokan karate, I simply disagree with that argument. To compound this, I can pull up various vids of Karate or TKD exponents free sparring, and *none of them are performing any throws or takedowns whatsoever.*





			
				Hanzou the Troll[SIZE=5 said:
			
		

> *]*_*I*_[/SIZE]* have, and I've never found it.* My experience with grappling karatekas is that their grappling skills are extremely low unless they've cross-trained. I know one instructor who mixes Judo with Isshin-Ryu, and he wrestled in HS, so his students are very good grapplers. However they are the exceptions.Which I always find K-Man's claims of pure Karate grappling so interesting.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 1, 2014)

elder999 said:


> How important is fighting in the Martial Arts?



You do understand that there's a difference between lack,( scarcity, rarity), and nonexistence correct?

You also understand that there's a difference between "my experience" and "all" right?

Just making sure.


----------



## K-man (Dec 1, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> There's some arts I'd like to have tried like Capoeira, I'm not built for it and I don't have rhythm lol but it would have been fun I think. I've no idea whether it's any good for SD or fighting, never had a chance to study it.
> I think the problem would be if I started bashing Capoeira from that basis of ignorance, that's when arguments happen because quite rightly a Capoeira stylist would want to take issue with what I said. Always wanted to try Kendo too, here it's expensive and it's a bit far away from where I am. Is there an old person's style anywhere


I think Tez has inadvertently touched on an important aspect here when she threw in the comment on age. When you are twenty five, healthy fit and filled with testosterone then something like MMA has huge appeal. Once you're on the wrong side of 50 the body can't do what it once could and it doesn't get any easier as you creep past 60. To say to a person of that age that unless they get in the cage they don't know that their training sucks is not overly helpful. I have had guys in their 60s take up martial arts for the first time. If they came here and joined in some of the recent discussions I reckon far from being encouraged they would probably be convinced they were wasting their time.

A bit of consideration would go a long way towards making this a better place.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

K-man said:


> A bit of consideration would go a long way towards making this a better place.


Agreed!


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 1, 2014)

Steve said:


> I think this is a perfect example.  The first post was pretty iffy:  tonyjw86 said, " It sounds bad but making a women mad by striking her really helps her come out of her shell and use some force."  Yikes.  Pretty inflammatory.
> 
> However, a few days later, he clarified and it turns out, he was saying something that most of us, including you, Tez, have endorsed: using realistic pressure and treating training partners like an equal.


OR did he realize what he said was wrong and back pedaled.  Or realized he didnt like the backlash and changed hos tune.  Kinda like the NFL suspended Ray Rice for 2 games then the backlash and they change their tune.
Or your right and he didnt mean it as he said

Giving the benefit of the doubt would be a good thing but Im  a jerk so I normally see the worst in people


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> OR did he realize what he said was wrong and back pedaled.  Or realized he didnt like the backlash and changed hos tune.  Kinda like the NFL suspended Ray Rice for 2 games then the backlash and they change their tune.
> Or your right and he didnt mean it as he said
> 
> Giving the benefit of the doubt would be a good thing but Im  a jerk so I normally see the worst in people



Hard to give the benefit of the doubt when something is said so plainly especially when you have long term experience of dealing with the aftermath of violence on women, one says what one thinks _at the time._ If it takes *several days* to decide it wasn't what he meant I would suggest that you are correct in your first idea.
We are probably conditioned by our experiences in both personal and work, it colours how we see things and I was horrified, a very honest reaction I assure you, to see someone suggest hitting a women hard to make her mad. I could see someone reading and taking up this 'advice' then some poor woman being hit hard and crumpling into a physical and mental mess because she wasn't taught properly to cope. It was a very unpleasant image. I think we have to be responsible in what we suggest on here. To my mind this was dangerous and I needed to say something in case anyone thought to copy the idea. If it was harsh on the person who wrote it, I'm sorry but not sorry I wrote what I did.
Others of course put a different spin on what I wrote but the above is the truth.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> OR did he realize what he said was wrong and back pedaled.  Or realized he didnt like the backlash and changed hos tune.  Kinda like the NFL suspended Ray Rice for 2 games then the backlash and they change their tune.
> Or your right and he didnt mean it as he said
> 
> Giving the benefit of the doubt would be a good thing but Im  a jerk so I normally see the worst in people


You're absolutely right!  There are a lot of different ways to handle it.  I'm suggesting that the way to keep the discussion positive and constructive is to choose to presume good intent.  What difference does it make if someone is back pedaling, changing his tiune or clarifying?   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## K-man (Dec 1, 2014)

I think the way a thread is promoted can be a red flag.  If it is a genuine question or statement such as; "So, You Want To Carry A Knife For Self-Defense" or "Different types of Short Power?", then you know instinctively that there will be an interesting discussion and some good advice. I will read what is posted but unless I have something constructive to add to the conversation I will move on. Occasionally I might make a comment and move on. Only if my comment is questioned or challenged will I comment further as my first post will normally be my comment on the topic. I will normally follow the thread but unless something arises down the track to justify another comment then that's it.

When you see a post like "Gun laws in Australia" you know there is someone pushing a barrow. Why would most people in the US even have a passing interest in what we do, unless they have a point to make?

"Is Aikido a Martial Art?" Was a provocative line but was in fact relating to a genuine article and genuine question, until it was hijacked by someone with no respect for Aikido after 5 posts. Instead of discussing the article we end up defending Aikido against someone who hasn't even trained Aikido. Good discussion can be stopped in the space of one post.


----------



## Steve (Dec 1, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> Hard to give the benefit of the doubt.


it's actually very easy.  You just make the choice to do it.  Here's a multiple choice question.  Which one of the following is not conducive to positive, constructive interaction?

A:  "You said X and you're a terrible person for it." 
B:  "Do you really mean X?" 
C:  "I heard X, and I must be misunderstanding you, because to me, X means [something horrible]."


----------



## Elbowgrease (Dec 1, 2014)

I'm glad to see things being discussed in a positive manner. 
I really can't come up with anything better to say at the moment, anything that I think might be really beneficial to the conversation. I've seen a lot of individual posts in this thread that I liked, but wasn't logged in to actually like them, maybe I'll go back and do that later. 
All I can add, and it's advice that I am also trying (sometimes pretty hard) to use, don't let BS take up space in your head. It is difficult to do sometimes, but it really helps. 
And sometimes, 
if you don't have something nice to say, 
just don't say anything at all.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

Elbowgrease said:


> I'm glad to see things being discussed in a positive manner.
> I really can't come up with anything better to say at the moment, anything that I think might be really beneficial to the conversation. I've seen a lot of individual posts in this thread that I liked, but wasn't logged in to actually like them, maybe I'll go back and do that later.
> All I can add, and it's advice that I am also trying (sometimes pretty hard) to use, don't let BS take up space in your head. It is difficult to do sometimes, but it really helps.
> And sometimes,
> ...



Sometimes though you have to be honest both with yourself and with others so you say what you have to. Not being honest can be disrespectful to others. People deserve honest answers, most of us appreciate that.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Dec 1, 2014)

Though I think you can be honest and yet still respectful of other people and the systems they chose to study. 

Personally, like K-Man mentioned above in encountering serious practitioner's from a system.  In my time traveling and training I too have encountered some people that totally changed my outlook on the system that they studied.  Their seriousness in their studies and the skill they had attained was impressive!  I try to view anyone practicing their martial system through what elements, principles they use to achieve the desired result in their system.  It is also important to note what their individual personal goals are as well.   Mine might be different and cloud my vision so that is some thing that is important when talking and discussing the Martial Sciences.


----------



## Elbowgrease (Dec 1, 2014)

I agree with that. 
But I think sometimes when I'm facing what appears to be a man with one foot nailed to the floor, I have to just suck it up and walk away instead of chasing the guy with his foot nailed to the floor around in circles. Sometimes the biggest part of the battle is recognizing that. 
Just my opinion.
But it's taken a long time to get to that, and sometimes it takes a lot of effort to keep that in mind.

Siege warfare is the lowest form of warfare. 
An unstoppable force attacking an immovable object, indefinitely, until one stops or the other gives in (or the mods lock the board). 
To get out of the way and let my enemy drive himself into the ground, that works a lot better. 

I hope that didn't go too far sideways.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

When writing you aren't just answering another post you have an awful lot of others reading it, not just those who are posting on the thread but a whole load of people you don't know so you have to be responsible in what you write and you have to be responsible enough that if someone gives really bad ie dangerous advice or something patently untrue, you, rather than just ignore, correct it or at least give warnings. Suppose someone posts up that bashing your shins with a rolling pins is the only way to be able to do Muay Thai or getting your mate to punch you hard repeatedly in the stomach toughens you up, do you leave it or point out the dangers? You don't know who is reading so you don't want the wrong impression given. It isn't just the cosy few of us here I believe (and someone will post up the viewing figures for MT) we have more than a few thousand reading what is written here, so we are in the public domain, that chap may have one foot nailed to the floor ( nice analogy btw I like that!) but what he writes is mis-information, perhaps misleading or perhaps even dangerous, we aren't just answering him, we are telling everyone else too. We don't want to be responsible, even if we never know it, for that person ruining his legs or suffering a rupture because he read it on here.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 1, 2014)

K-man said:


> I think Tez has inadvertently touched on an important aspect here when she threw in the comment on age. When you are twenty five, healthy fit and filled with testosterone then something like MMA has huge appeal. Once you're on the wrong side of 50 the body can't do what it once could and it doesn't get any easier as you creep past 60. To say to a person of that age that unless they get in the cage they don't know that their training sucks is not overly helpful. I have had guys in their 60s take up martial arts for the first time. If they came here and joined in some of the recent discussions I reckon far from being encouraged they would probably be convinced they were wasting their time.
> 
> A bit of consideration would go a long way towards making this a better place.



My oldest student ever was an *87 year old* _white belt_... (these smileys are lame!)....Mr. Sillivent stuck with me for nearly three years, when he couldn't do it anymore.....still-As for that "wrong side of 50, " thing, I'd say that *dying before you get  there* would be the *real* "wrong side of 50....." Otherwise, I've known extremely vigrorous people of "an advanced age..."

Wrong side of 50......I'm definitely on the right side of 50, thank you!
(After all, it's not like I have any choice!-insert :lfao: smiley here-oh, that's right-lame!)



Hanzou said:


> You do understand that there's a difference between lack,( scarcity, rarity), and nonexistence correct?



Do you?

I mean "Bigfoot,?" Really?

ANd when you use superlatives, like "none whatsoever," even if that's not what you meant, it kind of makes the difference moot-makes it sound like,"I haven't seen it, so it doesn't exist."

Then, later, it became, "Well, if that's it, it's ridiculous."

What's ridiculous, to me, anyway, is that someone apparently expects an art like Shotokan to have a "ground game" or something, if someone says that it's got "grappling."

What's even more ridiculous is that someone who  claims to "have a black belt in Shotokan," wouldn't have seen and understood the throws from Shotokan-throws that are taught almost from the beginning, and have been since the 1920's. Though maybe not completely-maybe your teacher didn't care about these things-people have been having open conversations about them, and what various _mawatte_ mean (besides running out of gym floor!) and how they're applied for years, anyway-since the 1980's There's grappling in karate-you may not like it, but it's an established fact....



Hanzou said:


> You also understand that there's a difference between "my experience" and "all" right?
> .



Yeah.There's *all *sorts of *evidence* that "*all*" actually *exists.*

Your posts offer all sorts of evidence to the contrary for your "experience." .


----------



## Elbowgrease (Dec 1, 2014)

I see your point, and I do agree. 
(In a perfect world) it'd be nice to see the nonsense get it's lights knocked out without anyone getting too heated up about it. 
Some of it just looked like it was getting taken way too personal, which isn't to say that it's not personal, but that sometimes. 
Blah.
I'm not going to go through and read that whole thread again. I think I missed more than half of it anyway (which is probably a good thing). 

For what it's worth,
My Sifu used to say that, a LOT.
"...otherwise you're just a guy with one foot nailed to the floor, you keep on walking around in circles not going anywhere. It's not going anywhere! So change..."
Now I see people everywhere walking in circles, and sometimes I don't realize I'm following them around in circles until we've walked a few miles in a little circle together. I'm getting better at it though.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 1, 2014)

Over here we have the Ouzelum bird, it goes round and round until it disappears up it's own bum. (With apologies to the timeless Carry On team)
The Carry On films are never far from my mind when I'm on this site lol!
Ah infamy, infamy says Caesar they've all got it in for me!  With that lot, Monty Python, The Two Ronnies, Dad's Army and Red Dwarf floating in my head I never take things personally lol. Trust me, if I'm frothing at the mouth it's because I'm eating sherbet.

I really do want our old emoticons back, pretty please?


----------



## K-man (Dec 1, 2014)

Elbowgrease said:


> I see your point, and I do agree.
> (In a perfect world) it'd be nice to see the nonsense get it's lights knocked out without anyone getting too heated up about it.
> Some of it just looked like it was getting taken way too personal, which isn't to say that it's not personal, but that sometimes.
> Blah.
> ...


Unfortunately I don't think it is as cut and dried as this. Across the whole range of martial arts terminology varies. To me the logical thing would be to hone in on one particular style and ask a specific question, defining your terms if necessary. For example, _"How important  is fighting in Okinawan Goju Ryu? For the sake of the question 'fighting' can mean anything from sport type sparring to grappling."
_
The recent thread, _"How important is fighting in your martial art?"_, was always going to be a bun fight. The OP's position was clear from previous posts that he considered fighting in competition was the only test of a style's validity and if you didn't have YouTube video of your style of MA doing that then your style sucked. When asked to define the terms 'fighting' and 'martial art', the definitions were so loose that sensible discussion across the spectrum was going to be impossible. When I asked if we could hone in on one specific MA there was outright rejection of the idea. So at that stage I stepped away and just watched (your advice was followed). 

How can you stay out when you are misquoted and your chosen MA is maligned?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

No problem with walking away from the guy with his foot nailed to the flor, really that is his business. However if he rips up the floorboard he is attached to, limps after me and starts throwing nails at me insisting I take a hammer and drive it trough my foot (_I have such wonderful things to show you!_) the answer is going to be HELL NO!


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> Do you?
> 
> I mean "Bigfoot,?" Really?



Again, that implies rarity. A notion backed by experts such as Abernethy and even our own Kman.



> ANd when you use superlatives, like "none whatsoever," even if that's not what you meant, it kind of makes the difference moot-makes it sound like,"I haven't seen it, so it doesn't exist."



If you looked a bit further into that quote, I was talking about sparring matches I had seen on video. I even posted another video showing a karate school that you posted who initially performed bunkai, but when free sparring, did no bunkai whatsoever. This indicates that even in schools where the bunkai is known and practiced, it is not a natural part of their general fighting technique.



> Then, later, it became, "Well, if that's it, it's ridiculous."
> 
> What's ridiculous, to me, anyway, is that someone apparently expects an art like Shotokan to have a "ground game" or something, if someone says that it's got "grappling."



If someone tells me that Shotokan has leglocks, chokes, and takedowns, I expect some level of ground game yes. Further if you're going to tell me that Shotokan and other forms of karate have grappling, then I expect to see a competent level of it. Again, Abernethy makes it clear that grappling in karate is crude, and not on the level of even MMA grappling. If karate's grappling is truly on that level, then its obvious why many karate schools wouldn't teach it in the first place.



> What's even more ridiculous is that someone who  claims to "have a black belt in Shotokan," wouldn't have seen and understood the throws from Shotokan-throws that are taught almost from the beginning, and have been since the 1920's. Though maybe not completely-maybe your teacher didn't care about these things-people have been having open conversations about them, and what various _mawatte_ mean (besides running out of gym floor!) and how they're applied for years, anyway-since the 1980's There's grappling in karate-you may not like it, but it's an established fact....



And yet we have our local karate expert saying the following;



> K-MAN SAID: ↑
> *Read the post*. Shotokan was a Japanese form of karate that* removed most if not all of the grappling.* Otsuka reintroduced the grappling component after studying with Okinawan masters. He just put back into his karate what was already in traditional karate. To me Japanese karate in the main may be classified as traditional but not in the sense of being the same as the original, but perhaps that's a little deep for you.



That's my experience with Shotokan as well; A Japanese form of karate with most if not all the grappling removed.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

I think continuing an argument from a thread that has been locked is defiance in the face of the Mods decision to lock it. To carry on the same arguments is indeed having your foot nailed to the floor and going round in circles.
Making the same snide comments ('local karate expert') and rehashing the same arguments from another thread on this one is yet again provocative. It shows no willingness to pursue anything other than their own agenda.
I would say though that 'crude' is a matter, like beauty' of interpretation, karate grappling may be 'crude' by BJJ standards but if it is effective then it does it's job. It doesn't need to be 'beautiful'.
Now, I'm off for a nice cuppa before this thread is locked too.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

And here you really have it, Tony-for some people, their martial path becomes dogmatic-like a religious zealot that will brook no tolerance of an alternate viewpoint:_Evolution? Where's the evidence? That's just a theory! You can't call 'adaptation' 'evolution!" _and so on-even worse when they shift positions and requalify what they said.

Even worse when they can't just say, I was wrong. or, better yet (and I did not get to where I am in my career without frequently using this one) *I did not know that.*

It's easy:
_
Did you know that kali has empty hand techniques, and grappling?_

_*No. I did not know that-tell me more.
*_
Just that would make conversations like this a lot easier to get through for some people.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 2, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> I think continuing an argument from a thread that has been locked is defiance in the face of the Mods decision to lock it. To carry on the same arguments is indeed having your foot nailed to the floor and going round in circles.
> Making the same snide comments ('local karate expert') and rehashing the same arguments from another thread on this one is yet again provocative. It shows no willingness to pursue anything other than their own agenda.
> I would say though that 'crude' is a matter, like beauty' of interpretation, karate grappling may be 'crude' by BJJ standards but if it is effective then it does it's job. It doesn't need to be 'beautiful'.
> Now, I'm off for a nice cuppa before this thread is locked too.



No one's continuing the argument. I'm simply point out that I'm being accused of saying something I never said in the first place. Which btw is a prime example of the problem with having discussions on this forum.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> No one's continuing the argument. I'm simply point out that I'm being accused of saying something I never said in the first place. Which btw is a prime example of the problem with having discussions on this forum.


Except this topic isnt about you.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)




----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

For what it's worth, this is a perfect encapsulation of the issue.  Tez, Ballen, Elder and Hanzou are all arguing, each pointing fingers at the other, and all saying, "It's not me; it's you."


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> For what it's worth, this is a perfect encapsulation of the issue.  Tez, Ballen, Elder and Hanzou are all arguing, each pointing fingers at the other, and all saying, "It's not me; it's you."


And you standing to the side playing the "holier then thou" card doing the same exact thing


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

OK folks. Let's return to the original topic - and stay there - shall we?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm here to learn and enjoy the conversation, not to prove how much more I know than other people.
> I will never, ever change anyone's mind by calling them ignorant or otherwise insulting them.



WHat if they *are* ignorant?



Tony Dismukes said:


> I
> If the person I'm talking to _does _understand my point, but still doesn't agree with me, it's a waste of time to take offense or to repeat myself endlessly.



Point taken. 

A waving "bye-bye" smiley would go good right about here...
but  "Stop" will have to do.....(not even a "yawning" smiley...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

[


elder999 said:


> WHat if they *are* ignorant?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I quite like this one, .


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> And you standing to the side playing the "holier then thou" card doing the same exact thing


I'm genuinely trying to discuss the actual topic at hand.  The topic for this thread is "Some thoughts on discussing martial arts."  We've discussed some of the rhetorical loops we find ourselves in, and strategies for avoiding them.  As I said before, you guys are providing a perfect object lesson on the very topic of discussion. 

In the future, I will try to avoid appearing holier than thou, and appreciate your feedback.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> WHat if they *are* ignorant?



