|
 |
 |
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Michael Raney
Inspector
Username: Mikey559
Post Number: 224
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 12:57 pm: |       |
AP,
Very well said. If everyone would learn to back out "gracefully and with politeness" when the argument becomes a stalemate, someone else might be able to step in with a new idea or at least a fresh perspective. I know that when two people seem to be arguing with each other, I don't want to get involved or even read that thread for a while.
Mikey |
Andrew Spallek
Inspector
Username: Aspallek
Post Number: 490
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 1:38 pm: | |
I certainly agree. But on the other hand, I've been a part of discussion groups where even trying to convince someone else of your point of view is considered "argumentative." We also want to avoid that extreme.
Andy S. |
Robert Charles Linford
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Robert
Post Number: 2272
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 2:06 pm: | |
Hi all
Let's not forget all the great research posted by Chris Scott and others. This site is a major engine for generating new discoveries about the case.
Re discussions, I suppose it's true that many of the points made in the discussions must already have been made on the old boards, or in books etc. But there's nothing like being involved in a discussion yourself for really putting you in touch with the case - reading the discussions of others isn't quite the same, in my opinion.
Robert |
Kris Law
Inspector
Username: Kris
Post Number: 210
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 4:21 pm: | |
This was not my problem. As I said in my last post.
I don't know how to make it more clear. Arguing is not the problem. Arguing stupid points of minutia to an annoying degree is what I'm aggravated with.
You know what? You're probably all right. This is just how message boards are, and I guess when it comes down to it I don't like message boards.
I don't see the point of going back and forth 20 times about the same thing. Like I said in my first point, it just ends up becoming The Argument Sketch.
"I've had enough."
"No you haven't."
-K |
Natalie Severn
Chief Inspector
Username: Severn
Post Number: 588
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 4:33 pm: | |
Dont forget Kris you have none of the accompanying gestures of speech to aid the communication.No eye contact,reassuring voice,
smile/frown just dislocated sentences trying to reply to one another.Its whats called "decontextualised speech" and it can be hard going and frustrating from that point of view.
Natalie |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1407
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 7:27 pm: | |
Kris wrote:
>Arguing is not the problem. Arguing stupid points of minutia to an annoying degree is what I'm aggravated with.
I absolutely agree. And on many threads I think things usually gets ridiculous on occasions.
But then again, when exactly does an argument become pointless and superfluous? Who is going to be the judge; who decides what's "stupid points" (except Stephen)? We are all human, and to try and keep things academically correct at all times in an argument (and to keep it from becoming repetitious) is doomed to fail -- it doesen't matter how much academic training we've got. Of course the Boards can get better, but I would say the standard on these discussions are quite high compared to many other forums. These boards are already regulated to a large extent, in order to be kept "civil", literate and correct (almost too much for my taste).
On many discussion boards, two or three people totally rule, and shuts everyone else out from the discussions, leading into an endless dogfight between two or three individuals on the whole board. We have such tendencies here too on some threads (and God knows I am not the best one to talk), but compared to discussion boards in general, I think the Casebook Boards are unique in their diversity and their high academic level. But as I said, we are all human; it is natural to end up in excessive arguments to prove ones point, even though it can get ludicrous and frustrating. It is not a good thing and it's not mature, but it is a common element in debates even on higher levels than this. Sometimes it's a result of prestige and stubborness, and sometimes just a result of misunderstand and misinterpreting.
At the moment I find the Boards rather dull, due to the fact that no discussion is going on at the moment that really interests me, but that is just how it looks at the moment for me. I would rather jump out from balcony than to inject myself in the boring and never-ending Diary/Maybrick threads, and I simply choose not to get myself involved in them. That is my own decision; as it is Kris Law's own decision if he wants to jump in on the threads that irritates him.
I can agree on Kris' general objections, though, and I also agree that arguments can go on and on for no reason and that things can get unnecessary repetitious. Things can indeed get better. But a discussion board is a discussion board, with all its human mistakes and its flaws -- let's not try and pretend it is anything else.
