Colophon
Faqs and assorted answers. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask, answers, they will be posted here, along with the questions.
- Q: Whats with all the bathrooms?
- A: My daughter has a thing for clean bathrooms, in fact she judges businesses by how clean they keep their bathrooms. So, I thought I would document them, nothing more sinister than that.
- Q: Why is there sometimes stuff that has nothing to do with Elmira, or even the Southern Tier?
- A: Because it interests me, and I thought it might interest you. Sorry if it doesn’t. skip it and move on with your life.
- Q: Why iElmira?
- A: Uh, why not? Seriously, We live in a town that was once great, and now has fallen on hard times. The only way for it to be great again, is for we, the citizens, to communicate. Hence, iElmira (Which stands for Interactive Elmira). Postings will not be edited or redacted because of content, other than if you are posting something illegal. I have smooth, boyish skin and I am not going to the joint for you, so keep it legal, ok? Got news or insight about the Elmira area, post it here, people will see it.
- Q: Do I have to use my real name to post here?
- A: Not for me. I use my real name because I feel there should be some accountability for what I write. You on the other hand might have some juicy bit of info, that we all really need to know about, but fear for your safety, by all means create yourself a cool sounding pseudonym. You won’t get any complaints from me.
- Q: Whos the top commentor?
- A: Sure, it’s always about you. Ok, to find out who the top commentor for the Month is, look on any page with the left sidebar showing, it is the bottom left. Commentors will be ranked by their number of posts. You can be number One, it only takes determination, a stick-to-it-evness, and having no life, sot of like me.
Just don’t be one, ok?
- Q: How do I add a post?
- A: It’s really rather easy, do this: If you haven’t registered yet, do so, takes a minute or so. Just hit the ‘Login’ button and choose ‘Register’ from the menu. Once you have registered go to the ‘Login’ button contained in the left sidebox with a title of ‘Meta’. Enter your login information when prompted, you will then be presented with an Admin screen (which is cool, all by itself). From there select ‘Write’. The Write menu is rather self explanatory. Add some tags to your post,stick it in a category and hit the ‘Publish’ button. People will be able to read your post immediately! How cool is that?
Or hit the Post Now button. Either will work. Also, make sure you hit the PUBLISH button, as opposed to the save button, as it iwll be posted immediately that way.
If we’re all going to be disagreeing more, we should be careful to do it well. What does it mean to disagree well? Most readers can tell the difference between mere name-calling and a carefully reasoned refutation, but I think it would help to put names on the intermediate stages. So here’s an attempt at a disagreement hierarchy:
DH0. Name-calling.
This is the lowest form of disagreement, and probably also the most common. We’ve all seen comments like this: u r a fag!!!!!!!!!! But it’s important to realize that more articulate name-calling has just as little weight. A comment like The author is a self-important dilettante. is really nothing more than a pretentious version of “u r a fag.”
DH1. Ad Hominem.
An ad hominem attack is not quite as weak as mere name-calling. It might actually carry some weight. For example, if a senator wrote an article saying senators’ salaries should be increased, one could respond: Of course he would say that. He’s a senator. This wouldn’t refute the author’s argument, but it may at least be relevant to the case. It’s still a very weak form of disagreement, though. If there’s something wrong with the senator’s argument, you should say what it is; and if there isn’t, what difference does it make that he’s a senator?
Saying that an author lacks the authority to write about a topic is a variant of ad hominem—and a particularly useless sort, because good ideas often come from outsiders. The question is whether the author is correct or not. If his lack of authority caused him to make mistakes, point those out. And if it didn’t, it’s not a problem.
DH2. Responding to Tone.
The next level up we start to see responses to the writing, rather than the writer. The lowest form of these is to disagree with the author’s tone. E.g. I can’t believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion. Though better than attacking the author, this is still a weak form of disagreement. It matters much more whether the author is wrong or right than what his tone is. Especially since tone is so hard to judge. Someone who has a chip on their shoulder about some topic might be offended by a tone that to other readers seemed neutral.
So if the worst thing you can say about something is to criticize its tone, you’re not saying much. Is the author flippant, but correct? Better that than grave and wrong. And if the author is incorrect somewhere, say where.
DH3. Contradiction.
In this stage we finally get responses to what was said, rather than how or by whom. The lowest form of response to an argument is simply to state the opposing case, with little or no supporting evidence.
This is often combined with DH2 statements, as in: I can’t believe the author dismisses intelligent design in such a cavalier fashion. Intelligent design is a legitimate scientific theory. Contradiction can sometimes have some weight. Sometimes merely seeing the opposing case stated explicitly is enough to see that it’s right. But usually evidence will help.