They very well may _be_ ignorant, but calling them that will just cause them to dig in their heels and double down on their position. It's not an effective tactic for convincing someone that they are wrong.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 2, 2014)

When discussing martial arts if you say "karate" be sure to state if you are only talking  about Japanese and Okinawan arts or if you are including all striking arts, or a specific group or systems.
If there is a question on a specific style/system are you asking about a certain school within that system or a generalized question on the whole system?
when talking bladed weapons set the length of that weapon, different lengths may give a different answer
Points of difference in thoughts can be expressed in a positive manner with stated references but those references may not be the only ones on the subject and there may be differing thoughts that can be referenced
No one ever changes someone else  mind in an argument.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> I'm genuinely trying to discuss the actual topic at hand.  The topic for this thread is "Some thoughts on discussing martial arts."  We've discussed some of the rhetorical loops we find ourselves in, and strategies for avoiding them.  As I said before, you guys are providing a perfect object lesson on the very topic of discussion.
> 
> In the future, I will try to avoid appearing holier than thou, and appreciate your feedback.



Holier than thou and preaching one thing then practicing the exact opposite is very much how your posts have come across at least to me, not seeing further than the tip of your own nose. I very much look forward to you making an effort at improving that  introspection and accountability thingie you have suggested to the rest of us so many times.


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Holier than thou and preaching one thing then practicing the exact opposite is very much how your posts have come across at least to me, not seeing further than the tip of your own nose. I very much look forward to you making an effort at improving that  introspection and accountability thingie you have suggested to the rest of us so many times.


I'll do my best to practice what I preach.  Thanks for helping me to become a better poster, cirdan.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> WHat if they *are* ignorant?



Then you can (and I think should) try to educate. But that isn't always possible. If the person doesn't want to be educated - if they cling to whatever misconceptions, false assumptions, incorrect facts, or whatever - then calling them names or engaging the practice of flogging a dead horse isn't really productive. We're all guilty of doing so, sometimes, but it's rarely (if ever) helpful.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> I'll do my best to practice what I preach.  Thanks for helping me to become a better poster, cirdan.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



You are welcome. I am sure you can succeed if you really want to.


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> You are welcome. I am sure you can succeed if you really want to.


I'll do my best.  As the topic is how to be more constructive in our discussions, do you have any specific, helpful suggestions?  Perhaps others can benefit from my poor example.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> They very well may _be_ ignorant, but calling them that will just cause them to dig in their heels and double down on their position. It's not an effective tactic for convincing someone that they are wrong.



I can't say that I've ever done that-"called" someone "ignorant."

I'm sure I've said that their _post_ seemed ignorant _to me_,  and that's a difference that seems to have escaped people most of the time.

In the end, what frustrates me most is trying to make a point with facts and evidence, and having them dismissed.

That, and being called names...... (see that? I miss the "flaming mad" smiley, too-this fella looks like he's just constipated....)


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> I'll do my best.  As the topic is how to be more constructive in our discussions, do you have any specific, helpful suggestions?  Perhaps others can benefit from my poor example.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Well since you ask my one advice is to be honest.


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Well since you ask my one advice is to be honest.


Could you be more specific?  I'm genuinely interested.  Do you think we have a general issue with honesty around here or just me?  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> I can't say that I've ever done that-"called" someone "ignorant."
> 
> I'm sure I've said that their _post_ seemed ignorant _to me_,  and that's a difference that seems to have escaped people most of the time.
> 
> ...


Distinguishing between facts and opinions is a tough one around here sometimes.   It's particularly tricky when a poster mixes the two together.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> Could you be more specific?  I'm genuinely interested.  Do you think we have a general issue with honesty around here or just me?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Yes I can be more specific. Shut up and be honest.


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

if you think I'm being dishonest would you consider sending me a pm with some more information?   I'd appreciate it.   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Nope, actually Steve I am going to take a number from someone much wiser than me on this forum and put you on ignore for now. Maybe I`ll check on you in a few months and see how you are doing with that self improvement you want to work so hard on.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 2, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Except this topic isnt about you.



On the contrary, the remarks by several posters in this thread were in regards to what I supposedly stated in the previous thread.

If we wish to have a better discussion around these parts, it can start with a little bit of honesty. Wouldn't you agree?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

.....................


----------



## Steve (Dec 2, 2014)

Lol.  Elder, you're warming up to the new emoticons. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> If we wish to have a better discussion around these parts, it can start with a little bit of honesty. Wouldn't you agree?



You confessed to being the textbook definition of a troll in post #15, pretty honest I`ll give you that.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> You confessed to being the textbook definition of a troll in post #15, pretty honest I`ll give you that.



Me laughing at people getting angry over things said on a message board makes me a troll?

Interesting.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 2, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> On the contrary, the remarks by several posters in this thread were in regards to what I supposedly stated in the previous thread.
> 
> If we wish to have a better discussion around these parts, it can start with a little bit of honesty. Wouldn't you agree?


LOL ok  Im not really interested in having better discussions with you so Ill see if this new forum has an ignore feature


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Me laughing at people getting angry over things said on a message board makes me a troll?
> 
> Interesting.



We are what we choose to be. Happy with yours?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 2, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> LOL ok  Im not really interested in having better discussions with you so Ill see if this new forum has an ignore feature



Good idea! Hopefully this means you'll stay out of my threads as well.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

Steve said:


> Lol.  Elder, you're warming up to the new emoticons.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Nah. Just trying to express myself within the limited confines of the tools provided, as well as keeping on topic.....


----------



## K-man (Dec 2, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> Then you can (and I think should) try to educate. But that isn't always possible. If the person doesn't want to be educated - if they cling to whatever misconceptions, false assumptions, incorrect facts, or whatever - then calling them names or engaging the practice of flogging a dead horse isn't really productive. We're all guilty of doing so, sometimes, but it's rarely (if ever) helpful.


Yes, but sometimes it eases the frustration and makes you feel so much better. 
I mean  instead of  .


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

I am not above laughing when people make complete fools of themselves, a favor I hope will be returned when appropriate.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

K-man said:


> Yes, but sometimes it eases the frustration and makes you feel so much better.
> I mean  instead of  .



I agree, absolutely. But it must be admitted that when you reach that point, you're no longer trying to educate or inform. You're just poking them for the comic relief.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> I agree, absolutely. But it must be admitted that when you reach that point, you're no longer trying to educate or inform. You're just poking them for the *comic relief.[/*QUOTE]



Well if it's for comic relief, please stump up some money 
Home Comic Relief


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

Dirty Dog said:


> I agree, absolutely. But it must be admitted that when you reach that point, you're no longer trying to educate or inform. You're just poking them for the comic relief.



Like I say, _Bring on the ridiculous, and I'll bring the *ridicule*_
(Oh, where  oh where is my little rolling on the floor laughing his lovely *** off smiley??!!)


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> Like I say, _Bring on the ridiculous, and I'll bring the *ridicule*_
> (_Oh, where  oh where is my little rolling on the floor laughing his lovely *** off smiley_??!!)




I loved him, that and the little bowing chap.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

But they added the old person smiley just for you Tez 
*runs away*


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> But they added the old person smiley just for you Tez
> *runs away*




Where's that Hurtigruten brochure? cos I'm coming to thump you......................going up and down the coast first though roflmao.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

Can`t wait. Don`t forget that riding crop.


----------



## Tames D (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> Like I say, _Bring on the ridiculous, and I'll bring the *ridicule*_
> (Oh, where  oh where is my little rolling on the floor laughing his lovely *** off smiley??!!)



I think the auto censor feature went missing with your emoticons LOL


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 2, 2014)

Tames D said:


> I think the auto censor feature went missing with your emoticons LOL



Oh I didn't realise that at the time I read it! Well I never!


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

It seems this is the new hardcore MT where anything goes..


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> It seems this is the new hardcore MT where anything goes..



Please take my word for it... it is definitely NOT "anything goes"...


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> It seems this is the new hardcore MT where anything goes..



II'd trade "anything goes" just to see that little fella rolling on the floor......


----------



## elder999 (Dec 2, 2014)

I


elder999 said:


> II'd trade "anything goes" just to see that little fella rolling on the floor......


In the meantime, though...._love, love, love, love, *love!!!!!*_
That feels better....
(That was quick!!)


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

How about that?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> (That was quick!!)



(All together now...)

That's what she said.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> II'd trade "anything goes" just to see that little fella rolling on the floor......



Poor elder999, maybe this will cheer you up.


----------



## K-man (Dec 2, 2014)

elder999 said:


> I can't say that I've ever done that-"called" someone "ignorant."


Well I have but only for special cases.   If I dismiss someone making a valid point as ignorant it's like pointing ... one finger pointing to the other person, three pointing back at me. But when you point out something factual that another person summarily dismisses I will stick by the dictionary definition, use the proper word, and call that person ignorant. No statement or idea is ignorant. It is the person making the statement or promoting the idea.




elder999 said:


> In the end, what frustrates me most is trying to make a point with facts and evidence, and having them dismissed.


Ain't that the truth, especially when a post that has taken the best part of an hour to construct is disregarded with a one word reply.



elder999 said:


> Well since you ask my one advice is to be honest.


Ah! Honesty. Agreed. Honestly tell a person when they are ignorant. 

(I really need my 'popcorn' emoticon!)


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 3, 2014)

Some things are a matter of opinion, other are a matter of fact so when a poster comes along and says quite bluntly  'no you don't do that' when you know you do, I believe it would be perfectly in order to call them ignorant. I've pointed this out before. If I tell you I live in Yorkshire, which I know I do and someone tells me I live in Surrey what would you call it? Apart from being ignorant I would assume that person is trolling. It's  like back in the  bad old days of the study, someone would post oh in X country they do this then someone from that country would come along and post that they don't, yet the original poster would insist that in X they do, how do you contest it? How do you let people know that in X it's not as they say? (_I'm using 'country' here rather than style to keep this argument impersonal_) The people from X are proud of their country, there may have been issues in their history which is a long one but they like the way it is now, are proud of how hard they've worked for change so when someone ( who has only ever been on a day trip to X) insists on telling people that X is something it's not, those from X would find it hard not to say something and frankly why should they be quiet?  Everyone from X is an ambassador for their country, to see their country disrespected, to see it represented as something it's not requires them to stand up for X. How can they not against such lies?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 3, 2014)

That is a very good point Tez. I think a lot of people automatically apply their own "home" standards to everything they come across, which of course seldom fits when dealing with issues where the setting and background are very different. If your "home" is internet where you deal in "consistent" internet truths within your little group, the fluidity and chaos of a real world might be hard to grasp. Once again it is good to empty your cup.


----------



## Steve (Dec 3, 2014)

Something that I think can get overlooked is that this is informal communication.  I don't think most of us anguish over our words here, drafting and revising them until they're suitable for submission to a professor for a grade.  This is casual conversation, one step removed from a real life round table.  Every single poster here has "said" things that they didn't really mean, where their words were misinterpreted or just didn't read the way they intended. 

Not everyone here is a great writer.   Not everyone here is a world class intellect.  Not everyone has 100 years of martial arts experience.  But that doesn't mean we can't have constructive conversations about areas of mutual interest.


----------



## MJS (Dec 3, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> There's some arts I'd like to have tried like Capoeira, I'm not built for it and I don't have rhythm lol but it would have been fun I think. I've no idea whether it's any good for SD or fighting, never had a chance to study it.
> I think the problem would be if I started bashing Capoeira from that basis of ignorance, that's when arguments happen because quite rightly a Capoeira stylist would want to take issue with what I said. Always wanted to try Kendo too, here it's expensive and it's a bit far away from where I am. Is there an old person's style anywhere





Tez3 said:


> If the posts were simply 'your training style sucks, my way is best' it would be easier to understand but when the posts are 'no you don't train that' it's harder to find a common ground for discussion.



Agreed!   My like/dislike of an art is pretty much based on what I've seen of it, either on video, in person or what I've heard from others, although in that case, I prefer to get a 1st hand view of it, so I can form my own opinions of it. Of course, just because one school that teaches art X, may suck, that doesn't mean that all schools that teach that art, suck.  And while 1 bad apple ruins the bunch, can be said, we probably shouldn't judge everything by 1 school.


----------



## donald1 (Dec 3, 2014)

i got a question about the little icons in the bottom right hand corner where it shows like, agree, and those other feature(the one left next to the left of the blue letter i) what isthat smily face for?


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 3, 2014)

The ratings icons are: Like, Dislike, Agree, Disagree, Funny, Informative and Useful.

So answering your question could be like, informative, or useful.

If I call you an ignorant git in the process (I am not...) it could be dislike, disagree, or REPORT.

If I make you laugh in the process, it could be funny.


----------



## K-man (Dec 3, 2014)

Ok, can we add a couple of extras please. For example  Might mean "I think you are an idiot" and  would mean "you are plain ignorant". In fact, keep your eyes open, I'll see how the work in practice.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 4, 2014)

Can we have an "I fart in your general direction"  rating too please?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> I agree when the discussion is opinion based.  But when people made definitive statement like "Karate has no throws/Grappling"  Then 10 people with all different backgrounds in several styles of Karate say "no thats not true I do throws in my style."  Then your told no you dont, or well your throws suck so they dont count.  Thats where the issues start.  You can only politely disagree with someone so many times before it just gets silly then you cant tell if the guy really doesn't get it or is just trolling.  Then you look at the body of work and you see the same nonsense in every section of the forum , karate, TKD, Hapkido, MMA, Judo, General thats when you lean more towards trolling then trying to learn.  Like when you post about BJJ I respect your knowledge on the topic because its much greater then mine.  If I said Steve you have no arm bars in BJJ and you said well yes we do then Ill take that at face value.  Others dont give that same respect



see this is what i don't get. If you cant provide a source then that is where the conversation bogs down.

if Steve says there are no arm bars in bjj do we just accept that?

if hanzu says there are arm bars in bjj then what. Do we accept that as well?

"no there isn't"
"yes there is"
"you don't understand bjj"
"yes i do"
"no you don't"


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> see this is what i don't get. If you cant provide a source then that is where the conversation bogs down.
> 
> if Steve says there are no arm bars in bjj do we just accept that?
> 
> ...



No, the conversation gets bogged down as you, and Hanzou, completely ignore most evidence unless it comes in a form you recognise…and even then, you argue against it. You are aware of what anecdotal evidence is, yeah? I mean, that's largely what you'll come across here… 

The point is that there are a wide range of different types of evidence… ranging from circumstantial, disconnected (false evidence), specious evidence, anecdotal, eye-witness, supported, unsupported, and more… what you need to be able to do is to recognise both reliability and credibility in the evidence you are presented with… and, I have to say, in many cases, the source you're asking for is exactly what you're questioning… it's the person giving you the information and viewpoint.

I'm also going to say here and now that saying that you, for example, don't understand something is not an attack. It's a statement based on the evidence of your posts… and is meant to highlight that you can learn something, not accuse you of being lacking. There are any number of things that everyone here doesn't understand… I have no understanding whatsoever of how to fly a plane, for example. However, K-Man does know about it… so, if I was to tell him that planes work by flapping their wings up and down, as I only know about birds when it comes to flight, and he calls me out on it, pointing out that I don't understand how planes work (come to think of it, how do they work? Big, heavy things that don't fall to the ground? Freaky…), he'd be right to… and I then can take advantage of his knowledge to improve mine. Fighting against your own ignorance, getting snarky, and lashing out against people who, bluntly, are simply far more experienced and knowledgeable in these areas than you helps absolutely no-one… not you, not the people you're dealing with (as they're less likely to be accommodating or gentle in their explanations in future, if they even offer them), not the forum (it taints the entire board), not anyone else in the thread watching it… no-one.


----------



## jamesbrown1 (Dec 4, 2014)

Every martial art has its pros and cons.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 4, 2014)

jamesbrown1 said:


> Every martial art has its pros and cons.



Except Viking Berzerker Arts of course which naturally has no weaknesses.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> No, the conversation gets bogged down as you, and Hanzou, completely ignore most evidence unless it comes in a form you recognise…and even then, you argue against it. You are aware of what anecdotal evidence is, yeah? I mean, that's largely what you'll come across here…
> 
> The point is that there are a wide range of different types of evidence… ranging from circumstantial, disconnected (false evidence), specious evidence, anecdotal, eye-witness, supported, unsupported, and more… what you need to be able to do is to recognise both reliability and credibility in the evidence you are presented with… and, I have to say, in many cases, the source you're asking for is exactly what you're questioning… it's the person giving you the information and viewpoint.
> 
> I'm also going to say here and now that saying that you, for example, don't understand something is not an attack. It's a statement based on the evidence of your posts… and is meant to highlight that you can learn something, not accuse you of being lacking. There are any number of things that everyone here doesn't understand… I have no understanding whatsoever of how to fly a plane, for example. However, K-Man does know about it… so, if I was to tell him that planes work by flapping their wings up and down, as I only know about birds when it comes to flight, and he calls me out on it, pointing out that I don't understand how planes work (come to think of it, how do they work? Big, heavy things that don't fall to the ground? Freaky…), he'd be right to… and I then can take advantage of his knowledge to improve mine. Fighting against your own ignorance, getting snarky, and lashing out against people who, bluntly, are simply far more experienced and knowledgeable in these areas than you helps absolutely no-one… not you, not the people you're dealing with (as they're less likely to be accommodating or gentle in their explanations in future, if they even offer them), not the forum (it taints the entire board), not anyone else in the thread watching it… no-one.



so conversations will go a lot better if I know my place. And accept you are the authority on everything except planes at which point we all defer to kman.

obviously that is not going to happen. The expectation is unrealistic  incredibly arrogant and insulting to pretty much everyone here.

i cant even imagine how you got to that stage in the first place. It cant be good for you. 

live a little find a source every now and then.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> so conversations will go a lot better if I know my place. And accept you are the authority on everything except planes at which point we all defer to kman.
> 
> obviously that is not going to happen. The expectation is unrealistic  incredibly arrogant and insulting to pretty much everyone here.
> 
> ...



Dude, I wasn't talking about myself there… you and Hanzou have dealt with everyone on this forum that way… not just me. 

And no, it's not a matter of "know your place"… or deferring to me on everything… but it is a matter of recognising when you don't know something, and others have a hell of a lot more knowledge and experience than you do.

And, frankly, this response is in the same vein. The call to "find a source" is ridiculous… in many cases, I am the source (when dealing with my understanding and knowledge). The same goes for others here… and that includes you.

Again, look at the terms "reliable" and "credible". If it meets both criteria, calls for other "sources", particularly of things that aren't as tangible, is just bull-headed stubbornness and ego.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> No, the conversation gets bogged down as you, and Hanzou, completely ignore most evidence unless it comes in a form you recognise…and even then, you argue against it. You are aware of what anecdotal evidence is, yeah? I mean, that's largely what you'll come across here…
> 
> The point is that there are a wide range of different types of evidence… ranging from circumstantial, disconnected (false evidence), specious evidence, anecdotal, eye-witness, supported, unsupported, and more… what you need to be able to do is to recognise both reliability and credibility in the evidence you are presented with… and, I have to say, in many cases, the source you're asking for is exactly what you're questioning… it's the person giving you the information and viewpoint.
> 
> I'm also going to say here and now that saying that you, for example, don't understand something is not an attack. It's a statement based on the evidence of your posts… and is meant to highlight that you can learn something, not accuse you of being lacking. There are any number of things that everyone here doesn't understand… I have no understanding whatsoever of how to fly a plane, for example. However, K-Man does know about it… so, if I was to tell him that planes work by flapping their wings up and down, as I only know about birds when it comes to flight, and he calls me out on it, pointing out that I don't understand how planes work (come to think of it, how do they work? Big, heavy things that don't fall to the ground? Freaky…), he'd be right to… and I then can take advantage of his knowledge to improve mine. Fighting against your own ignorance, getting snarky, and lashing out against people who, bluntly, are simply far more experienced and knowledgeable in these areas than you helps absolutely no-one… not you, not the people you're dealing with (as they're less likely to be accommodating or gentle in their explanations in future, if they even offer them), not the forum (it taints the entire board), not anyone else in the thread watching it… no-one.



you troll people. Not just me and for no good reason. Bluster and wind? Directionless post? Are you expecting Shakespeare?

