Glider

My name is Dave.

I agree, less than good is a pretty low bar. But ‘ideal’ (the word you used) means ‘most suitable’ or ‘perfect’, not just good. I agree also with the principle you highlight. I have noticed it too and I have never disagreed with those who have commented on it. The thread veered off after I made a simple observation on the fact that there are more and less effective ways of correcting a person’s attempts to do something.

I don’t think he did challenge my education. I think his response to my observation was simply abrasive and dismissive:

“ Seligman 75, huh? Is there a complete refrence? Or is this out of a thesis and quoted thusly? This should bring on a spathe of pseudointellectual babble about teaching methods and approaches from a psychosial perspective.”.

He presented his own evidence of teaching (which is fair enough. Evidence is good).

“I trained graduate students (and a bunch of undergraduate research students)for a long time.”.

My response was not defensive, although I will admit to being a little annoyed. Is that unreasonable? My response was to post evidence that I too was in a position to know what I was talking about with respect to teaching and so not deserving of such a dismissive response. It is also evidence that my observation was neither based on, nor likely to generate “pseudo-intellectual babble”. Why should I expect anybody to take my word if I can’t provide such evidence?

You responded to this with sarcasm (which also misrepresented my point entirely):

“ Thanks glider for the clarification. I understand now how important it is to let someone know how much I appreciate the effort they went to, to make a less than ideal bonsai according to principles laid down for centuries.”

And John, with a veiled insult to my discipline:

“ Glider, I won't go into the issues I have with the "soft" sciences, that is for another forum. Economy of bandwidth and all”.

Thank you, although my education does extend beyond words.

As I have said, I do understand your point, and I agree broadly. I just made the observation that there are different methods of dealing with it.

I think it’s good that you like to base what people have to say on the evidence of their own body of work. However, I do think it strange then that when I presented my body of work as evidence in support of what I have to say, it was classed as defensive and transparent. I don’t think my posting pictures of bonsai would support anything I have to say on the subject of teaching.

I readily admit that I haven’t a single tree in my new collection that is yet worth posting on these forums (although we are working on it), but neither have I ever put myself forward as anything approaching a bonsai master. I have absolutely no issue with anything you have to say on bonsai, but bonsai is not what this is about. This is about due respect.

As I have said elsewhere, I respect your evident experience in bonsai, and it is clear that you are well respected here. As such, nothing I have presented in this thread was ever written without due respect or with the intent of causing offence. I sincerely wish things hadn’t gone this far. But, when a simple observation posted on this forum is met with such a dismissive and abrasive attitude from senior members, then I think there is an issue and it should be addressed.

You and John don’t know me. I’m just another member, nothing special. I browse the posts, and post now and again. I enjoy browsing the forums and I learn things here and there from listening to (reading) them. I try not to post beyond my ability or knowledge.

I made one short observation on the fact that there are different approaches to teaching and it was abrasively dismissed out of hand. As I say, you don’t know me and I am not a ‘known name’ in bonsai, but does that mean I deserve to be dismissed?

Given that you don’t know me, I presented evidence that I am qualified to make such an observation. This was met with sarcasm from you and (veiled) insult from John. Is this how ‘unknowns’ are treated here? If a poster is not a ‘known name’ in bonsai then they have nothing of value to say and so it is acceptable to deride their veiws?

I chose not to respond in kind, rather I chose to take the time to try and present a reasoned and structured case in support of my argument. This has been completely ignored and I am challenged to present a photograph of one of my bonsai?

Why is it so hard for you to accept that there might be people who are equally as qualified as you (although not in your field) and who might actually have something pertinent to say and some sound basis for saying it? Why, when they say it, do you consider sarcasm and dismissal an appropriate response? Are these things an appropriate response to anybody’s post if their post is not, in itself, unreasonable or abusive?

This is not about bonsai. This is about how you choose to treat people here. For the most part, you aren’t going to know who is posting, but that doesn’t matter. You can assume that the one posting is a person, and if what a person posts is not unreasonable or abusive, then they have a right to be treated with some basic courtesy. This applies to anybody who posts. It doesn’t matter who they are or what they do.

I don’t believe an expertise in bonsai in any way gives anybody an automatic right to treat other people’s views with contempt, regardless of the other's status in bonsai and particularly if they can demonstrate some expertise in the area on which they are commenting. I doubt very much whether John or yourself would treat people so abrasively face to face, so I don’t see why you would consider it acceptable here.

From reading other things you have written, I had you pegged as a much better person than that. Was I that wrong?

Did you intend this as a genuine question, or as further insult? It really is hard to tell in forums sometimes.

For the sake of diplomacy, I will treat it as a genuine question. No, I didn’t receive my education on the internet. Some time after leaving the Army I found I was going nowhere, so I attended night school for two years to gain the A-Levels that would allow me access to higher education. After that I attended University for 3 years to gain my B.Sc., and then attended University again for another 6 years to gain my Ph.D..

I doubt that, but you have to accept that some might know what they are talking about.

As I say, I sincerely wish things hadn’t gone this far, but I think that when senior members of a forum begin to think they can treat the views of another poster (whoever they may be or however junior) with contempt, then I feel it needs to be addressed, there and then.

As a teacher, I know that a teacher should never expect blind respect from their students simply by virtue of being a teacher (nor should students blindly give it). Respect always has to be earned and it is not earned by treating the views of students with contempt.

__________________
Experience is knowledge gained immediately after it was needed.