Now, have a good evening everyone. I've said all that I've got to say in this discussion. Cheers.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on March 31, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 290
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 7:31 pm: | |
Hi,
I know I've been guilty of partaking in discussions of the type Kris is talking about. I think one of the reasons such discussions tend to live beyond their "use-by date" is that it is often difficult to tell if the other person (or one's self actually) is simply not understanding what you are writing because you've explained it poorly or because nothing you say will be accepted.
If a reply seems to ignore the content of the message to which it's a response (or gets the points wrong) I always start from the assumption that the person simply didn't get it and has misinterpreted the previous post. So, I try and re-state things in a different way while maintaining the gist.
Of course, if the other person sees my responses likewise, then they may simply do the same, and so on and so on.
And sometimes, it just gets hard to stop.
- Jeff |
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1409
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 7:45 pm: | |
Jeff,
I just saw your post and just had to add:
I can think of a number of persons fitting the ones that Kris refers to (myself included), but I would hardly include you in that category. You are, as I see it, one of the sanest and reasonable individuals here (your brilliant points above once again confirmed it) -- don't sell yourself short.
As you say, sometimes it just gets hard to stop.
Now, I'll but off and leave this thread. Besides, it's 2:45 am here. Cheers again and good night.
All the best
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Monty
Chief Inspector
Username: Monty
Post Number: 958
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 01, 2004 - 3:22 am: | |
Kris,
Argument for arguments sake.
Yeah ?
Glenns post above is bang on for me,
To you the point is stupid, to others its not.
Its all about views isnt it. Sometimes yours will differ from mine and sometimes not. And never the twain shall meet. Ive always agreed to disagree when it gets to that stage but some just do not know how to, and that is their problem not yours. So dont burden yourself with that. You're too young and beautiful to carry such worries !
Relax, grab a cigar, I'll take you for a pint !
Monty
Our little group has always been and always will until the end... |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 961
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 01, 2004 - 5:34 am: | |
Hi All,
Andy, you make a very reasonable suggestion that posters take things to email when the going is getting unbearably heavy for the readers. A few of the posters I have become involved with take Mrs Merton's "Let's have a heated debate" far too seriously, and then show a complete misunderstanding of what the word actually means.
If I had already made my mind up about something, and knew I was never going to budge an inch, regardless of any new information introduced, and regardless of any rational argument put to me to consider, I wouldn't bother coming here to bait the natives who remain less than 100% certain about anything. You can only debate topics that either have no chance of being resolved, such as abstract concepts like the existence of ghosts, the Loch Ness Monster or God, or topics that all participants acknowledge may one day be resolved with hard facts, but also acknowledge that day has yet to come.
If both 'sides' of this false debate have equally closed minds it can only produce a farce of irresistible force meeting immovable object proportions.
Willing and interested debaters who encounter an immovable object soon get bored and drift away to leave them to it. No one can last long talking to oneself in a public forum.
But if the former asks a question, criticises or challenges the word (it's gone beyond the definition of opinion or argument) of an irresistible force, acrimony is the inevitable - and only possible consequence. And the moment the would-be debater is scared off and gives up the unequal struggle, or gets fed up with being shouted down or abused or ridiculed, or suggests the discussion be taken to email and any results posted later, because they don't want to be seen as the 'cause' of the acrimony, the irresistible force declares their hollow 'victory' and calls the would-be debater a coward for running away and not facing the music. Me, I like a merry tune. Just like my own mum and dad, I don't do funeral marches.
It's a great pity, because without the dull dull incredibly dull smokescreen of repetitive, mindlessly boring dictatorial mantra (just take the p out of mantrap and there! You are free to leave 'em to it), you lot might just have been able to make out the tiny nugget of 18 carat gold slowly coming into view on Maywatch, held by a wrinkly old Maywatch babe not quite yet in her prime.