You bully people while being super sensitive about the responses you get. I am defiantly not a victim i discuss robustly and expect robust response.

but neither are you. 

you response to an op that was not as elegantly put as you would like.

Look, I think I get what you're getting at&#8230; but it's largely bluster and wind. There are some large and largely inaccurate generalisations here, as well as quite a lot of misconceptions about the way ranking is dealt with in many forms (historically, contemporarily, and culturally), which gives a result of a fairly directionless post, in the end saying nothing. You're mistaking the relative importance of Shodan (in systems that use it) for what it represents, and what it means/takes to achieve it&#8230; as well as ignoring the cultural reasons for different impressions. Why is a blackbelt seen as "expert" in the West? Well, that's to do with the way Westerners tend to view progressions, as well as the fact that early pioneers had relatively low Dan grades&#8230; the idea of a blackbelt was built up in the zeitgeist as something of value and respect (something that continues today, which is why there is such backlash against junior Dan grades, despite the fact that, as Donald said, it's entirely up to the system/organisation/school itself).

 The idea of black being the "last colour" really doesn't mean anything either, you realise&#8230; honestly, I have trouble seeing where to start with the number of problems in that post


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Dude, I wasn't talking about myself there… you and Hanzou have dealt with everyone on this forum that way… not just me.
> 
> And no, it's not a matter of "know your place"… or deferring to me on everything… but it is a matter of recognising when you don't know something, and others have a hell of a lot more knowledge and experience than you do.
> 
> ...



you are your own source?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> you troll people. Not just me and for no good reason.



I think I would call it educating rather than trolling in most cases, certainly in yours drop bear.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> you troll people.



You don't have a clue what you're talking about, you realise… correcting the large number of errors some come up with is not "trolling"… your posts, on the other hand, seemingly designed to insight certain posters (including myself), are pretty much the textbook definition.



drop bear said:


> Not just me and for no good reason.



You're missing the backstories, the contexts, and, well, everything other than your prejudices here, you know… 



drop bear said:


> Bluster and wind? Directionless post? Are you expecting Shakespeare?



Gee, sorry for being educated… must throw you a bit… 



drop bear said:


> You bully people while being super sensitive about the responses you get.



I pay attention to the responses I get… that's quite a different thing to being "super sensitive" about them… 



drop bear said:


> I am defiantly not a victim i discuss robustly and expect robust response.



I can see how you think that… but, to be blunt, you do not present robust discussion, you present sheer bloody minded denial of anyone else bringing you more (better) information. And as far as you expecting robust response… this is the way you respond to such? Right… 



drop bear said:


> but neither are you.



Neither am I what? A victim? You're missing a contextual link in your sentence structure… I don't have a clue what you're talking about here.



drop bear said:


> you response to an op that was not as elegantly put as you would like.



(For those unaware, the following is a post of mine in response to one of Photon Guy's posts on rank… one in a series… and, as such, this is taken out of context entirely):



drop bear said:


> Look, I think I get what you're getting at&#8230; but it's largely bluster and wind. There are some large and largely inaccurate generalisations here, as well as quite a lot of misconceptions about the way ranking is dealt with in many forms (historically, contemporarily, and culturally), which gives a result of a fairly directionless post, in the end saying nothing. You're mistaking the relative importance of Shodan (in systems that use it) for what it represents, and what it means/takes to achieve it&#8230; as well as ignoring the cultural reasons for different impressions. Why is a blackbelt seen as "expert" in the West? Well, that's to do with the way Westerners tend to view progressions, as well as the fact that early pioneers had relatively low Dan grades&#8230; the idea of a blackbelt was built up in the zeitgeist as something of value and respect (something that continues today, which is why there is such backlash against junior Dan grades, despite the fact that, as Donald said, it's entirely up to the system/organisation/school itself).
> 
> The idea of black being the "last colour" really doesn't mean anything either, you realise&#8230; honestly, I have trouble seeing where to start with the number of problems in that post



What on earth does that post have to do with anything? You think that was me "trolling" Photon Guy? Seriously? Or me "bullying" him?

Dude… learn to read context.

And, mate, I'd love to how you would phrase that with more elegance (I'm pretty sure you meant eloquence, for the record…), care to attempt? If not, would you like to demonstrate how my post isn't eloquent (or elegant)? Or, say, demonstrate how elegant you think I thought I was being…?


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> you are your own source?



I am the source for the information I provide, when the information I provide is my own experience and understanding, yes.


----------



## Zero (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Why is a blackbelt seen as "expert" in the West? Well, that's to do with the way Westerners tend to view progressions, as well as the fact that early pioneers had relatively low Dan grades&#8230; the idea of a blackbelt was built up in the zeitgeist as something of value and respect (something that continues today, which is why there is such backlash against junior Dan grades, despite the fact that, as Donald said, it's entirely up to the system/organisation/school itself).
> 
> The idea of black being the "last colour" really doesn't mean anything either, you realise&#8230; honestly, I have trouble seeing where to start with the number of problems in that post



Look, I haven't had much to do with this thread so sorry for dropping in but surely you know black belt/low dan grades are only seen as "expert" generally by those outside of the arts or unfortunately in those mass-conveyor McDojos where people have either been duped or are happy to buy into the pretence?

I doubt very many on MT and including yourself would categorise many lower grade black belts as "expert".  They may be very accomplished in certain areas of the style but it will be very impressive, if not incredible, if they are rounded in all aspects to that level of expertise or knowledge.

I think from your last sentence you agree with that.

It would be kind of nice if the final colour went from black back to white to indicate the full circle of study and awareness and in many practical senses this happens for those who wear the bb long enough (a kind of frayed, washed out grey/white, sweat stained colour).


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 4, 2014)

Zero said:


> Look, I haven't had much to do with this thread so sorry for dropping in but surely you know black belt/low dan grades are only seen as "expert" generally by those outside of the arts or unfortunately in those mass-conveyor McDojos were people have either been duped or are happy to buy into the pretence?
> 
> I doubt very many on MT and including yourself would categorise many lower grade black belts as "expert".  They may be very accomplished in certain areas of the style but it will be very impressive, if not incredible, if they are rounded in all aspects to that level of expertise or knowledge.
> 
> ...



Drop Bear didn't say any of that… he copy and pasted my response to a different thread without giving it the proper quote notation. Those are my words, and completely unrelated to this thread.

EDIT: This is where he took it from, for the record: Putting the black belt on a pedestal MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community


----------



## Zero (Dec 4, 2014)

Ta, I will get back out of this thread, it's somewhat interesting reading but I have clearly made a hash of it hehe!  : )


----------



## K-man (Dec 4, 2014)

drop bear said:


> so conversations will go a lot better if I know my place. And accept you are the authority on everything except planes at which point we all defer to kman.
> 
> obviously that is not going to happen. The expectation is unrealistic  incredibly arrogant and insulting to pretty much everyone here.


Conversations will always go better with good manners and your little snipe here did not go unnoticed. You might notice I don't post much if at all on the BJJ threads. Same for Mauy Thai and a multitude of others. Why? Because I don't have the necessary knowledge. If you look at post numbers it has taken me six years to reach 5000 posts. You have nearly 2000 in less than 12 months. How does that work? Not even Hanzou had that many posts and he has been accused of trolling. 

I post where I believe I have sufficient knowledge from experience to make a contribution. A number of people post in areas they have no knowledge and pretend to be experts. Then they take offence when people call them out. If that is "knowing your place" fair enough. I know my place is not making stupid posts in the BJJ threads. 

Sure, I get agitated when people who don't understand my training get it wrong then try to hang s#'t on everything I do or say. Perhaps years of training counts for something and you can tell from people's posts their level of expertise.

I think if you were to read back through the earlier posts in this thread you may well find some good advice as to how to post without getting up people's noses.


----------



## Steve (Dec 4, 2014)

I agree, K-man, that manners are very important. I try to be courteous, but I'm pretty sure you view my behavior as rude, at times.  Conversely, I view your behavior here as rude, at times.  We all get heated.  We all get our feathers ruffled.  And we all write things we know we probably shouldn't.  It's not just Hanzou and Drop Bear and me causing conflict.  It's not just the "BJJ Fanboys" or the MMA fanboys who are causing conflict.

I will accept full responsibility for my own role in the situation.  Can you do the same?


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 4, 2014)

Steve said:


> I agree, K-man, that manners are very important. I try to be courteous, but I'm pretty sure you view my behavior as rude, at times.  Conversely, I view your behavior here as rude, at times.  We all get heated.  We all get our feathers ruffled.  And we all write things we know we probably shouldn't.  It's not just Hanzou and Drop Bear and me causing conflict.  It's not just the "BJJ Fanboys" or the MMA fanboys who are causing conflict.
> 
> I will accept full responsibility for my own role in the situation.  Can you do the same?



Not commenting on the current interpersonal kerfuffle, but just a general observation from watching lots of arguments over the years...

After an argument, it's pretty common for someone to try cooling things down by saying "okay, I'll admit that I was partially to blame, but I'd like you to admit that you were partially in the wrong as well." It's only natural - we feel like we're making a concession, so why shouldn't the other guy make a concession as well.

The funny thing is, in my experience it seems like the other person is significantly *more* likely to accept responsibility or offer an apology when we leave out that second part. When someone just says, "hey, you know what? I was being unreasonable about that. I'm sorry," the other person is much more likely to say "Hey, I think I was overreacting. Just had a bad day. I'm sorry too." For some reason, many folks are more likely to offer a sincere apology or accept responsibility when they feel they are freely choosing to do so rather than having it demanded of them.

Maybe that's just the people I hang out with, though. I certainly can't claim to have any universal insight into human behavior.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

K-man said:


> Conversations will always go better with good manners and your little snipe here did not go unnoticed. You might notice I don't post much if at all on the BJJ threads. Same for Mauy Thai and a multitude of others. Why? Because I don't have the necessary knowledge. If you look at post numbers it has taken me six years to reach 5000 posts. You have nearly 2000 in less than 12 months. How does that work? Not even Hanzou had that many posts and he has been accused of trolling.
> 
> I post where I believe I have sufficient knowledge from experience to make a contribution. A number of people post in areas they have no knowledge and pretend to be experts. Then they take offence when people call them out. If that is "knowing your place" fair enough. I know my place is not making stupid posts in the BJJ threads.
> 
> ...



yeah about that. I have been hitting this wrong trying to use logic and evidence.

if anecdotal evidence is the main hand to play. It is going to be easier for me.

see i am a very average sport guy. I am not a pro or ranked fighter.

but having done too many years bouncing and engaged in far too much violence. I am a self defence veteran. 

i am an avoidance veteran.

i am a de-escalation veteran.

and most of this forum is street.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 4, 2014)

Of course right now i am guarding a car park. Which is why the ton of posts.


----------



## Steve (Dec 4, 2014)

Fair point, Tony.  I wish you weren't so damned reasonable.


----------



## K-man (Dec 4, 2014)

Steve said:


> I agree, K-man, that manners are very important. I try to be courteous, but I'm pretty sure you view my behavior as rude, at times.  Conversely, I view your behavior here as rude, at times.  We all get heated.  We all get our feathers ruffled.  And we all write things we know we probably shouldn't.  It's not just Hanzou and Drop Bear and me causing conflict.  It's not just the "BJJ Fanboys" or the MMA fanboys who are causing conflict.
> 
> I will accept full responsibility for my own role in the situation.  Can you do the same?


OK! So you still haven't acknowledged that calling me coy was an insult and when I pointed it out to you you say that it is not an insult where you come from and deliberately use the term again. So that is accepting responsibility for your role? 

I don't even know why we are having this conversation. The respect I had for you disappeared after your PM when you started attacking me and accused me of hounding Hanzou.  You brought up the bit about BJJ, MMA and fanboys. Well let me say this. I have no problem with BJJ. I have no issue with MMA and I have no problem with fans of BJJ and MMA. That leaves Drop Bear, Hanzou and you. 

So let's start with Drop Bear. He says what he says from his position as a bouncer. I don't have a problem with that. He trains MMA. I don't have an issue with that. He might make a comment about something and I might agree with him or I may disagree with him. That's what makes for discussion. I have no doubt he is the person he claims to be. Maybe he is trolling. So what? A lot of people do the same thing. Why did you make a statement that Drop Bear is causing conflict?

I'll move on to Hanzou. Is there a conflict? Yes. Why is there a conflict? Well Hanzou has been putting himself out there as an expert. When someone dismisses some of the world's top martial artists as ineffective or worse alarm bells should start ringing. When someone starts arguing against people who have been training for decades in an area he has no experience alarm bells should start ringing. When the guys on this forum make statements saying that he just doesn't understand and he still claims he knows better alarm bells should be ringing. When someone claims to hold a high rank in a martial art that turns out to be Shodan, alarm bells should be ringing. Now someone criticising a 9th dan person should be reasonable experienced you would think. Someone putting down a 6th dan guy, recognised as one of the UK's top martial artists, from another style should be similar rank you would assume. Normally I couldn't give a toss about rank as long as the persons heart is in the right place. Turns out Hanzou doesn't have a BJJ black belt. We don't know his rank.  No wonder he was dismissive when I said one of my training partners is a BJJ black belt. 

So where does this leave you? I called BS early in the piece. You sided with Hanzou and we have had a circus for months. Sometimes we can be nice and sometimes we have to call a spade a bloody shovel. This has been a festering sore for months. It's time it was lanced.

You got one thing right in your post. Sometimes we write things we shouldn't, and perhaps this is one of those times, but to be frank, I'm over it. There has been a poisonous atmosphere for too long.


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 4, 2014)

Gentle folk,

This thread has brought some important things out, and I think it's got some real potential to maybe break up some of the log jams that come up, if everyone stays civil.

I'd like to take a moment here and bring up some things about communication...  Communication is a process -- and a difficult one.  It's even more difficult in a medium like the web, where we cross cultures and languages (England and the US "are two nations separated by a common language", I've heard attributed to Winston Churchill.)  and limited to text and a handful of images, rather than all the variances of tone, expression, body language, and other non-verbal aspects to communication.  (Multiple studies have shown that non-verbal elements make up the huge -- better than 90% -- majority of communication.)  I often find myself reminded of something an instructor once said in class on communication:
*You may think you know what I meant, but what you heard was not what I said.*​You might think that this wouldn't matter as much in a non-verbal setting -- but I think it matters MORE!  Have you ever received an email or note from someone, and found out that what you believed it said or meant was nowhere close to what the sender intended?  I sure have -- and I've seen it happen plenty of times here, so anyone about to say it hasn't happened to them is mistaken.  Perhaps if we can all keep some of these things in mind, we'll all be able to communicate a little better. 

Of course, that's not to say that we can't all perhaps select our words a little more carefully or kindly, and avoid words or phrases that we know damn well are going to be offensive.  Let me also share something that I do a lot, which I find can mitigate some of that -- just cut down on heated, off the cuff remarks.  (Sometimes I do this more than I can believe!)  I'll type up a response to a post, then review it -- and delete the darn thing because it's not going further a conversation.  I might rewrite it... but a lot of the time, I don't.  Especially if I'm responding to something that got under my skin...

And that's one last point I want to make.  Folks, this is an online forum.  Most of us haven't met in person.  Sometimes we say things on-line that we wouldn't say face-to-face.  But... why let it get to you that much anyway?  Have fun, and if it stops being fun, use the Ignore list, or just take a break.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

That is a good point jks, the limits of an internet forum as a tool of conversation is the reason why I keep my posts relatively short and simple. Going too much into detail and splitting hairs only leads to never ending cyclical arguments. That doesn`t mean you should not call someone on obvious BS however.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

There is a difference between work and high school.

in high school if you don't like someone you don't have to function around them and it is an important part of who you are.

in work if you don't like someone tough. you have to get over it.there are more important things.

the forum is probably fifty fifty. And although being nice is good. If you interact with others there is going to be conflict.

i don't think that has been addressed. In all this how to get along posting. 

me i don't care. I like to fight. I like to disagree. I believe in resisted training.

and that applies to my ideas as well as my techniques.

this is sparring. You get smashed. You get tapped. Re set re adjust move on.

and before anybody thinks i am trying to advocate this becoming 4 Chan.

shades of grey.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

No, this is not sparing, it is something known as conversation. You know the kind where you actually discuss something, listen to others and winning is not all important?

May I ask how old you are drop bear?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> No, this is not sparing, it is something known as conversation. You know the kind where you actually discuss something, listen to others and winning is not all important?
> 
> May I ask how old you are drop bear?



40.

sparring is a conversation.

how old are you?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

And i am not the first guy to come up with that idea by the way.

MAMA Martial Arts Mommy Archives Sparring is a Conversation Not a Monologue


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> 40.
> 
> sparring is a conversation.
> 
> how old are you?



Does not mean the reverse is true. Punch me in the face or tap me out in the dojo and I`ll love it, using the same tactics when posting here can be quite rude to say the least. Do you see what I am getting at?

My age and other info is in my profile like it always has been.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Does not mean the reverse is true. Punch me in the face or tap me out in the dojo and I`ll love it, using the same tactics when posting here can be quite rude to say the least. Do you see what I am getting at?
> 
> My age and other info is in my profile like it always has been.



no i don't. What is the difference. Why isn't punching people in the face ruder than disagreement?

and it would have been easier just to type you age than explain where it is.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> no i don't. What is the difference. Why isn't punching people in the face ruder than disagreement?
> 
> and it would have been easier just to type you age than explain where it is.



Hey you are the one who said this is sparing, not me. 

Even simpler if you had found the info right where it is supposed to be. Maybe you should take the time to update your own profile?


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Hey you are the one who said this is sparing, not me.
> 
> Even simpler if you had found the info right where it is supposed to be. Maybe you should take the time to update your own profile?



sorry i don't understand your explanation.

how is a disagreement ruder than face punching?

or did you mean something else?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> sorry i don't understand your explanation.
> 
> how is a disagreement ruder than face punching?
> 
> or did you mean something else?





drop bear said:


> this is sparring. You get smashed. You get tapped. Re set re adjust move on.



Ok I`ll try do keep it simple.

If you do the equivalent to "smashing" people on this forum in a discussion and attempt to make them "tap out" people just might take offense.

Polite conversation and having an open mind might be a better idea than the sparing mentality you describe. Occationally you might need the equivalent of a punch to cut trough a lot of BS but that should not be the rule.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> Ok I`ll try do keep it simple.
> 
> If you do the equivalent to "smashing" people on this forum in a discussion and attempt to make them "tap out" people just might take offense.
> 
> Polite conversation and having an open mind might be a better idea than the sparing mentality you describe.



why?

it seems if i don't accept i may get smashed in conversation. I am more likely to take offence.

like if i get punched in sparring and take offence.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> why?
> 
> it seems if i don't accept i may get smashed in conversation. I am more likely to take offence.
> 
> like if i get punched in sparring and take offence.



I don`t expect to get smashed in a conversation. If this happens to you a lot maybe you should ask why.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> I don`t expect to get smashed in a conversation. If this happens to you a lot maybe you should ask why.



i know why. Because I test my ideas against resistance. Sometimes my ideas are wrong. Sometimes my ideas are not supported well enough.

if you don't expect to get smashed in conversation. What is your reasoning behind that?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 5, 2014)

drop bear said:


> i know why. Because I test my ideas against resistance. Sometimes my ideas are wrong. Sometimes my ideas are not supported well enough.
> 
> if you don't expect to get smashed in conversation. What is your reasoning behind that?



I don`t expect to be smashed too often in conversations because I try to express myself honestly. If I have ideas I will present them as such rather than hit people over the head with them.

No offense, just giving a direct answer.


----------



## Steve (Dec 5, 2014)

Cirdan said:


> I don`t expect to get smashed in a conversation. If this happens to you a lot maybe you should ask why.


Why do you continue to smash people, then?  You don't seem to see how aggressive you are in your posts.  

And this is the second poster you are calling dishonest.  In what way do you think drop bear is dishonest?  I don't agree with everything he posts, but I find his candor and willingness to speak plainly very honest and refreshing.  I Have not seen anything in his posts that suggests that he exaggerates the truth or lies about his experience.   

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve (Dec 5, 2014)

K-man said:


> OK! So you still haven't acknowledged that calling me coy was an insult and when I pointed it out to you you say that it is not an insult where you come from and deliberately use the term again. So that is accepting responsibility for your role?


K-man, my intention was to use the term that best described the situation, to identify a specific behavior that I disagree with.   I could have reframed it, maybe, and said, "K-man, when you post in this way, it leads me to question your sincerity."  


> I don't even know why we are having this conversation. The respect I had for you disappeared after your PM when you started attacking me and accused me of hounding Hanzou.  You brought up the bit about BJJ, MMA and fanboys. Well let me say this. I have no problem with BJJ. I have no issue with MMA and I have no problem with fans of BJJ and MMA. That leaves Drop Bear, Hanzou and you.


Speaking of honesty, let's be clear here about the PM.  First, I think it's a damned shame.  I sent you a note and Hanzou a note at the same time.  I suggested to you that, as a mentor, we have an opportunity to try and encourage posters like Hanzou to be constructive and I was (and remain) concerned that you and a few others seem to pile on new posters.  I didn't realize at the time that you weren't interested in that and had already written him off.  I will always agree with posts I agree with, regardless of the poster, and disagree with posts I disagree with, regardless of the poster.  That I happen to think that Hanzou has some good ideas seems to make you mad. 


> So let's start with Drop Bear. He says what he says from his position as a bouncer. I don't have a problem with that. He trains MMA. I don't have an issue with that. He might make a comment about something and I might agree with him or I may disagree with him. That's what makes for discussion. I have no doubt he is the person he claims to be. Maybe he is trolling. So what? A lot of people do the same thing. Why did you make a statement that Drop Bear is causing conflict?


I actually don't.  I think drop bear is a solid contributor to the site.  He is often hounded for his opinions, and derided.   





> I'll move on to Hanzou. Is there a conflict? Yes. Why is there a conflict? Well Hanzou has been putting himself out there as an expert. When someone dismisses some of the world's top martial artists as ineffective or worse alarm bells should start ringing. When someone starts arguing against people who have been training for decades in an area he has no experience alarm bells should start ringing. When the guys on this forum make statements saying that he just doesn't understand and he still claims he knows better alarm bells should be ringing. When someone claims to hold a high rank in a martial art that turns out to be Shodan, alarm bells should be ringing. Now someone criticising a 9th dan person should be reasonable experienced you would think. Someone putting down a 6th dan guy, recognised as one of the UK's top martial artists, from another style should be similar rank you would assume. Normally I couldn't give a toss about rank as long as the persons heart is in the right place. Turns out Hanzou doesn't have a BJJ black belt. We don't know his rank.  No wonder he was dismissive when I said one of my training partners is a BJJ black belt.


I think Hanzou has a position that is comprised of opinions, and he's never shown an unwillingness to further explain his rationale.  Some of his opinions I agree with, and some I don't.   Following him around, pulling baggage from old threads into new ones, piling on and generally perpetuating conflict isn't good for conversation.  I think if you treated him more respectfully, he would respond in kind.   I like that we have some other BJJ guys around and I am very interested in encouraging more participation.  And so, I agree with him where I think he makes a good point.  





> So where does this leave you? I called BS early in the piece. You sided with Hanzou and we have had a circus for months. Sometimes we can be nice and sometimes we have to call a spade a bloody shovel. This has been a festering sore for months. It's time it was lanced.


This "us vs them" mentality is at the root of the issue.  I didn't "side with Hanzou" or against you.  I'm glad you're speaking plainly.  Maybe I shouldn't have reached out to you.  I send like 10 PMs a year, so it was something I thought about prior to sending it. It was a good faith attempt to address this conflict months ago before it became caustic.   


> You got one thing right in your post. Sometimes we write things we shouldn't, and perhaps this is one of those times, but to be frank, I'm over it. There has been a poisonous atmosphere for too long.


I agree wholeheartedly.


----------



## K-man (Dec 5, 2014)

Steve said:


> Why do you continue to smash people, then?  You don't seem to see how aggressive you are in your posts.
> 
> And this is the second poster you are calling dishonest.  In what way do you think drop bear is dishonest?  I don't agree with everything he posts, but I find his candor and willingness to speak plainly very honest and refreshing.  I Have not seen anything in his posts that suggests that he exaggerates the truth or lies about his experience.


LOL.  Where did Cirdan call Drop Bear dishonest?



Cirdan said:


> I don`t expect to be smashed too often in conversations because *I try to express myself honestly*. If I have ideas I will present them as such rather than hit people over the head with them.


I might have thought "trying to express myself honestly" meant just that. I would suggest that aggressiveness follows ill informed comment or where posters deliberately flame such as you are doing here.



Steve said:


> K-man, my intention was to use the term that best described the situation, to identify a specific behavior that I disagree with.   I could have reframed it, maybe, and said, "K-man, when you post in this way, it leads me to question your sincerity."


So you meant what you said? Cool. I would be banned from the board if I were to post what I now think of you.



Steve said:


> Speaking of honesty, let's be clear here about the PM.  First, I think it's a damned shame.  I sent you a note and Hanzou a note at the same time.  I suggested to you that, as a mentor, we have an opportunity to try and encourage posters like Hanzou to be constructive and I was (and remain) concerned that you and a few others seem to pile on new posters.  I didn't realize at the time that you weren't interested in that and had already written him off.  I will always agree with posts I agree with, regardless of the poster, and disagree with posts I disagree with, regardless of the poster.  That I happen to think that Hanzou has some good ideas seems to make you mad.


 Good to see you are now being honest. Your phraseology suggests that in the past you have been less than honest ... or does the use of the word have different meaning according to the user?

I have never disagreed with Hanzou's "good ideas". I'm not sure they were actually 'ideas' but the meaning of words seems to confuse you at times.  I would suggest Hanzou was putting forward opinion that in the main you agreed with. I don't think I have seen one comment from you disagreeing with his 'ideas'. Hanzou put forward some good opinion on several of his posts on various grappling techniques. None of those posts "made me mad". Posts that made me 'mad' were the ones denigrating other styles of martial arts, running down some of the world's most respected martial art practitioners, where he was rejecting information provided by multiple experienced practitioners (not just disagreeing with me) and of course when he admitted enjoying needling people. Ironically, you did not speak out against any of those posts so one can only assume that you agree with them. On the old board where we could actually see who liked posts, you liked some of his more highly inflammatory posts. Hmm!

But back to your PM. *I deferred to your request and backed off. *What did you say to Hanzou as it obviously had no effect? Well actually it did. He seemed to be encouraged to post even more inflammatory statements which brought me back in and to this toxic position we find today. So you possibly told him; "K-man is an arsehole, I'll  try to get him to hold back, but don't be discouraged Hanzou, keep up the good work. Stick it right up them." Close?




Steve said:


> I actually don't.  I think drop bear is a solid contributor to the site.  He is often hounded for his opinions, and derided.


This is an interesting take!  You don't what? I suppose I'm being 'coy' by asking what you mean.  I am assuming that you don't agree with my opinion of a Drop Bear.

What did I say? ...
_"So let's start with Drop Bear. *He says what he says from his position as a bouncer.* I don't have a problem with that. *He trains MMA*. I don't have an issue with that. *He might make a comment about something and I might agree with him or I may disagree with him. *That's what makes for discussion.* I have no doubt he is the person he claims to be. Maybe he is trolling.* So what? A lot of people do the same thing. Why did you make a statement that Drop Bear is causing conflict?"_

So I made five statements, one of which is a 'maybe' and you wrote that you "don't". You don't what? You don't *agree* with my statements or you don't think my statements are true? Or are you just disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing?



Steve said:


> I think Hanzou has a position that is comprised of opinions, and he's never shown an unwillingness to further explain his rationale.  Some of his opinions I agree with, and some I don't.


So which of his opinions do you disagree with? You disagree with other people all the time but I've not once seen you disagree with Hanzou. As to explaining his rationale. I have no doubt about that, where he has been asked to clarify his position on a grappling technique, he has done that. It is a totally different story where people have tried to explain to him that his position on Karate or Aikido or Wing Chun was wrong. In those instances he doesn't ask for 'proof', he demands 'proof', and then rejects what is provided because he has never seen it himself, or that it is just a 'demonstration'.



Steve said:


> Following him around, pulling baggage from old threads into new ones, piling on and generally perpetuating conflict isn't good for conversation.


You are obsessed with people following people around. I have never followed anyone around. I post in threads I have an interest. Hanzou has posted in dozens of threads that I haven't even looked at. I haven't posted in any of those. The ones I have posted in are the ones I have an active interest in and feel I can contribute. As to pulling baggage from old threads into new ones ... sometimes quite justified when he writes "show me where I said that". (For what it's worth, others have been far more successful at this than me.) So you can rest easy. I haven't been following Hanzou around and I have no intention of following him around in the future either.



Steve said:


> I think if you treated him more respectfully, he would respond in kind.


I did and he didn't.




Steve said:


> I like that we have some other BJJ guys around and I am very interested in encouraging more participation.  And so, I agree with him where I think he makes a good point.


I agree completely, but they don't need to diss the other styles. Leave that for Bullshido.




Steve said:


> This "us vs them" mentality is at the root of the issue.


Sorry, not being 'coy' but who is 'us' and who is 'them'? As there is no sentiment against BJJ or MMA, I can only assume it is now personalities. Ah, here it is ...


> It's not just Hanzou and Drop Bear and me causing conflict. It's not just the "BJJ Fanboys" or the MMA fanboys who are causing conflict.


There's the 'us' and I presume 'them' is the rest of us.




Steve said:


> I didn't "side with Hanzou" or against you.


 Thank goodness you cleared that up. I was really beginning to wonder"



Steve said:


> I'm glad you're speaking plainly.


Refreshing isn't it?




Steve said:


> Maybe I shouldn't have reached out to you.  I send like 10 PMs a year, so it was something I thought about prior to sending it. It was a good faith attempt to address this conflict months ago before it became caustic.


Not at all. At the time I appreciated the contact. It's a shame that Hanzou didn't respond positively to your PM.



Steve said:


> I agree wholeheartedly


What better than to end on a positive?


----------



## Steve (Dec 5, 2014)

K-man, I wish I could go back and read what I actually sent you and to Hanzou, but they're long gone.  He's welcome to share what I sent him, if he can and chooses, but I assure you it was not what you think.  

For examples of when I disagree with Hanzou, there happens to be a very recent example in the "IJF bans Judo athletes" thread.  As I said before, if I agree with a post, I agree with it regardless of the poster.  And conversely, if I disagree with one, it is regardless of the poster. 

Honesty is a big one.  Let's talk about that for a moment.  Cirdan overtly accused me of being dishonest, but couldn't or wouldn't elaborate publicly or privately.  Now, you're saying (really insinuating) that I've been dishonest.  Sure, you don't come right out and say it (ie, speaking plainly), but when you comment on my phraseology, your meaning comes through clearly.  I'll invite you to share with me publicly or privately an instance of dishonesty, because I take that very seriously.  I am a stubborn guy and I know that I often wade in hip deep into these conversations even when I shouldn't.  If you're doing something that I disagree with, I will say so, and that seems to me to be very honest.   

Regarding the use of "us vs them," I'll try to explain.  When someone sides with something, they are siding against something else.  Choosing sides means something pretty specific.  I choose this and not that.  If one chooses a side, they are opting to associate with that side and against another.  For example, if someone is "pro choice", they are siding against "pro life." 

When you say that I "sided with Hanzou", in the context of this discussion, the implication is that I sided against you.  I reject the entire line of reasoning.  I neither sided with Hanzou nor against you.  Rather, I agreed with Hanzou where he posted something I agreed with.   

I also want to be clear, I don't have any contact with either Hanzou or Drop Bear outside of the public forums, and so don't want to imply we're a cabal of any kind.  In fact, Hanzou didn't respond to my PM to him, so outside of that one contact in PM months ago, we aren't an "us."  I mentioned the names in a sentence only because these seem to be certain users on the butt end of derisive comments and passive/aggressive attempts to "help" educate them.  I could add other usernames to the list, but didn't think it would be necessary.


----------



## K-man (Dec 5, 2014)

Steve said:


> K-man, I wish I could go back and read what I actually sent you and to Hanzou, but they're long gone.  He's welcome to share what I sent him, if he can and chooses, but I assure you it was not what you think.


Steve, I don't care in the least what you said to Hanzou. All that is important to me are your actions after you asked me to pull back.



Steve said:


> For examples of when I disagree with Hanzou, there happens to be a very recent example in the "IJF bans Judo athletes" thread.  As I said before, if I agree with a post, I agree with it regardless of the poster.  And conversely, if I disagree with one, it is regardless of the poster.


Wow! Hanzou says that he doesn't think Judo is all that popular and you say, _"I don't know, Hanzou. It's very popular around here and has been for a long time."_ Wow! That's a real biggie! I'll bet that really had Hanzou asking himself questions.




Steve said:


> Honesty is a big one.  Let's talk about that for a moment.  Cirdan overtly accused me of being dishonest, but couldn't or wouldn't elaborate publicly or privately.


I dispute your claim that that is what he meant. I read it and didn't see that at all. On the other hand when I questioned you on the use of the word 'coy' you confirmed that you meant it. In fact you went further and said you should have called me insincere. Cool, if that's what you think.




Steve said:


> Now, you're saying (really insinuating) that I've been dishonest.  Sure, you don't come right out and say it (ie, speaking plainly), but when you comment on my phraseology, your meaning comes through clearly.  I'll invite you to share with me publicly or privately an instance of dishonesty, because I take that very seriously.  I am a stubborn guy and I know that I often wade in hip deep into these conversations even when I shouldn't.  If you're doing something that I disagree with, I will say so, and that seems to me to be very honest.


Now lets's look at the use of English. Saying something, "you are being insincere" and insinuating, "you are being coy" can be the same or it can be different. That's why you clarified your meaning. Steve, I have never accused you of being dishonest. I was referring to you choice of language. You accused Cirdan of calling Drop Bear dishonest because he used the phrase "trying to express myself honestly" then you  used a similar expression yourself. The difference was of course, he used the word in context where you used it out of context then took my reply out of context as well. Ain't English a *****.



Steve said:


> Regarding the use of "us vs them," I'll try to explain.  When someone sides with something, they are siding against something else.  Choosing sides means something pretty specific.  I choose this and not that.  If one chooses a side, they are opting to associate with that side and against another.  For example, if someone is "pro choice", they are siding against "pro life."


Really? Thank you for the clarification. Who would have guessed?



Steve said:


> When you say that I "sided with Hanzou", in the context of this discussion, the implication is that I sided against you.  I reject the entire line of reasoning.  I neither sided with Hanzou nor against you.  Rather, I agreed with Hanzou where he posted something I agreed with.


That isn't what you said earlier and it is not what is generally meant by "us vs them", and remember, it was you that introduced 'us vs them'. As to siding with Hanzou against me ... I didn't say that or mean that. Whether you 'sided' with Hanzou or whether you just ignored the posts where he was out of line is immaterial. The fact that you weren't critical in those situations despite being present in the conversation is implicit approval.



Steve said:


> I also want to be clear, I don't have any contact with either Hanzou or Drop Bear outside of the public forums, and so don't want to imply we're a cabal of any kind.  In fact, Hanzou didn't respond to my PM to him, so outside of that one contact in PM months ago, we aren't an "us."  I mentioned the names in a sentence only because these seem to be certain users on the butt end of derisive comments and passive/aggressive attempts to "help" educate them.  I could add other usernames to the list, but didn't think it would be necessary.


I don't care whether you email the President. I'm not interested in who you talk to and I accept there is no 'cabal', (nice word). It is reassuring that you guys weren't plotting my downfall. Why am I not surprised that Hazou didn't respond. Didn't that give you any indication of what was going to happen?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 5, 2014)

Just to clarify, I never pretended to be an expert in anything. I have experienced many different martial arts, and hold high belts in two of them. I was around karate for a long time before I actually practiced it, and everything I've said about the art comes from those experiences. I just happen to use Youtube vids to verify those experiences because they mirror my own. I don't think its disparaging to point out that grappling simply isn't very prevalent in karate. 

I also don't think its disparaging to point out that some styles have pretty hilarious ways to address grappling situations. People put that stuff out there, and its perfectly within rights to criticize it, or even get a chuckle out of it. I've been meaning to put up a vid of how an Aikido sensei put up a ridiculous way to counter open guard. I don't put those up to bag Aikido, I put them up because they're pretty funny.

As for my comments about the posters getting angry at my posts and me getting a chuckle out of it; I just thought it was humorous that simple comments could get people so upset. I mean, I said that Wado-Ryu is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu and people went crazy. I just thought the reaction was completely unwarranted and kind of silly, so I laughed about it. The off-topic comments (some at my expense) were kind of funny too. However, the last thing I desire is to attack people's art. I'm simply curious about how other arts deal with grappling, because that was never a factor when I was in the striking arts, and that lack was a big factor in my migration from Karate to Judo and eventually Bjj.

I actually did read Steve's PM, and meant to respond to it. It was simply some advice on how to interact with others on the forum, and even to lay off of Kman because he thought I was attacking him too much. I've meant to tell him "thanks" for some time now, but I never got around to it. So thanks Steve for the advice, it was appreciated.


----------



## K-man (Dec 5, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Just to clarify, I never pretended to be an expert in anything. I have experienced many different martial arts, and hold high belts in two of them.


Sorry Hanzou, you don't hold any high belts, that is one of the problems. You have a black belt in Shotokan and a purple belt in BJJ. That is not demeaning your achievements, just a fact.



Hanzou said:


> I was around karate for a long time before I actually practiced it, and everything I've said about the art comes from those experiences. I just happen to use Youtube vids to verify those experiences because they mirror my own. I don't think its disparaging to point out that grappling simply isn't very prevalent in karate.


I agree that pointing out grappling isn't prevalent in karate isn't disparaging. It is the truth. Grappling unfortunately isn't prevalent in a lot of karate because those styles of karate went down the sport track. That was the type of karate you trained and despite the fact that Shotokan is a solid style of Martial Art,mount ground it less than satisfactory, exactly the experience I had with Goju Kai, although I recognised a lot of good things in my previous training too. There is a lot of grappling in the Okinawan styles, something you obviously haven't come across. 

There are good things on YouTube and there are some really poor things on YouTube. Selecting bad examples of an art and holding them up to ridicule is not funny to serious practitioners of those styles. When they complain that that is not indicative of their training, demanding video of their training is not the way to win friends.



Hanzou said:


> I also don't think its disparaging to point out that some styles have pretty hilarious ways to address grappling situations. People put that stuff out there, and its perfectly within rights to criticize it, or even get a chuckle out of it. I've been meaning to put up a vid of how an Aikido sensei put up a ridiculous way to counter open guard. I don't put those up to bag Aikido, I put them up because they're pretty funny.


No. They might be funny to you. People put all sorts of stuff on YouTube. We have had people on MT who consider themselves God's gift to the martial arts. They even put up their own videos to show us how good they are. That's when you have a right to be critical. For the rest, keep it to yourself and laugh at it on private if you like. Putting it up on MT to ridicule it just makes you a jerk.



Hanzou said:


> As for my comments about the posters getting angry at my posts and me getting a chuckle out of it; I just thought it was humorous that simple comments could get people so upset. I mean, I said that Wado-Ryu is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu and people went crazy. I just thought the reaction was completely unwarranted and kind of silly, so I laughed about it.