Love,
Caz
PC H 9 3 |
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Wednesday, March 31, 2004 - 4:16 pm: | |
People are like that huge box of cryons with all the muti-colored parts of blues, yellows, reds, etc. Sometimes they match and sometimes they clash, thus no two people are going to agree 100% at any given time. I think the problem is the lack of RESPECT for other people and what they think, even if you do not agree with it. They have a good reason to think what they do and so do you but a fight should not come of it. Nope!
In other words opinions are like a (BEEP) everyone has one. If you want to know what the beep was for here is a tiny clipart clue to that.  |
Scott Nelson
Detective Sergeant
Username: Snelson
Post Number: 61
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, April 01, 2004 - 9:52 am: | |
Please go ahead and post some of your poetry, Melissa Kay. I know you want to. Sorry about the earlier fuss. |
Bullwinkle
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Thursday, April 01, 2004 - 12:18 pm: | |
"Me, I like a merry tune. Just like my own mum and dad, I don't do funeral marches."
>>But funeral marches are a part of our world. We all are going to have one of our own, aren't we?
Bullwinkle
|
Paul Butler
Sergeant
Username: Paul
Post Number: 47
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, April 03, 2004 - 7:52 am: | |
Hi All
Here here, is what I say..! The spooky thing about this thread seems to be the level of agreement between posters.
Wouldn’t it be great, not to say constructive even, if we could all have just a little more respect for the points of view of our fellow posters. There are some threads here, which although I don’t participate in them, are a great read daily. MJK is a prime example.
As someone who still has a real interest in the, dare I mention the word, Maybrick diary, (there I did it), I have little choice but to use those particular threads. The level of discussion is positively civilised here and elsewhere compared to the acres of childish and patronising dross you have to wade through to find the occasional morsels of real interest there.
I certainly don’t blame anyone for staying away from them, and that is a shame, as although its quite possible we haven’t got our man, the diary itself still holds a deep fascination for many as a JTR artefact, and the real truth about its origins have, I sincerely believe, not as yet been discovered.
The true story of the diary and watch will be discovered one day, of that I have no doubt. It would be so much better if that could be done with the help of the casebook rather than despite it.
Anyhow, keep up the good work chaps, the Casebook is still my daily read of choice.
Regards to all,
Paul
|
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Friday, April 02, 2004 - 10:42 am: | |
Well Scott I don't really have much Jack the Ripper creations either art or poetry. Most of my poetry work is from personal problems I've had. Being a stalking victim for one thing. Or somthing that means something to me as most poets have writen about. I have the art work I do which is mostly my cartoon though I do have oil canvas work. However as messy as oil paint is I like working on computer art much better. Anyway I'm going an and on here. (Sighs) Just go to my art site if you are interested. Or you can check out my links site if you want, both URL's are below...
ART SITE- http://melissamcmahan.tripod.com/
LINK SITE- http://www.geocities.com/greenwaterpurpledirt/index.html
Thanks, M.Mc. |
Thomas C. Wescott
Sergeant
Username: Tom_wescott
Post Number: 42
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 1:38 am: | |
Hello all,
Still discussing the future of the board? I think the future of this board will be continuing discussions about the future of this board...oh yeah, and a lot of Diary and Barnett talk. Boy, I remember the heyday of this board, where for every newbie there was an established author posting (would you believe that one time, Martin Fido, Stewart Evans, Paul Begg, Melvin Harris, and a score of others were regular posters). Now what do we have? A.P. Wolf. There were 10 times the number of discussions going on, and they weren't all about poetry, Barnett and the damn Diary. There were tons of heated arguments to entertain, but lots of fun and really...REALLY...worthwhile discussion. How many people here remember Yazoo (and not from the CD-ROM, either!)? Probably just Caz, who's the only other poster on here from way back when (she was a newbie when this SITE was a newbie!). And now SHE'S an established author. Pretty cool. Even if her topic was the damn Diary. Even much later, during the period when everyone hated Ally and blamed her for everything short of the national deficit, there was still cool stuff going on. What happened to educated debate and the exchange of research and information? You know, stuff like discussing the graffiti without having to talk about a fictitious dog.