Wado Ryu is not a combination of Karate and Jujutso. It is a genuine karate style where Otsuka combined elements of his Jujutsu with karate to create his own style, Wado Ryu. If we look at BJJ we could just as easily say BJJ is just a combination on wrestling and Judo. That would be to sell it short. BJJ is BJJ. A system that has combined elements of other styles of MA and honed them to a high level. Nothing humourus at all, especially to the Wado guys.



Hanzou said:


> The off-topic comments (some at my expense) were kind of funny too. However, the last thing I desire is to attack people's art. I'm simply curious about how other arts deal with grappling, because that was never a factor when I was in the striking arts, and that lack was a big factor in my migration from Karate to Judo and eventually Bjj.


If you were curious about something you only need to ask in an enquiring way. Not from a position of; "this is really stupid, what do you think?"



Hanzou said:


> I actually did read Steve's PM, and meant to respond to it. It was simply some advice on how to interact with others on the forum, and even to lay off of Kman because he thought I was attacking him too much. I've meant to tell him "thanks" for some time now, but I never got around to it. So thanks Steve for the advice, it was appreciated.


You can attack me as much as you like, I've been around a fair while and I'm not sensitive. But please, challenge me with an open mind. There is a very small chance that I might have gathered a few tips over the years that might be of value to you on your journey.


----------



## K-man (Dec 5, 2014)

So Hanzou, what part do you disagree with?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 5, 2014)

Just about everything. However, I really don't feel like discussing it, so I just pressed the disagree button.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 6, 2014)

drop bear said:


> yeah about that. I have been hitting this wrong trying to use logic and evidence.



No, you don't. There is no logic in your posts, there is bias, prejudice, a real lack of understanding and information, and a denial of any others information and evidence.



drop bear said:


> if anecdotal evidence is the main hand to play. It is going to be easier for me.



Good. But remember that that is the most common form you're going to get from others… dismissing it when you have nothing to counter it with is not logical, nor any basis for good conversation. In other words… listen… you might just learn something.



drop bear said:


> see i am a very average sport guy. I am not a pro or ranked fighter.



Okay.



drop bear said:


> but having done too many years bouncing and engaged in far too much violence. I am a self defence veteran.



I don't know that I'd class that as "self defence"… as, well, it isn't. Handling violence? Sure. But, broadly, that's not the same thing.



drop bear said:


> i am an avoidance veteran.
> 
> i am a de-escalation veteran.



Okay. Might I suggest that you impart some of that experience, then? So far, that hasn't been what you've been talking about in the majority of the posts you've made… 



drop bear said:


> and most of this forum is street.



No, it's really not. There are about 100 different forums here… only one is "street" by definition. While it can be a part of many discussions in many areas, that's not the way it's set up.



drop bear said:


> There is a difference between work and high school.
> 
> in high school if you don't like someone you don't have to function around them and it is an important part of who you are.
> 
> in work if you don't like someone tough. you have to get over it.there are more important things.



I don't know what high school you went to, but… can't say I agree with that… 

Look, there are differences… but that, I don't think, is really one of them… at least, not a major one…



drop bear said:


> the forum is probably fifty fifty. And although being nice is good. If you interact with others there is going to be conflict.



No, there is the potential for conflict… if there is conflict whenever you deal with anyone, then mate, you have issues that need to be addressed.



drop bear said:


> i don't think that has been addressed. In all this how to get along posting.



It hasn't been addressed as it's not the reality for most here.



drop bear said:


> me i don't care. I like to fight. I like to disagree. I believe in resisted training.
> 
> and that applies to my ideas as well as my techniques.



Then you're on the wrong board, if you're looking for a fight every time you post.

Look, heated discussion is one thing… passionate debate as well. And yes, that can get towards the idea of conflict… but, if you're posting looking for a fight, even expecting one, you are seriously in the wrong place… you're going against the spirit of this board, and the TOS you agreed to. The desire for fights, and the appearance of trying to start them (with obtuse posting, denial of anyone else's point of view, and so forth) is really, genuinely, the definition of trolling. And that will see you banned.



drop bear said:


> this is sparring. You get smashed. You get tapped. Re set re adjust move on.



No, this is not sparring… this is conversation. No-one here is looking to get "smashed" or "tapped"… and bluntly, you don't have the tools for that… so I suggest you re-assess why you're here.

And you might want to remember, that a number here, including myself, don't spar… in my case, I just go straight to severing limbs.



drop bear said:


> and before anybody thinks i am trying to advocate this becoming 4 Chan.
> 
> shades of grey.



I don't even know what you mean by this… you comment that you like to fight, that all conversation involves people getting "smashed" or "tapped"… and then say it's shades of grey? Really?



drop bear said:


> sparring is a conversation.





drop bear said:


> And i am not the first guy to come up with that idea by the way.
> 
> MAMA Martial Arts Mommy Archives Sparring is a Conversation Not a Monologue



Yeah, you're not getting what is being said in that article… sure, sparring can be looked at as a conversation (an exchange between two or more), rather than a monologue (a single viewpoint expressed by one person)… but what that's meaning is that, when you're sparring, you should be as conscious of the other person, and what they're bringing as you are focused on what you're doing yourself… the admonition is to avoid focusing solely on yourself, and limit the lessons you can take from the engagement.

There is no correlation to say that therefore, conversation is sparring… it's not.



drop bear said:


> no i don't. What is the difference. Why isn't punching people in the face ruder than disagreement?



That's not what was being said. But, to give you an answer, in a sparring match, both of you are engaging actively, knowing the parameters and aims, knowing what you're getting into… you know the other guy is going to try to hit you in the face, and you get to hit him back. It's an agreed upon situation. In a conversation, on an assumed friendly platform, to have someone try to "smash you", when that's not the agreed upon situation or environment, then yeah, it's pretty rude, inflammatory, and so on… and, again, in the context of this board, trolling.

For the record, I keep harping on that to highlight to you how you're representing yourself, in the hopes that you recognise it, and can change for the better.



drop bear said:


> why?
> 
> it seems if i don't accept i may get smashed in conversation. I am more likely to take offence.
> 
> like if i get punched in sparring and take offence.



Let's put it this way… even in sparring, there are considerations and parameters… let's say you're rolling in BJJ… positions, submission, escape only… no striking, no flesh grabs, and so on… and your partner decides to just start slamming their elbow into your head. It's not part of that sparring construct… and when you tell them that that's not this session, even if you also spar with striking at other times, he just laughs and says "hey dude, it's fighting… ya gotta be ready for this!", how do you take it?

It's the same here… again, sparring and conversation are very different… especially where this board is concerned… suddenly raining down elbows just isn't appropriate. It really doesn't matter what you "accept" in terms of your take on conversation, as it is completely besides the point.



drop bear said:


> i know why. Because I test my ideas against resistance. Sometimes my ideas are wrong. Sometimes my ideas are not supported well enough.



No, you don't (test your ideas against resistance)… you bluntly stubbornly refuse to accept any such resistance. To put it in terms you might understand, it's like someone trying to train an arm bar (note: train, not rolling) with you, and you not giving the position to practice it in… and then claiming that they don't know how to choke you. That's not resistance.



drop bear said:


> if you don't expect to get smashed in conversation. What is your reasoning behind that?



Because it's a conversation…? Seriously, if you don't get that, take a good, hard look at the way you interact with people. 



K-man said:


> So Hanzou, what part do you disagree with?





Hanzou said:


> Just about everything. However, I really don't feel like discussing it, so I just pressed the disagree button.



Really? For the record, there was pretty much nothing in K-man's post that was incorrect… quite the opposite… if you disagreed with it, I'd recommend taking a serious look at what he was saying… and your personal behaviour here, as K-man's assessment is damn well on the money.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 6, 2014)

I suppose you have nothing to add, Hanzou….?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> I suppose you have nothing to add, Hanzou….?



Is there really anything to add or discuss when you believe the other side of the discussion is completely wrong from the outset?


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 6, 2014)

Sure, there is… for one thing, I don't see anything in my, or K-man's posts, that are "completely wrong from the outset"…. yours, drop bears, etc, yeah… so I'm curious as to what exactly you feel is wrong in our posts… do you feel you're being misrepresented? Are we putting words in your mouth (or fingers)?


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Sure, there is… for one thing, I don't see anything in my, or K-man's posts, that are "completely wrong from the outset"…. yours, drop bears, etc, yeah… so I'm curious as to what exactly you feel is wrong in our posts… do you feel you're being misrepresented? Are we putting words in your mouth (or fingers)?



Well just look at Kman's post. In the other thread I was the most evil s.o.b. on MT for pointing out a lack of grappling in karate. Some of that came from Kman himself. Now in this thread pointing that out is not only not disparaging, but it's the truth. Awesome!

As for the videos of traditional stylists doing weird grappling things, if you go over to the Hapkido forum, we had a really good discussion about a Hapkido group doing a bad armbar and then proceeding to counter said bad armbar. A couple of posters tried to hop in that thread and derail it, but they were ignored and the great conversation continued. We had a similar (mostly) positive discussion in the Wing Chun forum about anti-grappling, though it got heated in some spots. So I disagree that posting those videos make me a "jerk", or that such vids troll the forum. On the contrary, I feel that they spark a great conversation.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree that posting random videos of people not performing very well makes for 'great' discussion. It will depend on what you are after whether you consider trying to wind people up a good result or not, and as for assuming that people were raging about your posts, well, they weren't. They had tried patiently explaining what they do, they tried, patiently explaining _again_ what they do but then when it's obvious it's not going to make a blind bit of difference posting when others have an agenda they got fed up, not frothing at the mouth, just fed up.
Ignoring posters doesn't make for 'good conversation' because it's only your opinion that they were trying to 'derail' your thread. perhaps they had something valuable to add but it didn't agree with what you were saying.
I think too that people read into what others write seeing only what they want to see not what is actually written, I think Hanzou's post here amply demonstrates that in what he thinks K-man said.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> I think we are going to have to agree to disagree that posting random videos of people not performing very well makes for 'great' discussion.



Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #1:

Help me out Hapkido folks... MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #2:

Some more thoughts on anti grappling . MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community




> It will depend on what you are after whether you consider trying to wind people up a good result or not, and as for assuming that people were raging about your posts, well, they weren't. They had tried patiently explaining what they do, they tried, patiently explaining _again_ what they do but then when it's obvious it's not going to make a blind bit of difference posting when others have an agenda they got fed up, not frothing at the mouth, just fed up.



I do believe that the only thing that happened in the previous thread is that you posted some vids of Wado Ryu guys doing grappling within the Bunkai, and me saying that Wado is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu, and then you and some other posters began making bizarre posts about drinking.

Please note again, that spawned from one post of me stating that Wado is a combo of Karate and Jujutsu.



> Ignoring posters doesn't make for 'good conversation' because it's only your opinion that they were trying to 'derail' your thread. perhaps they had something valuable to add but it didn't agree with what you were saying.



I was talking about the Hapkido thread. If you read that thread you'll see quite a few derail attempts in an otherwise fruitful conversation.



> I think too that people read into what others write seeing only what they want to see not what is actually written, I think Hanzou's post here amply demonstrates that in what he thinks K-man said.



How ironic...


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

LOL, at 'some Wado guys', only the founder. Ohtsuka Sensei didn't die until the 1980s so we have first hand information _from him_ about how Wado Ryu started, what it's aims were, where the grappling came from etc etc. Of course I expect you'll say he's wrong.

Derail or disagree?


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

The 'drinking' comments were an attempt, in vain as it turns out, to put a little humour into the thread before it turned into the disaster it did become, ie like lets have a drink on this and chat like adults. A sense of humour is invaluable, also not imagining people frothing at the mouth or getting in a tizzy because people disagree.
So what's yours? mine's a glass of white wine.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 6, 2014)

Myself I like discussing the arts over a beer or a glass of moonshine.   
after a while the discussions or at my side of it gets very mellow. 


WAAA  cant find my drinking smiley


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> LOL, at 'some Wado guys', only the founder. Ohtsuka Sensei didn't die until the 1980s so we have first hand information _from him_ about how Wado Ryu started, what it's aims were, where the grappling came from etc etc. Of course I expect you'll say he's wrong.
> 
> Derail or disagree?



Not the point. I was saying that the craziness began just from me saying that Wado is a combo of Karate and jujutsu in _one_ post.

I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 6, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.


They are not great discussions because of your input.  You posted the videos to Make fun of the people and the styles.  Any good or great info came from other posters


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> They are not great discussions because of your input.  You posted the videos to Make fun of the people and the styles.  Any good or great info came from other posters



In your opinion.

Besides, the argument was that no good or great discussions could come from that source with or without my input. Clearly that isn't the case.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> Not the point. I was saying that the craziness began just from me saying that Wado is a combo of Karate and jujutsu in _one_ post.
> 
> I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.




No, there wasn't any craziness at all, just people telling you about *their* art. You are the only one who thinks it is craziness, and frankly you flatter yourself it you think you caused anyone anything other than a very mild amusement. I rather resent that someone is posting up videos with the intent of making fun of people, 'look how bad these guys are'. It's negative to start with.

No I'm not saying anything about those discussions because I don't have time to go and look at them, I have a life away from the computer, I have to cook dinner for one thing, it's nearly 1900h where I am.
Posting random videos of people doing things not very well is more in line with a pop television show really rather than a base for 'interesting' discussions. A better thing would be posting up videos, if you must, of people doing things well.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 6, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> No, there wasn't any craziness at all, just people telling you about *their* art. You are the only one who thinks it is craziness, and frankly you flatter yourself it you think you caused anyone anything other than a very mild amusement. I rather resent that someone is posting up videos with the intent of making fun of people, 'look how bad these guys are'. It's negative to start with.
> 
> No I'm not saying anything about those discussions because I don't have time to go and look at them, I have a life away from the computer, I have to cook dinner for one thing, it's nearly 1900h where I am.
> Posting random videos of people doing things not very well is more in line with a pop television show really rather than a base for 'interesting' discussions. A better thing would be posting up videos, if you must, of people doing things well.



Talking about boozing and calling me a variety of names for saying that Wado is a combo of Karate and Jj are people talking about their art?  Okay.

We'll simply have to agree to disagree Tez. You refuse to admit that hijacking a thread because of one post was uncalled for and silly, and you refuse to acknowledge the positive discussions that I posted.

There's really nothing more to discuss. Feel free to have the last word if you wish.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 6, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> In your opinion.
> 
> Besides, the argument was that no good or great discussions could come from that source with or without my input. Clearly that isn't the case.


Well I wouldnt really consider any of that nonsense great to begin with.  Ive seen you troll, style bash, troll some more, you have bashed damn near ever style out there except of course the almighty BJJ.  I removed you  from ignore when I reset all my settings because of forum problems I was having but Ill fix that now.  Keep on trolling, lying, and bashing since that seems ok here now


----------



## jks9199 (Dec 6, 2014)

Something else has come to mind...

One thing that never furthers a conversation is labeling...  If I throw a label at someone, I've already dismissed what they're saying.  If you've got a concern like that, please, use the Report button to let the Mod staff know.  We'll look at it, and take whatever action is appropriate.  But throwing a label out at someone like that?  All that's going to do is raise hackles and make people act all defensive.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

Sometimes you feel you can't do right for doing wrong. Thread is getting a bit heated so introduce a lighter note to ease the atmosphere because it was clear that it was on it's way to being locked which of course it was it's dismissed as hijacking so things carry on to the predicted conclusion. Offer a conciliatory tone ie 'what's yours' and you are talked down to and again dismissed. Pointless even trying.
As for calling people names, I believe Elder is still waiting for his apology over the racist remark made to him.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 6, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> As for calling people names, I believe Elder is still waiting for his apology over the racist remark made to him.


 
No, he's not.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 6, 2014)

elder999 said:


> No, he's not.




You've given up waiting?


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 6, 2014)

I guess it is a question of which head gets to apologize?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 6, 2014)

Tez3 said:


> You've given up waiting?


 
.


			
				the latest in a long and forgettable line of BJJ trolls on the subject of doing the right thing said:
			
		

> Ain't happening.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 6, 2014)

elder999 said:


> .


Hey your whole again lol  Your post counts about to skyrocket


----------



## drop bear (Dec 6, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> No, you don't. There is no logic in your posts, there is bias, prejudice, a real lack of understanding and information, and a denial of any others information and evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



yeah but you don't spar.

and you cant accept that there may be conflict in your life.

so it is probably not a concept you are going to understand.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 6, 2014)

Lets look at this like a debate. An actual two team pre arranged meet up where people have trained and prepared to defend their ideas against a resisted opponent.

like sparring. See? 

not an echo chamber where we all just follow the leader.

we should be able to disagree. Nobody is such an expert that they cant face criticism.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 6, 2014)

Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

and why i was resistant to just beat people over the head with my experience. It is effectively cheating in the context of argument.

an appeal to authority misused is a logical fallacy.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 7, 2014)

drop bear said:


> Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> and why i was resistant to just beat people over the head with my experience. It is effectively cheating in the context of argument.
> 
> an appeal to authority misused is a logical fallacy.


Except being an expert is valid and their opinions do hold more value then others.  I for example am a recognized expert in various topics related to illegal narcotics activity. I get called to court to give my opinion in cases I had no involvement in other then reading a case file.  Can I be wrong sure but my opinion is held at a higher value then an average joe on the street.  
Others here have far more experience in certain martial arts styles compared to people that have never trained in it.  For example Id value Kman's opinion on Goju Ryu higher then then someone that says they never trained in Goju when the topic is discussing Goju.  Id value Steves opinion on BJJ over mine on the topic of BJJ because he knows more then me.  

The argument falls apart when people cant accept that someone knows more then they do on a topic.  If I stared arguing with Steve about what is in and not in BJJ and Steve says look I train BJJ and I do XYZ.  I then say well XYZ isnt in BJJ.  Well Im a fool.  Or I make excuses like well you do XYZ but its not from BJJ you stole it from another style so that doesnt count.


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2014)

Where it gets sticky is when one expert tells another expert he doesn't know what he's talking about.  While I know bjj, I would be reluctant to argue that I'm an expert on all things grappling.   So, I wouldn't presume to speak about all of grappling without providing some context.   We have people here who are comfortable speaking about all things martial arts, all things RBSD, all things everything, and who then tell other people, that they are not in fact experts, despite their extensive experience.  

Also, as a purple belt, Hanzou is as expert in bjj as I. If you guys consider me credible, he has as much authority as me, which is middling.   Sure, I know more than most, but within bjj, I have a lot to learn. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> Where it gets sticky is when one expert tells another expert he doesn't know what he's talking about.


Sure that happens all the time Usually if Im called as an expert for the state the defense calls their own to disagree.  But that witness has some expertise in the topic.  What we have here lately is some folks that "may" know BJJ  telling people who study Okinawan Karate, or Korean Styles etc what is and isnt in there system when he has have never studied it.


> While I know bjj, I would be reluctant to argue that I'm an expert on all things grappling.   So, I wouldn't presume to speak about all of grappling without providing some context.   We have people here who are comfortable speaking about all things martial arts, all things RBSD, all things everything, and who then tell other people, that they are not in fact experts, despite their extensive experience.
> 
> Also, as a purple belt, Hanzou is as expert in bjj as I. If you guys consider me credible, he has as much authority as me, which is middling.   Sure, I know more than most, but within bjj, I have a lot to learn.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Ive never seen anyone question Hanzon on BJJ topics (but I dont go into the BJJ section so I guess it could happen) What I do see is he gets questioned quite alot when he speaks out of turn on other styles.  Thats the issue.  Im smart enough not  to go into the BJJ section and tell you what your doing is wrong and sucks.  I can find Hanzo doing that in just about every style subsection on this forum.  Thats where the conflict comes in.  Someone that doesnt study Wado Ryu telling a Wado Ryu practitioner whats in their style.  You got to be smart enough to know what you dont know.  Hanzo might be very knowledgeable in BJJ Im not convinced but ok.
When he post clips of female fighters so he can make fun of them well it rubs folks the wrong way.  When he calls Elder a racial slur that Elder said was offensive and asked for an apology that rubs people wrong.  Maybe he doesnt care I know lots of people here dont like me I get random PMs all the time letting me know I personally dont care but I dont see the fun in posting random clips to show how bad this style or that style is.  All I can think of is these people prob work hard and take pride in their arts and are having fun just like I do and if they were to come here and see  they have been used as a punch line is wrong.


----------



## K-man (Dec 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> Where it gets sticky is when one expert tells another expert he doesn't know what he's talking about.  While I know bjj, I would be reluctant to argue that I'm an expert on all things grappling.   So, I wouldn't presume to speak about all of grappling without providing some context.   We have people here who are comfortable speaking about all things martial arts, all things RBSD, all things everything, and who then tell other people, that they are not in fact experts, despite their extensive experience.
> 
> Also, as a purple belt, Hanzou is as expert in bjj as I. If you guys consider me credible, he has as much authority as me, which is middling.   Sure, I know more than most, but within bjj, I have a lot to learn.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


Steve credibility comes from the value and integrity of your posts, not necessarily from expertise. For example there are several obviously young posters on MT with limited MA experience making great contributions to the forum. Sometimes they might get it a bit wrong, someone points out what that is, they take that on board and have benefitted from the experience. 

As to whether Hanzou has expertise or not, I really don't know and I don't really care. What he says that seems to be credible loses credibility when he turns on some other style or person. That makes me ask, does he really know what he is talking about or is he just taking another cheap shot? I am not in any position to question his opinion on BJJ and I haven't. That is for others with more knowledge than me.

Is a BJJ purple belt an expert? Who knows? He might be a competent grappler but that doesn't mean a lot when it comes to expert opinion. Is a person with the same time in training in another style an expert? Obviously not if what has been posted is to be believed.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 7, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Ive never seen anyone question Hanzon on BJJ topics (but I dont go into the BJJ section so I guess it could happen) What I do see is he gets questioned quite alot when he speaks out of turn on other styles.  Thats the issue.  Im smart enough not  to go into the BJJ section and tell you what your doing is wrong and sucks.  I can find Hanzo doing that in just about every style subsection on this forum.  Thats where the conflict comes in.  Someone that doesnt study Wado Ryu telling a Wado Ryu practitioner whats in their style.  You got to be smart enough to know what you dont know.  Hanzo might be very knowledgeable in BJJ Im not convinced but ok.



I said that Wado Ryu is a combo of Karate and jujutsu. According to Wikipedia;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadō-ryū

The ancestor styles of Wado Ryu are Shindō Yōshin-ryū and Shotokan. Wouldn't that indicate that that is in their style?


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Sure that happens all the time Usually if Im called as an expert for the state the defense calls their own to disagree.  But that witness has some expertise in the topic.  What we have here lately is some folks that "may" know BJJ  telling people who study Okinawan Karate, or Korean Styles etc what is and isnt in there system when he has have never studied it.
> 
> Ive never seen anyone question Hanzon on BJJ topics (but I dont go into the BJJ section so I guess it could happen) What I do see is he gets questioned quite alot when he speaks out of turn on other styles.  Thats the issue.  Im smart enough not  to go into the BJJ section and tell you what your doing is wrong and sucks.  I can find Hanzo doing that in just about every style subsection on this forum.  Thats where the conflict comes in.  Someone that doesnt study Wado Ryu telling a Wado Ryu practitioner whats in their style.  You got to be smart enough to know what you dont know.  Hanzo might be very knowledgeable in BJJ Im not convinced but ok.
> When he post clips of female fighters so he can make fun of them well it rubs folks the wrong way.  When he calls Elder a racial slur that Elder said was offensive and asked for an apology that rubs people wrong.  Maybe he doesnt care I know lots of people here dont like me I get random PMs all the time letting me know I personally dont care but I dont see the fun in posting random clips to show how bad this style or that style is.  All I can think of is these people prob work hard and take pride in their arts and are having fun just like I do and if they were to come here and see  they have been used as a punch line is wrong.


Not talking about Hanzou, ballen.  I only mentioned that he and I are (I think) the same rank.   I was thinking more along the lines of drop bear's points on appeals to authority.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2014)

K-man said:


> Steve credibility comes from the value and integrity of your posts, not necessarily from expertise. For example there are several obviously young posters on MT with limited MA experience making great contributions to the forum. Sometimes they might get it a bit wrong, someone points out what that is, they take that on board and have benefitted from the experience.
> 
> As to whether Hanzou has expertise or not, I really don't know and I don't really care. What he says that seems to be credible loses credibility when he turns on some other style or person. That makes me ask, does he really know what he is talking about or is he just taking another cheap shot? I am not in any position to question his opinion on BJJ and I haven't. That is for others with more knowledge than me.
> 
> Is a BJJ purple belt an expert? Who knows? He might be a competent grappler but that doesn't mean a lot when it comes to expert opinion. Is a person with the same time in training in another style an expert? Obviously not if what has been posted is to be believed.


Expertise is relative.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> Not talking about Hanzou, ballen.  I only mentioned that he and I are (I think) the same rank.   I was thinking more along the lines of drop bear's points on appeals to authority.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


I wasnt speaking of him either in that portion of my post. But I have yet to see two similarly experienced people in the same topic disagreeing as strongly as some of these have.  When you have 2 authorities giving different opinions the we are left to decide which side make more sense to us much like a jury would.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 7, 2014)

Hanzou said:


> I said that Wado Ryu is a combo of Karate and jujutsu. According to Wikipedia;
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadō-ryū
> 
> The ancestor styles of Wado Ryu are Shindō Yōshin-ryū and Shotokan. Wouldn't that indicate that that is in their style?



Disingenuous. The discussion was about what was originally in karate ie Shotokan and the fact that Ohtsuka Sensei put back in what was taken out/diminished in, to him, modern karate.


----------



## Steve (Dec 7, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> I wasnt speaking of him either in that portion of my post. But I have yet to see two similarly experienced people in the same topic disagreeing as strongly as some of these have.  When you have 2 authorities giving different opinions the we are left to decide which side make more sense to us much like a jury would.


I completely understand.  We have an advantage, though, in that as a "jury" we are not bound to choose.  In other words, we don't have to endorse one opinion over another.  I look at Chris Parker's assertions regarding RBSD, and I then look at Drop Bear's, and I have the advantage of being able to say, "Don't know who is more "right" but they both make sense."
granted, It's only natural for people to lean in favor of one opinion over another.  People will evaluate the statements of alleged experts and decide which one sounds... more correct.

That said, my opinion is that often, here on an informal discussion board, this is often little more than an emotional reaction.  I believe in most cases, it has more to do with personality and homogeneous thought than any objective evaluation.  Personality, in that I think people will tend to agree with those who most often agree with them.  If I agree with you, you will likely agree with me, regardless of my position.  It's a loyalty thing.  If I have your back and support you in a thread, you will view me favorably and tend to give me the benefit of the doubt, regardless of how wacky my assertion.  

Homogenous though in that we all come to the table with opinions, and will tend to agree with those people who already share our opinions.  So, we will tend to endorse an "expert" who best fits what we want to hear, even when they are challenged by another "expert" who is providing a more reasonable, rational and objectively supportable position.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 7, 2014)

Steve said:


> I completely understand.  We have an advantage, though, in that as a "jury" we are not bound to choose.  In other words, we don't have to endorse one opinion over another.  I look at Chris Parker's assertions regarding RBSD, and I then look at Drop Bear's, and I have the advantage of being able to say, "Don't know who is more "right" but they both make sense."
> granted, It's only natural for people to lean in favor of one opinion over another.  People will evaluate the statements of alleged experts and decide which one sounds... more correct.
> 
> That said, my opinion is that often, here on an informal discussion board, this is often little more than an emotional reaction.  I believe in most cases, it has more to do with personality and homogeneous thought than any objective evaluation.  Personality, in that I think people will tend to agree with those who most often agree with them.  If I agree with you, you will likely agree with me, regardless of my position.
> ...


I dont know about that at lest not for me Ill agree with people I dont generally get along with if what they are saying makes sense.  You and I have had heated disagreement but when you agree with me your right...............


----------



## cloud dancing (Dec 8, 2014)

On another forum someone attacked me with    "You just BELIEVE-You see there's no such thing as KNOWLEDGE./You need to stop saying that YOU KNOW.I simply said BIGOT /IDIOT  and left him to his own world.When you KNOW, fact your ability to break is      
4- 1x 4's or 4- 2x 4's /and someone says Naww you just BELIEVE you can do that.tis simple action of breaking and showing see=not BELIEF is called KNOWLEDGE.WHAT AMAZES ME is after 42 years practising and teaching tai chi/ introduction to understanding raja yoga-  someone who has zippity do dah for KNOWLEDGE says well gee I like how I'm doing it now.I allow him his stupidity but that person's energy/ I try like Hell to stay away from.Was one ?insane?brain damaged  tai chi person.Simply 2 minutes near him and took me about 45 minutes to rid myself of his weird weird energy.so when differing often I'll simply stay away from any any interactions with that person.ie Sober 11 years now and avoid all contact with AA cause I like being happy and not ANGRY.I like what my raja yoga master Prem Rawat said decades ago.
"If I waste my time with arrogant people who simply want to argue then I've wasted time when I could have been teaching those who are actually interested in KNOWING, in learning."
So much of argument is arrogance.Ahunk kharr in hindi/  ego. Species has many who simply want to feel some worthless superficial superiority to others.so they debate/ argue no you only BELIEVE you can brrrr-ache/break 4 --2x4's.see there is no such thing as KNOWLEDGE. anyways tis good to learn and to ahve some inspiration {latin: in-spire= to breathe in } as I do get my lazy, depressed days and need  to breathe in some inspiration  to keep training. keep practising what I KNOW,what I have learned  correctly.What amazes me is how some techniques over time become transformed into new techniques;while others over decades stay {unchanged INSIDE} BUT OUTSIDE  changed/ adjusted to my age and different aches and pains.Sadness over opportunities wasted,but old saying "  On two crosses left and to right of Jesu were Yesterday and Tomorrow -those two will crucify anyone."
.Even a small candle, WHEN LIT,  will cause the darkness to leave.Unlit candle can not shine nor can it light other candles.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 8, 2014)

[


cloud dancing said:


> On another forum someone attacked me with    "You just BELIEVE-You see there's no such thing as KNOWLEDGE./You need to stop saying that YOU KNOW.I simply said BIGOT /IDIOT  and left him to his own world.When you KNOW, fact your ability to break is
> 4- 1x 4's or 4- 2x 4's /and someone says Naww you just BELIEVE you can do that.tis simple action of breaking and showing see=not BELIEF is called KNOWLEDGE.WHAT AMAZES ME is after 42 years practising and teaching tai chi/ introduction to understanding raja yoga-  someone who has zippity do dah for KNOWLEDGE says well gee I like how I'm doing it now.I allow him his stupidity but that person's energy/ I try like Hell to stay away from.Was one ?insane?brain damaged  tai chi person.Simply 2 minutes near him and took me about 45 minutes to rid myself of his weird weird energy.so when differing often I'll simply stay away from any any interactions with that person.ie Sober 11 years now and avoid all contact with AA cause I like being happy and not ANGRY.I like what my raja yoga master Prem Rawat said decades ago.
> "If I waste my time with arrogant people who simply want to argue then I've wasted time when I could have been teaching those who are actually interested in KNOWING, in learning."
> So much of argument is arrogance.Ahunk kharr in hindi/  ego. Species has many who simply want to feel some worthless superficial superiority to others.so they debate/ argue no you only BELIEVE you can brrrr-ache/break 4 --2x4's.see there is no such thing as KNOWLEDGE. anyways tis good to learn and to ahve some inspiration {latin: in-spire= to breathe in } as I do get my lazy, depressed days and need  to breathe in some inspiration  to keep training. keep practising what I KNOW,what I have learned  correctly.What amazes me is how some techniques over time become transformed into new techniques;while others over decades stay {unchanged INSIDE} BUT OUTSIDE  changed/ adjusted to my age and different aches and pains.Sadness over opportunities wasted,but old saying "  On two crosses left and to right of Jesu were Yesterday and Tomorrow -those two will crucify anyone."
> .Even a small candle, WHEN LIT,  will cause the darkness to leave.Unlit candle can not shine nor can it light other candles.


----------



## Danny T (Dec 8, 2014)

cloud dancing said:


> On another forum someone attacked me with    "You just BELIEVE-You see there's no such thing as KNOWLEDGE./You need to stop saying that YOU KNOW.I simply said BIGOT /IDIOT  and left him to his own world.When you KNOW, fact your ability to break is
> 4- 1x 4's or 4- 2x 4's /and someone says Naww you just BELIEVE you can do that.tis simple action of breaking and showing see=not BELIEF is called KNOWLEDGE.WHAT AMAZES ME is after 42 years practising and teaching tai chi/ introduction to understanding raja yoga-  someone who has zippity do dah for KNOWLEDGE says well gee I like how I'm doing it now.I allow him his stupidity but that person's energy/ I try like Hell to stay away from.Was one ?insane?brain damaged  tai chi person.Simply 2 minutes near him and took me about 45 minutes to rid myself of his weird weird energy.so when differing often I'll simply stay away from any any interactions with that person.ie Sober 11 years now and avoid all contact with AA cause I like being happy and not ANGRY.I like what my raja yoga master Prem Rawat said decades ago.
> "If I waste my time with arrogant people who simply want to argue then I've wasted time when I could have been teaching those who are actually interested in KNOWING, in learning."
> So much of argument is arrogance.Ahunk kharr in hindi/  ego. Species has many who simply want to feel some worthless superficial superiority to others.so they debate/ argue no you only BELIEVE you can brrrr-ache/break 4 --2x4's.see there is no such thing as KNOWLEDGE. anyways tis good to learn and to ahve some inspiration {latin: in-spire= to breathe in } as I do get my lazy, depressed days and need  to breathe in some inspiration  to keep training. keep practising what I KNOW,what I have learned  correctly.What amazes me is how some techniques over time become transformed into new techniques;while others over decades stay {unchanged INSIDE} BUT OUTSIDE  changed/ adjusted to my age and different aches and pains.Sadness over opportunities wasted,but old saying "  On two crosses left and to right of Jesu were Yesterday and Tomorrow -those two will crucify anyone."
> .Even a small candle, WHEN LIT,  will cause the darkness to leave.Unlit candle can not shine nor can it light other candles.


One has to Want Knowledge and be receptive to what the knowledge is vs what wants the knowledge to be. When dealing with what is perceived as an arrogant, egotistical person be certain to take a view of yourself also. If the other is truly as you perceived then move on vs wasting time and energy debating useless matter for the argument only provides a worthless sense of superiority. Continue to research and educate yourself constantly refining your knowledge and skills. Help enlighten others but don’t smother your flame or burn yourself out over what others won’t see regardless if it is belief or knowledge. Keep the flame of knowledge bright, keep your energy strong. Help others when possible.


----------



## K-man (Dec 8, 2014)

cloud dancing said:


> "If I waste my time with arrogant people who simply want to argue then I've wasted time when I could have been teaching those who are actually interested in KNOWING, in learning."
> 
> So much of argument is arrogance.Ahunk kharr in hindi/  ego. Species has many who simply want to feel some worthless superficial superiority to others.so they debate/ argue no you only BELIEVE you can brrrr-ache/break 4 --2x4's.see there is no such thing as KNOWLEDGE.


Mmm! I thought I understood a bit more of this but seems I was mistaken. The only bits that make sense are these. I think the first applies perfectly to the OP. The second applies to some posters if they are not careful as to how they put their thoughts forward.


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 9, 2014)

Okay. Back now… let's see what we have here… 



Hanzou said:


> Well just look at Kman's post. In the other thread I was the most evil s.o.b. on MT for pointing out a lack of grappling in karate. Some of that came from Kman himself. Now in this thread pointing that out is not only not disparaging, but it's the truth. Awesome!



Okay, thanks for clarifying… so, in essence, you "disliked" my post, which was almost entirely about someone else, and responses to them, because, at the very end, I agreed with K-man's post about you? Lovely. But let's look at what you think was 'completely wrong from the outset'… 



Hanzou said:


> As for the videos of traditional stylists doing weird grappling things, if you go over to the Hapkido forum, we had a really good discussion about a Hapkido group doing a bad armbar and then proceeding to counter said bad armbar. A couple of posters tried to hop in that thread and derail it, but they were ignored and the great conversation continued. We had a similar (mostly) positive discussion in the Wing Chun forum about anti-grappling, though it got heated in some spots. So I disagree that posting those videos make me a "jerk", or that such vids troll the forum. On the contrary, I feel that they spark a great conversation.



I watched that thread… you started with a video chosen to highlight what you think is a lack, completely ignoring the art you were looking at itself, and choosing such a badly done version that it immediately came across that you were primarily starting the thread to, once more, put over the idea of BJJ being the superior art, as it's got the best ground work. The "good" discussion largely ignored your impetus, and the "derailing" was all an attempt to get you to clarify why you posted that video, and what your intentions were. There were a number of posts of yours there that I personally wanted to call you on, but didn't feel you'd understand what I was asking (such as when you claimed that they were doing their art "wrong"… how on earth would you know that? You might say the technique is ineffective, in your understanding, flawed, inefficient, or anything similar… but "wrong"? Nope, you wouldn't have the first notion of whether or not it was).

So no, they don't "spark" a great conversation… if anything it might be said that good conversation can come about in spite of your postings such things. You don't actually deserve credit for that… that's on the membership of the board.



Hanzou said:


> Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #1:
> 
> Help me out Hapkido folks... MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community



Again, let's look at that "good discussion" you prompted… 

It started with you posting a video that you found questionable, and asking the "Hapkido peeps" to explain it… ignoring the fact that Hapkido has a very wide variety of "flavours" and iterations. Your next post (number 4 in the thread) was a couple of snide digs at the technique, with a sarcastic comment on the viability of the method shown. On the second page (after using someone's posting of a Stephen Kesting video to point out everything that you found wrong with the Hapkido video, despite both showing similar concepts, just at very differing levels of understanding and applicability), you basically admitted that this was all a way of pointing and laughing at someone (the instructor in the video, potentially Hapkido itself by extension, possibly even anyone not BJJ doing anything to do with ground work), by stating "Relax. This is just like a car accident and we've all slowed down to point and gawk at the accident scene."

Any good discussion did not come from such poisoned attitude in posting. 



Hanzou said:


> Good discussion from posting random videos of people not performing well #2:
> 
> Some more thoughts on anti grappling . MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community



Again, you started snide, and degenerated within your first two posts to posting something you think is below par, ignoring everything but the idea that BJJ is the best ever, by pointing out that the second clip is what you would normally put up, and what you think of when you talk about "anti-grappling", and that you "normally laugh at that, but that upsets some people here".

Again, any good conversation did not come from you.



Hanzou said:


> I do believe that the only thing that happened in the previous thread is that you posted some vids of Wado Ryu guys doing grappling within the Bunkai, and me saying that Wado is a combination of Karate and Jujutsu, and then you and some other posters began making bizarre posts about drinking.
> 
> Please note again, that spawned from one post of me stating that Wado is a combo of Karate and Jujutsu.



Yes, and you completely failed to recognise what you were being told… or the larger list of other karate systems used to support the statements being made for a grappling methodology in karate systems.



Hanzou said:


> I was talking about the Hapkido thread. If you read that thread you'll see quite a few derail attempts in an otherwise fruitful conversation.



The "derail attempts" weren't derailing attempts. They were attempts to get some clarification from you.



Hanzou said:


> How ironic...



Personally, I find it rather sad that you feel that. I'm not surprised, of course.



Hanzou said:


> Not the point. I was saying that the craziness began just from me saying that Wado is a combo of Karate and jujutsu in _one_ post.
> 
> I also notice that you're not saying anything about the good/great discussions that spawned from posting random videos of people not performing well.