Despite all my longing for the olden days, the board will persevere, and will see better days. In fact, perhaps its best days are ahead of it! At least, I'd like to think so. If you don't like the moderators, go post somewhere else. And if you can't stand the heat, you shouldn't be a'cookin'.
Yours truly,
Tom Wescott |
Harry Mann
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 5:01 am: | |
It is not the nature of any particular subject that makes for uninteresting reading,but the manner in which it is discussed.
Even when the above favoured posters were participating,there was a sense of animosity if certain particular views were not held sacred.
Everyone row their own boat,and if the tide is not in your favour,turn round and row the opposite direction.
And if the message is that non registered posters keep their distance,I might add that I ask to be registered postumously. |
Donald Souden
Inspector
Username: Supe
Post Number: 199
Registered: 10-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 1:57 pm: | |
Thomas,
But are you sure the dog is fictitious? And, once again, I am trying not to be facetious but to make a point.
I was the one who injected the hypothetical dog into the recent grafitto discussion; not because I necessarily believe a dog was involved, but to stress the fact that we know absolutely nothing of the provenance of the apron piece from Mitre Square to Goulston Street. Jack may have carried it all the way or there may have been other intermediate agents -- two- or four-legged. We just don't know and must accept that paucity of information when trying to make sense of the apron's proximity to the grafitto.
This is not the place to continue that argument, but it does raise points germane to this thread -- and it has been my impression that there has been an unfortunate trend on the boards of late.
Many months ago, I postulated the same "dog" in a discussion about the grafitto and it was readily accepted for what it was -- simply an example of how little we know about how the piece of apron traveled from one place to another. Yet the second time I brought it up it was immediately seized upon with derision and labeled (with a certain amount of metaphorical confusion) a "red herring." As an actual theory I am the first to say it is quite deficient, but as a goad to considering other possibilities I think it still apt.
Why the change in attitude on the boards? I don't know, but an increasing unwillingness to read posts fully and openly could be part of the answer. And it could also be a reaction to the growing tendency by some posters to confuse possibility with probability and then confuse both of those with established fact. I don't know if it is naive enthusiasm or a willful attempt to bully readers with bombaste, but more and more I see speculation and coincidence considered irrefutable truth and then trumpeted as "conclusive proof."
Of course, that sort of silliness is not universal and there are still many posters who can present speculation as nothing more than that and who, even when they disagree, can do so in a civil and informative manner. Sadly, though, it seems to me there is less and less of that these days and I grow less and less inclined to get involved. I fear that Gresham's Law applies as well to the coinage of the mind.
Don.
|
AP Wolf
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Apwolf
Post Number: 1002
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 5:22 pm: | |
I find it terribly sad that someone should think this site more interesting or less interesting - or more valid or less valid - just because of the amount or quality of published authors visiting the site.
You want to know my honest opinion on the quality of material that emanates from the vast majority of published authors - including my good self - in any form or subject?
Load of dung that should be canned up and thrown in the nearest ocean.
I can tell you in absolute honesty that the quality posts on this site come from good honest people who have never had to flog or flaunt their precious egos through the prostitution of the published word, and just do so out of a genuine and honest interest in this site, and an abiding interest in an unsolved mystery.
This slavish lust for the words of people who may have published a pile of dung about this case is quite frankly disturbing, and is more fitting to the activities of rock groupies.
It is also elitist… and snobby.
When I come on this site it is as an interested person - with no background or ambition - looking for lively and informative discussion.
The last person I want to talk to is me.
A thousand active curses on all published authors… and their groupies.
|
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 303
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, April 04, 2004 - 7:11 pm: | |
A belated Thank-you Glenn for your more than kind response.
And, having been posting here for quite some time now (including on the old boards), I've not found things to be less interesting. There are similar issues that have been debated, but overall, I think the quality of posts is generally quite high.