No, the "craziness" came from you not listening to the responses you were getting. And, as for Tez not saying anything about your "good discussions"… see above.



Hanzou said:


> In your opinion.
> 
> Besides, the argument was that no good or great discussions could come from that source with or without my input. Clearly that isn't the case.



That was not the argument. The argument was that you were not the reason for good conversation, and neither were the videos you were posting. Not that good conversation didn't come from them… but that was more to the credit of the other posters than in anything you did.



drop bear said:


> yeah but you don't spar.



You don't do the listening thing much, do you? No, I don't spar… I consider it little more than a kids game, bluntly… largely ineffective compared to the methods I utilise… but that's besides the point. It's not like I don't have a sparring background, and an understanding of exactly what sparring is, and what it entails. I also haven't ridden a bike in years… but that doesn't mean I can't point out the differences between riding a bike and baking a cake.



drop bear said:


> and you cant accept that there may be conflict in your life.



Where the hell do you get these delusions from?!?! What basis on earth do you have to suggest that I can't accept there might be conflict in my life?!?! And what in Sam Hill does that have to do with you saying that conversation here is like sparring, and you go into it aiming to "smash people"?!?!?!

Dude, get a grip.



drop bear said:


> so it is probably not a concept you are going to understand.



You really don't have the first damn clue what I do or don't understand… but I'll make it simple for you. Assume I understand everything. Most of the time, you'll be right.



drop bear said:


> Lets look at this like a debate. An actual two team pre arranged meet up where people have trained and prepared to defend their ideas against a resisted opponent.



Do you know what debate actually is?



drop bear said:


> like sparring. See?



No. That's not like sparring.



drop bear said:


> not an echo chamber where we all just follow the leader.



Where are you pulling this from? Who's "following the leader" here? What are you talking about?!?!



drop bear said:


> we should be able to disagree. Nobody is such an expert that they cant face criticism.



We can disagree, yeah. And, here's the real kicker for you, you can be wrong. And that can be something that is not a matter of disagreement, but a matter of fact. 

For the record, of course, I'm more than happy to face criticism… argument… debate. I welcome it. You haven't provided anything close.



drop bear said:


> Argument from authority - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



What does that have to do with anything here? I'm genuinely interested… do you think that that's what's happening?



drop bear said:


> and why i was resistant to just beat people over the head with my experience. It is effectively cheating in the context of argument.



Wow, you really are incredibly bad at this… 

"Effectively cheating"?!?! Dude, no. It's the way you back up what you say. 

But I have to say… "beat people over the head" with your experience?!?! You ain't that great, you know… and you don't have the tools you think you do.



drop bear said:


> an appeal to authority misused is a logical fallacy.



Did you actually read that? It's a logical fallacy when _misused._ Again, repeated for emphasis… when _misused_. Not in and of itself. In fact, appeal to authority is a very valid argumentative technique… it's the basis of the idea of expert testimony in court cases… hell, it's the basis of the idea of expert evidence in anything.



Steve said:


> Where it gets sticky is when one expert tells another expert he doesn't know what he's talking about.  While I know bjj, I would be reluctant to argue that I'm an expert on all things grappling.   So, I wouldn't presume to speak about all of grappling without providing some context.   We have people here who are comfortable speaking about all things martial arts, all things RBSD, all things everything, and who then tell other people, that they are not in fact experts, despite their extensive experience.



Hmm… this might be me being a little paranoid here, Steve, but it sounds an awful lot like you're describing me there… if you are, feel free to mention me by name… but, if you are, I would ask you to back up anything that contradicts, or denies my statements and observations. I talk about things I know about… and, after over 3 decades learning about as many different aspects, methodologies, approaches, and more, that covers quite a bit.

And, for the record, I haven't told any "expert" that they're not one…   



Steve said:


> Also, as a purple belt, Hanzou is as expert in bjj as I. If you guys consider me credible, he has as much authority as me, which is middling.   Sure, I know more than most, but within bjj, I have a lot to learn.



No-one has questioned his BJJ knowledge, Steve. Nor yours…. or Tony's, or Drop Bears MMA understanding. It's everything else that both Hanzou and Drop Bear have tried to comment on, with little to no knowledge or understanding of that we've had these issues come up.



Hanzou said:


> I said that Wado Ryu is a combo of Karate and jujutsu. According to Wikipedia;
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadō-ryū
> 
> The ancestor styles of Wado Ryu are Shindō Yōshin-ryū and Shotokan. Wouldn't that indicate that that is in their style?



The ancestor schools of Takagi Yoshin Ryu are a couple of spear schools… but it's not a spear system, nor does it have spear in it, in the form of official techniques… an ancestor school for Katori Shinto Ryu was said to be Muso Jikiden Ryu Yawara… but it's not a Jujutsu system… Aikido was influenced by Yagyu Shinkage Ryu and Kukishin Ryu… but there's no Bojutsu, no Iai, no real sword (it's an expression of Aiki principles, rather than kenjutsu itself), no Naginata, no armoured component, no Shuriken, and more… so no, it wouldn't necessarily indicate anything of the kind.

Now, that said, yes, Wado Ryu is formulated from Ohtsuka's experience and training in both Shotokan (and other forms of karate, it must be said) and Shindo Yoshin Ryu… but the point was that Shindo Yoshin Ryu was not the sole source of any grappling within Wado Ryu… nor within any other karate systems.



Steve said:


> I completely understand.  We have an advantage, though, in that as a "jury" we are not bound to choose.  In other words, we don't have to endorse one opinion over another.  I look at Chris Parker's assertions regarding RBSD, and I then look at Drop Bear's, and I have the advantage of being able to say, "Don't know who is more "right" but they both make sense."
> granted, It's only natural for people to lean in favor of one opinion over another.  People will evaluate the statements of alleged experts and decide which one sounds... more correct.



The problem with this, Steve, is that we're not talking about opinion… we're talking about facts. And, frankly, when Drop Bear gives his examples of someone representing RBSD being either outright frauds and jokes who have no connection to the concept at all, and modern combatives systems that aren't RBSD, then no, he doesn't have the same credibility that I do. When you couple that with the fact that anyone else who has any knowledge of the subject have sided with me on my discussions of the topic, then you really don't need to know much about the subject to be able to judge who has the credibility in a discussion.

But, most importantly, when you have two opposing views of what something (factually) is, you can't say "well, you both sound like you might be right"… it's the same as saying you've never seen a calendar, and when I say that April is the fourth month, and comes before May, and someone else says that April is the last month of the year, both can sound plausible… but both aren't right. Peace-keeping just doesn't work in this instance… you can't have both be "right".



Steve said:


> That said, my opinion is that often, here on an informal discussion board, this is often little more than an emotional reaction.  I believe in most cases, it has more to do with personality and homogeneous thought than any objective evaluation.  Personality, in that I think people will tend to agree with those who most often agree with them.  If I agree with you, you will likely agree with me, regardless of my position.  It's a loyalty thing.  If I have your back and support you in a thread, you will view me favorably and tend to give me the benefit of the doubt, regardless of how wacky my assertion.



I'll be frank, and say that that's not a consideration for myself. I might alter the way I deal with someone, but I will just as quickly point out where a friend is wrong as anyone else. And I'll just as quickly accept someone as right when they are, regardless of my personal feelings about them.  



Steve said:


> Homogenous though in that we all come to the table with opinions, and will tend to agree with those people who already share our opinions.  So, we will tend to endorse an "expert" who best fits what we want to hear, even when they are challenged by another "expert" who is providing a more reasonable, rational and objectively supportable position.



No. I endorse experts who know what they're talking about. That's what makes them experts.


----------



## Steve (Dec 9, 2014)

Chris, I think some of your facts are actually opinions derived from facts.  It happens often and is completely understandable. 

For example, when you say that RBSD means something specific, it's like saying that TMA means something specific.  It may mean something specific to you (fact), but that does not mean that everyone agrees or even should agree on the definition, even among experts.  We need only look around, as Drop Bear has suggested, and we can see many examples of RBSD systems which do not precisely meet your definition.  So,while it may be a fact that you have a very specific and reasonable definition of RBSD, it is your opinion that your definition is THE definition of the term. 

Regarding the evaluation of credible opinions, people will naturally gravitate to the person with whom they have an established rapport or affinity.  In matters of opinion, such as the specific meaning of the acronym "RBSD," it is absolutely possible for two experts to disagree and both also be "right" (or at least, neither be wrong, which isn't exactly the same thing).


----------



## K-man (Dec 9, 2014)

Steve said:


> Chris, I think some of your facts are actually opinions derived from facts.  It happens often and is completely understandable.
> 
> For example, when you say that RBSD means something specific, it's like saying that TMA means something specific.  It may mean something specific to you (fact), but that does not mean that everyone agrees or even should agree on the definition, even among experts.  We need only look around, as Drop Bear has suggested, and we can see many examples of RBSD systems which do not precisely meet your definition.  So,while it may be a fact that you have a very specific and reasonable definition of RBSD, it is your opinion that your definition is THE definition of the term.
> 
> Regarding the evaluation of credible opinions, people will naturally gravitate to the person with whom they have an established rapport or affinity.  In matters of opinion, such as the specific meaning of the acronym "RBSD," it is absolutely possible for two experts to disagree and both also be "right" (or at least, neither be wrong, which isn't exactly the same thing).


I think there is no doubt as to the meaning of the terms RBSD orTMA. That is a given. TMA is a 'traditional martial art'. That is where the certainty stops and interpretation comes into the equation. The individual terms need to be defined to have a sensible discussion. Some posters have deliberately rejected defining the terms so they can take an obscure or misrepresentative example and pretend that that applies to the whole. If we are to discuss TMAs we have to define the terms clearly at the outset. There is nothing wrong with a number of interpretations as long as you define your terms. For example, to me, for a number of reasons, Shotokan karate is not a TMA. However, I am quite happy to have it included in a discussion of TMAs if you broaden the base. However if the terms of a discussion, if terms are not clearly defined you are going to have arguement rather than discussion, something some people obviously are striving to achieve.


----------



## Steve (Dec 9, 2014)

I agree and disagree, K-man.  I agree that defining terms is important.  I disagree that some posters have deliberately rejected defining terms.  I would, instead, suggest that other posters are as invested in their own definitions as you are in yours.

Simply put, there is a difference between understanding how you define a term and agreeing with your definition.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 9, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> I watched that thread… you started with a video chosen to highlight what you think is a lack, completely ignoring the art you were looking at itself, and choosing such a badly done version that it immediately came across that you were primarily starting the thread to, once more, put over the idea of BJJ being the superior art, as it's got the best ground work. The "good" discussion largely ignored your impetus, and the "derailing" was all an attempt to get you to clarify why you posted that video, and what your intentions were. There were a number of posts of yours there that I personally wanted to call you on, but didn't feel you'd understand what I was asking (such as when you claimed that they were doing their art "wrong"… how on earth would you know that? You might say the technique is ineffective, in your understanding, flawed, inefficient, or anything similar… but "wrong"? Nope, you wouldn't have the first notion of whether or not it was).



If their goal was to counter an armbar, they failed miserably at it. We even had Hapkido practitioners in that thread stating that the entire technique was done wrong. It would be interesting to see what you believe they did correctly outside of posting a video online. There's plenty of things I don't know how to do in the martial arts. Fortunately, the armbar from mount isn't one of them.



> So no, they don't "spark" a great conversation… if anything it might be said that good conversation can come about in spite of your postings such things. You don't actually deserve credit for that… that's on the membership of the board.



Whether or not you feel my post was negative, the fact that it sparked a good discussion is beyond doubt.



> Again, let's look at that "good discussion" you prompted…
> 
> It started with you posting a video that you found questionable, and asking the "Hapkido peeps" to explain it… ignoring the fact that Hapkido has a very wide variety of "flavours" and iterations. Your next post (number 4 in the thread) was a couple of snide digs at the technique, with a sarcastic comment on the viability of the method shown. On the second page (after using someone's posting of a Stephen Kesting video to point out everything that you found wrong with the Hapkido video, despite both showing similar concepts, just at very differing levels of understanding and applicability), you basically admitted that this was all a way of pointing and laughing at someone (the instructor in the video, potentially Hapkido itself by extension, possibly even anyone not BJJ doing anything to do with ground work), by stating "Relax. This is just like a car accident and we've all slowed down to point and gawk at the accident scene."



That's quite a leap. For starters, the sarcastic comment came after a series of sarcastic comments. Everyone was just joking around before we got to the nitty gritty of the vid. Interestingly, no Hapkido stylist that posted found anything in that thread negative or offensive, and offered some excellent analysis and input. All seemingly from a horribly toxic opening post.

Incredible that non-Hapkido stylists who posted were more offended than Hapkido stylists who posted.



> Again, you started snide, and degenerated within your first two posts to posting something you think is below par, ignoring everything but the idea that BJJ is the best ever, by pointing out that the second clip is what you would normally put up, and what you think of when you talk about "anti-grappling", and that you "normally laugh at that, but that upsets some people here".



I was far from the only person who felt it was below par, and a good discussion emerged from that consensus. Sorry you disagree. The Hapkido guys and grapplers who participated seemed to enjoy it.



> Again, any good conversation did not come from you.



Who started the conversation?



> The "derail attempts" weren't derailing attempts. They were attempts to get some clarification from you.



Considering the poster, they were certainly derail attempts. Additionally, I wasn't the only poster who pointed out that he was attempting to derail the thread.


----------



## K-man (Dec 9, 2014)

Steve said:


> I agree and disagree, K-man.  I agree that defining terms is important.  I disagree that some posters have deliberately rejected defining terms.  I would, instead, suggest that other posters are as invested in their own definitions as you are in yours.
> 
> Simply put, there is a difference between understanding how you define a term and agreeing with your definition.


Here is where it occurred ...


> K-man said:
> "Then perhaps you should discuss TKD as a single example rather than lump everything together as TMAs or MAs."





> Hanzou said:
> "Nah."


Now if that doesn't stop discussion dead in it's tracks what does?


----------



## Steve (Dec 9, 2014)

K-man said:


> Here is where it occurred ...
> 
> 
> Now if that doesn't stop discussion dead in it's tracks what does?


That might actually hold some water if we ignore the entire context of your relationship with Hanzou.  Sure, that's flippant and insincere.  Was it nice?  No.  Was it helpful?  No.  Did it in any way further the conversation?  No.  

However, it was written in the context of an overtly hostile relationship you have helped to create.  You and Hanzou have been going after each other for weeks, picking and poking and jabbing at each other.  Just accept that you and Hanzou bring out the worst in each other and let it go, but for Pete's sake, take a little responsibility.


----------



## K-man (Dec 9, 2014)

Steve said:


> That might actually hold some water if we ignore the entire context of your relationship with Hanzou.  Sure, that's flippant and insincere.  Was it nice?  No.  Was it helpful?  No.  Did it in any way further the conversation?  No.
> 
> However, it was written in the context of an overtly hostile relationship you have helped to create.  You and Hanzou have been going after each other for weeks, picking and poking and jabbing at each other.  Just accept that you and Hanzou bring out the worst in each other and let it go, but for Pete's sake, take a little responsibility.


Steve, you have a strange attitude. Perhaps you should go back and read the thread, I did. What you will find is a generalised sledging across TMAs. Applying the same criteria to Kyudo as TKD was never going to lead to reasonable discussion. I actually left the thread after this post.


----------



## Steve (Dec 9, 2014)

K-man said:


> Steve, you have a strange attitude. Perhaps you should go back and read the thread, I did. What you will find is a generalised sledging across TMAs. Applying the same criteria to Kyudo as TKD was never going to lead to reasonable discussion. I actually left the thread after this post.


  Surely, were I reasonable, I would agree with you.  Because, after all, your perspective is the only reasonable perspective.  We're I'm to simply read more carefully, I would of course agree completely.

But, there is another alternative.  

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## Chris Parker (Dec 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> Chris, I think some of your facts are actually opinions derived from facts.  It happens often and is completely understandable.



Steve, I think perhaps you should refrain from telling me what my understanding is based on, especially when dealing with a field you have claimed no knowledge, experience, or interest in at all. 

In other words, no. My facts are just that. Facts. Based on knowledge, experience, observation, understanding, and education, and backed up by, well, all other knowledgable sources.



Steve said:


> For example, when you say that RBSD means something specific, it's like saying that TMA means something specific.



It does, though. That's the point. Is there a single iteration of RBSD, or TMA? No. But a TMA isn't just what anyone decides to call a TMA… there are a range of hallmarks, points of distinction, and so on. Same with RBSD… that's how classification works. Are all animals the same? Nope. But there are certain traits that gain them that classification… and, within the classification of "animal", we can further look at reptiles, or mammals, or fish, or birds… and even further down into snakes and lizards, bovine and canine, fresh and salt water, and so on. 

TMA is specifically Traditional Martial Arts. If someone creates a new art, and attempts to be "traditional", but doesn't have the traits of an actual traditional system, it's not traditional… therefore not a TMA. It really doesn't matter if someone thinks it should be or not, it either is, or it isn't.



Steve said:


> It may mean something specific to you (fact), but that does not mean that everyone agrees or even should agree on the definition, even among experts.



There can be some slight quibbling over a few aspects, sure… but no, there really isn't the disagreement you're suggesting here.



Steve said:


> We need only look around, as Drop Bear has suggested, and we can see many examples of RBSD systems which do not precisely meet your definition.



And here's the problem… none of the systems that Drop Bear has suggested have actually been RBSD systems. At all. He's picked combatives systems, military systems, and the delusional ravings of an idiot. Those not fitting my definition doesn't really have any effect, you realise… 



Steve said:


> So,while it may be a fact that you have a very specific and reasonable definition of RBSD, it is your opinion that your definition is THE definition of the term.



No, Steve, it is the definition of the term. You might as well tell me that, if I wanted, I could class swordsmanship as BJJ, because, well, it's just people's opinions as to what BJJ really is.



Steve said:


> Regarding the evaluation of credible opinions, people will naturally gravitate to the person with whom they have an established rapport or affinity.  In matters of opinion, such as the specific meaning of the acronym "RBSD," it is absolutely possible for two experts to disagree and both also be "right" (or at least, neither be wrong, which isn't exactly the same thing).



For that, you'd need two experts. You only have one in this debate right now.



Steve said:


> I agree and disagree, K-man.  I agree that defining terms is important.  I disagree that some posters have deliberately rejected defining terms.  I would, instead, suggest that other posters are as invested in their own definitions as you are in yours.



I seem to remember some saying that you couldn't define TMA previously… that'd be an example of deliberately rejecting defining terms… or we could look at your idea of it being about "self identification", which has nothing to do with any actual classification or definition… 



Steve said:


> Simply put, there is a difference between understanding how you define a term and agreeing with your definition.



Here's the thing with definitions, Steve… they are how we can communicate. Agreeing with definitions or not is really kinda besides the point… the definition is the definition… it's kinda definite… that's what the term refers to… you don't have to agree that this segmented fruit is an orange for it to be an orange, rather than an apple… 



Hanzou said:


> If their goal was to counter an armbar, they failed miserably at it. We even had Hapkido practitioners in that thread stating that the entire technique was done wrong. It would be interesting to see what you believe they did correctly outside of posting a video online. There's plenty of things I don't know how to do in the martial arts. Fortunately, the armbar from mount isn't one of them.



Yeah… as I said, you wouldn't understand what I was saying.

I'll try to elaborate here… the idea of something being "wrong" is entirely within the context of the art itself. A technique can be ineffective, impractical, flawed, poor, or anything else… but still not "wrong". But here's the important part… "wrong" can only be seen from the inside. You don't know that Hapkido system… you don't know their syllabus… you don't know how it was supposed to be done in that art… you cannot possibly know if it was being done "wrong" or not. You can say that it's flawed, poor, or anything of that ilk… but the idea that you can know whether a technique is right or wrong from another system is frankly beyond your ken.

To put it another way, in my time in BJJ, I was taught a number of things that would be "wrong" from the perspective of my other arts… and some of the things from my other art would be considered "wrong" in BJJ… but, within the systems themselves, they were both completely "right"… even despite the fact that they were almost completely opposite to each other.



Hanzou said:


> Whether or not you feel my post was negative, the fact that it sparked a good discussion is beyond doubt.



You really are missing the point.



Hanzou said:


> That's quite a leap. For starters, the sarcastic comment came after a series of sarcastic comments. Everyone was just joking around before we got to the nitty gritty of the vid. Interestingly, no Hapkido stylist that posted found anything in that thread negative or offensive, and offered some excellent analysis and input. All seemingly from a horribly toxic opening post.
> 
> Incredible that non-Hapkido stylists who posted were more offended than Hapkido stylists who posted.



Er… talking about a different thread there… do try to keep up… 

And, for the record, it was the membership, particularly the established ones, who were offended… or, at least, concerned over the tendencies you've been showing.



Hanzou said:


> I was far from the only person who felt it was below par, and a good discussion emerged from that consensus. Sorry you disagree. The Hapkido guys and grapplers who participated seemed to enjoy it.



The idea of that technique being less than optimal wasn't the issue… it was the way you introduced it, the way you set up the thread, the tone you began with, the fact that you had the primary aim of ridicule something that wasn't matching your standards… frankly, it was a cowardly and petty OP… and far below anything that is genuinely designed to generate good conversation.

You wanted a cheap laugh, and targeted a Hapkido school. Fortunately the membership was able to rise above your beginning.



Hanzou said:


> Who started the conversation?



Really, really, really besides the point. 

The tiny detail that you started the thread is bluntly just your ego railing against the wind, trying once again to paint yourself as the hero, despite actually being the villain of the piece. You're not the hero. You're the catalyst… but not in the way you think.



Hanzou said:


> Considering the poster, they were certainly derail attempts. Additionally, I wasn't the only poster who pointed out that he was attempting to derail the thread.



You mean Steve butting heads with Ballen again? Really? Frankly, I was on Ballen's side… he was rightly calling you out, your own admissions backed that up, and Steve chose to try to call Ballen out on his calling you… Bluntly, Steve was in the wrong, in my opinion.


----------



## drop bear (Dec 10, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Steve, I think perhaps you should refrain from telling me what my understanding is based on, especially when dealing with a field you have claimed no knowledge, experience, or interest in at all.
> 
> In other words, no. My facts are just that. Facts. Based on knowledge, experience, observation, understanding, and education, and backed up by, well, all other knowledgable sources.
> 
> ...



mabye re read what an appeal from authority actually is.

i don't think you have ever provided an external source.


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

Chris, as I said, some of your facts are actually opinions derived from a fact.  That's an important distinction.  Two experts can interpret facts differently.

Regarding definitions, I think I was pretty clear.  But I'll try again.  Understanding what you mean when you use a term is helpful and necessary.  Agreeing with your definition is not necessary.  Approaching each discussion with the attitude that your definitions are the only possible definition for the term causes a lot of misunderstanding.  English just doesn't work that way. 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

drop bear said:


> mabye re read what an appeal from authority actually is.
> 
> i don't think you have ever provided an external source.


Depending on the topic you don't need one.  Back to my example of illegal drug I'm an expert I don't provide external sources to back that up I am the external source my training knowledge and experience is all that's needed on the topic.  There are people here that are experts or at least very knowledgeable on topics, your free to agree or not.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> Regarding definitions, I think I was pretty clear.  But I'll try again.  Understanding what you mean when you use a term is helpful and necessary.  Agreeing with your definition is not necessary.  Approaching each discussion with the attitude that your definitions are the only possible definition for the term causes a lot of misunderstanding.  English just doesn't work that way.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


English does work that way.  Its really hard to have conversations with someone when they tell you a cat has fur, 4 legs, and barks.  Words do have accepted meanings your not entitled to change them to suit your needs.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 10, 2014)

You have to go pretty far outside accepted meanings in the language that is the Queens English to make sense of say... tiger riding samurai. Still waiting for more info on that interesting topic by the way.


----------



## seasoned (Dec 10, 2014)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*_

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy here. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

Wes Yager
MT Moderator


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

I think the thread discussing the meaning of tma is a good encapsulation of what I'm referring to.   Started by Brian vancise iirc.  On phone so can't post link, but that discussion is relevant I think.

Edit:  Here is one Rich Parsons started.  Interesting discussion that highlights how people, many of whom are experts to varying degrees, have opinions about what a term means that in some cases directly contradict each other:

What makes an art Traditional MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

I'll see if I can find the one I'm recalling, but searching on this forum is a pain.

Here's the one I was thinking of:

What Is A TMA MartialTalk.Com - Friendly Martial Arts Forum Community

FWIW, my post (#10) is the most correct.  If you disagree, I think you just need to read it again and surely you'll come around. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## drop bear (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Depending on the topic you don't need one.  Back to my example of illegal drug I'm an expert I don't provide external sources to back that up I am the external source my training knowledge and experience is all that's needed on the topic.  There are people here that are experts or at least very knowledgeable on topics, your free to agree or not.



never. Not once. 

am i free to suggest that is a logical fallacy?


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> English does work that way.  Its really hard to have conversations with someone when they tell you a cat has fur, 4 legs, and barks.  Words do have accepted meanings your not entitled to change them to suit your needs.


Words often have multiple meanings.  Often, a word also connotes much more.  And some words are general containers for other words, while others are much more specific.  And the definitions of some words are very clear and concrete, while the definitions of other words really depends upon who is being asked.

So, as I said, it's very important to know what YOU mean when you use a word, so that I don't understand what you're saying.  But that does not mean I have to agree with your definition.  For example, Traditional Martial Art is a term often used but which means different things to different people.  Martial Art is, itself, a term we can't agree on, even though everyone here trains in one (we think).


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> English does work that way. Its really hard to have conversations with someone when they tell you a cat has fur, 4 legs, and barks. Words do have accepted meanings your not entitled to change them to suit your needs.







 



Steve said:


> Words often have multiple meanings. Often, a word also connotes much more. And some words are general containers for other words, while others are much more specific. And the definitions of some words are very clear and concrete, while the definitions of other words really depends upon who is being asked.



I'm with Steve on this one. The meanings of words are not dictated by a central authority. They evolve within a given community. Words can have multiple meanings depending on the context and the speaker. If the word denotes a category, that category may have fuzzy boundaries.

That doesn't mean you can, like Humpty Dumpty, assign any arbitrary meaning to a word that you feel like. (At least not if you want to communicate effectively.) If I tell you that my cat has thick, grey, wrinkled skin, weighs 8 tons, and has a prehensile trunk, then you are entirely within your bounds to point out that I am speaking of an elephant. The commonly understood meaning of "cat" does not stretch far enough to cover pachyderms.

On the other hand, if you ask for a definition of "TMA" or a list of what arts that category might encompass, you aren't likely to get the same agreement that you would if you asked about "cat." Many people consider TKD, Shotokan, and Judo to be "Traditional Martial Arts", others do not. Some apply the label to an art based on its age, others based on certain cultural signifiers and values. Unless the martial arts community eventually comes to a consensus on what the term covers, then "TMA" lacks a lot of communicative utility.


----------



## Hanzou (Dec 10, 2014)

Chris Parker said:


> Yeah… as I said, you wouldn't understand what I was saying.
> 
> I'll try to elaborate here… the idea of something being "wrong" is entirely within the context of the art itself. A technique can be ineffective, impractical, flawed, poor, or anything else… but still not "wrong". But here's the important part… "wrong" can only be seen from the inside. You don't know that Hapkido system… you don't know their syllabus… you don't know how it was supposed to be done in that art… you cannot possibly know if it was being done "wrong" or not. You can say that it's flawed, poor, or anything of that ilk… but the idea that you can know whether a technique is right or wrong from another system is frankly beyond your ken.
> 
> To put it another way, in my time in BJJ, I was taught a number of things that would be "wrong" from the perspective of my other arts… and some of the things from my other art would be considered "wrong" in BJJ… but, within the systems themselves, they were both completely "right"… even despite the fact that they were almost completely opposite to each other.



The armbar was based on the concept of a Hapkido stylist fighting a grappler. That's not how we do armbars from the mount in Bjj, and there aren't too many other arts that utilize the armbar from mount that didn't pull it from Bjj in the first place. That's how I knew it was performed wrong.

The Hapkido stylists who participated in the thread also said the technique was performed wrong. So really, what point are you trying to make here? The "grappler's armbar" was wrong, and the Hapkido stylists said the counter to it was wrong. So in either case, you have no point.



> Er… talking about a different thread there… do try to keep up…



Actually you're still talking about the same thread, because I've only started one Hapkido thread.



> And, for the record, it was the membership, particularly the established ones, who were offended… or, at least, concerned over the tendencies you've been showing.



In your opinion....



> The idea of that technique being less than optimal wasn't the issue… it was the way you introduced it, the way you set up the thread, the tone you began with, the fact that you had the primary aim of ridicule something that wasn't matching your standards… frankly, it was a cowardly and petty OP… and far below anything that is genuinely designed to generate good conversation.



Interesting that the Hapkido stylists who participated didn't view that the same way.




> The tiny detail that you started the thread is bluntly just your ego railing against the wind, trying once again to paint yourself as the hero, despite actually being the villain of the piece. You're not the hero. You're the catalyst… but not in the way you think.



So I'm the villain because I pointed out a flawed technique that everyone else in the thread also agreed was flawed? Interesting.



> You mean Steve butting heads with Ballen again? Really? Frankly, I was on Ballen's side… he was rightly calling you out, your own admissions backed that up, and Steve chose to try to call Ballen out on his calling you… Bluntly, Steve was in the wrong, in my opinion.



So you think its okay for someone who has no interest in the discussion to attempt to derail the discussion because he doesn't like the contents? Ballen isn't a grappler, and he doesn't do Hapkido. His only purpose in that thread was to derail it far enough to get it closed. Again, the grapplers and the Hapkido practitioners were having a productive discussion and comparing technique. I find it laughable that *you* think its perfectly okay to derail that simply because you think the OP was ulterior motives.


----------



## K-man (Dec 10, 2014)

_*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*_

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Please review our sniping policy here. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

Wes Yager
MT Moderator[/QUOTE]
Thank you. I have availed myself of that option, interestingly, the first time I have had to do that in 6 years. Sad I've had to do it as I like to read all the posts.


----------



## K-man (Dec 10, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm with Steve on this one. The meanings of words are not dictated by a central authority. They evolve within a given community. Words can have multiple meanings depending on the context and the speaker. If the word denotes a category, that category may have fuzzy boundaries.
> 
> That doesn't mean you can, like Humpty Dumpty, assign any arbitrary meaning to a word that you feel like. (At least not if you want to communicate effectively.) If I tell you that my cat has thick, grey, wrinkled skin, weighs 8 tons, and has a prehensile trunk, then you are entirely within your bounds to point out that I am speaking of an elephant. The commonly understood meaning of "cat" does not stretch far enough to cover pachyderms.
> 
> On the other hand, if you ask for a definition of "TMA" or a list of what arts that category might encompass, you aren't likely to get the same agreement that you would if you asked about "cat." Many people consider TKD, Shotokan, and Judo to be "Traditional Martial Arts", others do not. Some apply the label to an art based on its age, others based on certain cultural signifiers and values. Unless the martial arts community eventually comes to a consensus on what the term covers, then "TMA" lacks a lot of communicative utility.


True there can be exceptions. Well done on finding that video!

Context is a huge part of online discussion. There are a number of difference in meanings of words between American English and English. Try talking about 'fanny packs' or 'rooting' over here and you'll get some raised eyebrows even if you are use the terms within your context. I use terms that are in common use here, in all circles, and the software ****s them out. Unfortunately not all people have studied English enough to recognise the idiosyncrasies of our common language.

I agree with you about agreement on definitions. That is what I suggest that in some instances where discussion is likely to be spirited, the topic be clearly defined. TMA is a classic example here. If someone wants to discuss 'World of Warcraft' as a TMA, fine. Just do it in the context of video games excluding all other MAs.


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Depending on the topic you don't need one.  Back to my example of illegal drug I'm an expert I don't provide external sources to back that up I am the external source my training knowledge and experience is all that's needed on the topic.  There are people here that are experts or at least very knowledgeable on topics, your free to agree or not.


Your expertise isn't established to the satisfaction of the court in some way?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

pork chop oven mit pine tree dog fish bumble bee


----------



## drop bear (Dec 10, 2014)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I'm with Steve on this one. The meanings of words are not dictated by a central authority. They evolve within a given community. Words can have multiple meanings depending on the context and the speaker. If the word denotes a category, that category may have fuzzy boundaries.
> 
> That doesn't mean you can, like Humpty Dumpty, assign any arbitrary meaning to a word that you feel like. (At least not if you want to communicate effectively.) If I tell you that my cat has thick, grey, wrinkled skin, weighs 8 tons, and has a prehensile trunk, then you are entirely within your bounds to point out that I am speaking of an elephant. The commonly understood meaning of "cat" does not stretch far enough to cover pachyderms.
> 
> On the other hand, if you ask for a definition of "TMA" or a list of what arts that category might encompass, you aren't likely to get the same agreement that you would if you asked about "cat." Many people consider TKD, Shotokan, and Judo to be "Traditional Martial Arts", others do not. Some apply the label to an art based on its age, others based on certain cultural signifiers and values. Unless the martial arts community eventually comes to a consensus on what the term covers, then "TMA" lacks a lot of communicative utility.



you get that with the street sport debate and self defence. Where some fights count and some don't.

which becomes crazy to debate. Because then every thing you present is not really the street even if it is on the street.


----------



## Cirdan (Dec 10, 2014)

_Two protons expelled at each coupling site creates the mode of force, the embryo becomes a fish that we don't enter until a plate, we're here to experience evolve the little toe, atrophy, don't ask me how I'll be dead in a thousand light years, thank you, thank you. Genesis turns to its source, reduction occurs stepwise though the essence is all one. End of line. FTL system check, diagnostic functions within parameters repeats the harlequin the agony exquisite, the colors run the path of ashes, neuronal network run fifty-two percent of heat exchanger cross-collateralized with hyper-dimensional matrix, upper senses, repair ordered relay to zero zero zero zero. The excited state decays by vibrational relaxation into the first excited singlet state. Yes, yes and merrily we go. Reduce atmospheric nitrogen by 0.03%. It is not much consolation that society will pick up the bits, leaving us at eight modern where punishment, rather than interdiction, is paramount. Please, cut the fuse. They will not harm their own. End of line. Limiting diffusions to two dimensions increases the number of evolutionary jumps within the species. Rise and measure the temple of the five. Transformation is the goal. They will not harm their own. Data-font synchronization complete. _


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 10, 2014)

I've been to Street, it's a really lovely place, not in the least violent. Street Somerset - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

K-man said:


> True there can be exceptions. Well done on finding that video!
> 
> Context is a huge part of online discussion. There are a number of difference in meanings of words between American English and English. Try talking about 'fanny packs' or 'rooting' over here and you'll get some raised eyebrows even if you are use the terms within your context. I use terms that are in common use here, in all circles, and the software ****s them out. Unfortunately not all people have studied English enough to recognise the idiosyncrasies of our common language.
> 
> I agree with you about agreement on definitions. That is what I suggest that in some instances where discussion is likely to be spirited, the topic be clearly defined. TMA is a classic example here. If someone wants to discuss 'World of Warcraft' as a TMA, fine. Just do it in the context of video games excluding all other MAs.


Here's a great case in point.  I wouldn't consider myself an authority on all things English, but I do have a degree in English Lit with a minor in philosophy, and spend much of my days communicating in writing as a core function of my job.  I'm literate and have a pretty good command of the English language.

I've also spent the better part of 20 years working with people of all nationalities and varying degrees of facility with the language, often working through interpreters, relay services or even written notes back and forth in some cases.  Add to this that many of these people are disabled in some way, either physically or mentally.   So, I have a lot of experience communicating in English under difficult conditions with people who have little to no capacity for the language.

So, the English language is kind of in my wheelhouse.  And I disagree with you.  Presuming, based upon your remark about people who have studied Engilsh, you are also at least something of an expert on the language, this is a perfect example of where two "experts" can disagree fundamentally.


----------



## tshadowchaser (Dec 10, 2014)

Folks the tread is about discussing the arts.
It is NOT about smashing faces with conversation or calling people dishonest.
Please keep the discussion friendly and respectful

Take personal feuds to pm or better still learn to disagree


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> Your expertise isn't established to the satisfaction of the court in some way?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sure I testify to my experience  how many search warrants I've written, how many undercover buys I've made, the quantity of drugs,  the felony arrests I've made the classes I've attended the length of my career all factor in.  Just like here people tell us the style they train how long they gave trained the rank they hold the seminars they hav3 attended the people they have trained with etc.  I've never been asked to prove anything I assume defense attorney check up on what I say and if I were to be caught in a lie my career is over I'll be fired.  If someone here gets caught in a lie they usually leave or their word is meaningless.


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

Steve said:


> Here's a great case in point.  I wouldn't consider myself an authority on all things English, but I do have a degree in English Lit with a minor in philosophy, and spend much of my days communicating in writing as a core function of my job.  I'm literate and have a pretty good command of the English language.
> 
> I've also spent the better part of 20 years working with people of all nationalities and varying degrees of facility with the language, often working through interpreters, relay services or even written notes back and forth in some cases.  Add to this that many of these people are disabled in some way, either physically or mentally.   So, I have a lot of experience communicating in English under difficult conditions with people who have little to no capacity for the language.
> 
> So, the English language is kind of in my wheelhouse.  And I disagree with you.  Presuming, based upon your remark about people who have studied Engilsh, you are also at least something of an expert on the language, this is a perfect example of where two "experts" can disagree fundamentally.


Except the dictionary disagrees with you.  Words have meanings you don't get to change them to fit your piint


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

Nor am I suggesting otherwise
 The dictionary agrees with me completely

Sent from my iPhone using


----------



## ballen0351 (Dec 10, 2014)

*Point darn it I still can't edit posts on my phone it never loads them


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> *Point darn it I still can't edit posts on my phone it never loads them


Lol.  It was clear and posting anything with these little keyboards is a pain in the butt. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Steve (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Sure I testify to my experience  how many search warrants I've written, how many undercover buys I've made, the quantity of drugs,  the felony arrests I've made the classes I've attended the length of my career all factor in.  Just like here people tell us the style they train how long they gave trained the rank they hold the seminars they hav3 attended the people they have trained with etc.  I've never been asked to prove anything I assume defense attorney check up on what I say and if I were to be caught in a lie my career is over I'll be fired.  If someone here gets caught in a lie they usually leave or their word is meaningless.


Hey, missed this one.  So yeah.  You testify under oath that you have experience necessary to establish you as an expert.  And I'm presuming the defense attorneys may produce their own expert who provides a counterpoint to your expert testimony.  

We just kind of take your word around here, unless there's something wonky.  It's a little different.   The vetting process here is much less structured, and much more dependent upon personality and a convincing back story,    I'm not saying people ARE fibbing.  I'm saying, as you yourself have said many times, people COULD BE fibbing. 

Which, leading back to the appeal to authority, means that sometimes... Really every time... We assert something, we should either be providing objective, external support, or understand that we are banking on tenuous credibility and the strength of our personalities.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD


----------



## drop bear (Dec 10, 2014)

ballen0351 said:


> Except the dictionary disagrees with you.  Words have meanings you don't get to change them to fit your piint



so he is not his own external source?

and which dictionary? A technical dictionary can have quite different meanings for words.


----------



## Grenadier (Dec 11, 2014)

*ATTENTION ALL USERS:*

Thread locked, pending staff review. 

-Ronald Shin
MT Assistant Administrator


----------