Some issues get very heated, sometimes we all get a bit stubborn, but overall a lot of new information is found and new ways of looking at the information is presented.
We're at a bit of a lull partly because the latest book is such a dud. Cornwell's book was almost universally rejected by those who've studied the case. The Diary is at a stand still, and probably will remain as such for some time.
No new "suspect" has been presented, and personally I think that is for the best. I'm hoping that we can look at the case without a "suspect" in mind, but rather look at it as the police had to originally. With no idea who was committing these crimes. From what we know about the crimes, if we're not biased to try and link them to Suspect X, maybe something new will come out of it. That something new, might even suggest someone knew, and that might lead to someone new. (Sorry, that's a bad word play there).
- Jeff |
Caroline Anne Morris
Chief Inspector
Username: Caz
Post Number: 969
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 7:44 am: | |
Hi Bullwinkle,
But funeral marches are a part of our world. We all are going to have one of our own, aren't we?
My mum and dad expressed their wishes not to have a funeral – or a funeral march. They always hated to think of their, or anyone else’s, money being wasted like that. The family simply abided by those wishes.
I plan to do the same. If I leave any money behind when I go, I don’t want a penny of it wasted on my departure. I’d sooner give it to the cats’ home and let the inmates spend it on self-publishing their oeuvre on the evils of Caz and all her questions. 
Hi Jeff,
The Diary is at a stand still, and probably will remain as such for some time.
I assume you mean here on the Casebook, in which case I think you may be right. But if a tree falls in a forest, it needs hearing people around if it wants to make a noise to be remembered. A tree cannot make any impact if it falls only on deaf ears. Elsewhere the sound may already be reaching deafening point.
Love,
Caz
X
|
Glenn L Andersson
Assistant Commissioner
Username: Glenna
Post Number: 1461
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 3:59 pm: | |
"The Diary is at a stand still, and probably will remain as such for some time.
I assume you mean here on the Casebook..."
No, actually, it's the other way around. The Casebook site is the only place where the Diary is being discussed and unfortunately is given way more attention than it deserves.
By the rest of Ripperology the Diary is treated with a considerable lack of interest, which is perfectly understandable.
All the best
(Message edited by Glenna on April 05, 2004)
Glenn Gustaf Lauritz Andersson
Crime historian, Sweden |
Richard Brian Nunweek
Chief Inspector
Username: Richardn
Post Number: 784
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 4:09 pm: | |
Hi,
I agree with Glenn, the diary is worthless, in Identifying Jack. I have re-read the diary many times recently attempting to keep a open mind, but I find it ludricous, it was written by a modern day hoaxer, cleverly done in the dialogue, as if written by a person of insane mind, and placing carefully , imformation that had been recently been returned, to further its authenticity.
Nothing more to add, a good attempt to make money, from a very commmercial subject.
Regards Richard. |
Jeff Hamm
Inspector
Username: Jeffhamm
Post Number: 304
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 6:04 pm: | |
Yes, I meant the Diary discussions here are at a standstill. I don't know what's being done with the Diary outside of these boards, so couldn't comment on what's thought outside. I would think that at least some in the publishing world must consider the Diary a forgery, or Patrica Cornwell's book would not have been published.
- Jeff |
M.Mc.
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Monday, April 05, 2004 - 8:18 pm: | |
I would like to see or know more about the GUESTBOOK Cornwell brings up in her book. It might be a HOAX too as the JTR Diary is. However I think more should be known about it nonetheless. |
|
Use of these
message boards implies agreement and consent to our Terms of Use.
The views expressed here in no way reflect the views of the owners and
operators of Casebook: Jack the Ripper.
Our old message board content (45,000+ messages) is no longer available online, but a complete archive
is available on the Casebook At Home Edition, for 19.99 (US) plus shipping.
The "At Home" Edition works just like the real web site, but with absolutely no advertisements.
You can browse it anywhere - in the car, on the plane, on your front porch - without ever needing to hook up to
an internet connection. Click here to buy the Casebook At Home Edition.
|
|
|
|