DH4. Counterargument.
At level 4 we reach the first form of convincing disagreement: counterargument. Forms up to this point can usually be ignored as proving nothing. Counterargument might prove something. The problem is, it’s hard to say exactly what.
Counterargument is contradiction plus reasoning and/or evidence. When aimed squarely at the original argument, it can be convincing. But unfortunately it’s common for counterarguments to be aimed at something slightly different. More often than not, two people arguing passionately about something are actually arguing about two different things. Sometimes they even agree with one another, but are so caught up in their squabble they don’t realize it.
There could be a legitimate reason for arguing against something slightly different from what the original author said: when you feel they missed the heart of the matter. But when you do that, you should say explicitly you’re doing it.
DH5. Refutation.
The most convincing form of disagreement is refutation. It’s also the rarest, because it’s the most work. Indeed, the disagreement hierarchy forms a kind of pyramid, in the sense that the higher you go the fewer instances you find.
To refute someone you probably have to quote them. You have to find a “smoking gun,” a passage in whatever you disagree with that you feel is mistaken, and then explain why it’s mistaken. If you can’t find an actual quote to disagree with, you may be arguing with a straw man.
While refutation generally entails quoting, quoting doesn’t necessarily imply refutation. Some writers quote parts of things they disagree with to give the appearance of legitimate refutation, then follow with a response as low as DH3 or even DH0.
DH6. Refuting the Central Point.
The force of a refutation depends on what you refute. The most powerful form of disagreement is to refute someone’s central point.
Even as high as DH5 we still sometimes see deliberate dishonesty, as when someone picks out minor points of an argument and refutes those. Sometimes the spirit in which this is done makes it more of a sophisticated form of ad hominem than actual refutation. For example, correcting someone’s grammar, or harping on minor mistakes in names or numbers. Unless the opposing argument actually depends on such things, the only purpose of correcting them is to discredit one’s opponent.
Truly refuting something requires one to refute its central point, or at least one of them. And that means one has to commit explicitly to what the central point is. So a truly effective refutation would look like: The author’s main point seems to be x. As he says: <quotation> But this is wrong for the following reasons… The quotation you point out as mistaken need not be the actual statement of the author’s main point. It’s enough to refute something it depends upon.
What It Means
Now we have a way of classifying forms of disagreement. What good is it? One thing the disagreement hierarchy doesn’t give us is a way of picking a winner. DH levels merely describe the form of a statement, not whether it’s correct. A DH6 response could still be completely mistaken.
But while DH levels don’t set a lower bound on the convincingness of a reply, they do set an upper bound. A DH6 response might be unconvincing, but a DH2 or lower response is always unconvincing.
The most obvious advantage of classifying the forms of disagreement is that it will help people to evaluate what they read. In particular, it will help them to see through intellectually dishonest arguments. An eloquent speaker or writer can give the impression of vanquishing an opponent merely by using forceful words. In fact that is probably the defining quality of a demagogue. By giving names to the different forms of disagreement, we give critical readers a pin for popping such balloons.
Such labels may help writers too. Most intellectual dishonesty is unintentional. Someone arguing against the tone of something he disagrees with may believe he’s really saying something. Zooming out and seeing his current position on the disagreement hierarchy may inspire him to try moving up to counterargument or refutation.
But the greatest benefit of disagreeing well is not just that it will make conversations better, but that it will make the people who have them happier. If you study conversations, you find there is a lot more meanness down in DH1 than up in DH6. You don’t have to be mean when you have a real point to make. In fact, you don’t want to. If you have something real to say, being mean just gets in the way.
If moving up the disagreement hierarchy makes people less mean, that will make most of them happier. Most people don’t really enjoy being mean; they do it because they can’t help it.
Loading ...
Well Bill I finally figured out what ” colophon” meant. And after much hesitation I placed the little arrow over the word and pressed the little button. Wow, now I know what this site is all about and the answers to many questions which have plagued me. I like this site because we all seem to be able to ‘agree to disagree ‘ on the issues that are brought into play. The bathroom thing only seemed to bother one of our local Politicians ( so that don’t count ). And I thought it was kind of a ‘cool’ thing to break the ice on this site. Even going so far as to venture into the World of the unknown to contribute. But most of all you have given us all a chance to air our complaints and ideas to anyone that will open their eyes/ears and listen to what REAL Elmiran’s think about the problems and solutions in OUR City. Thanks. And hopefull we’ll see you at the next Meeting of the minds…… Herb Wild and Brenda naturally. So goes life !
(Report comment)
(Report comment)
Bill, you appear to me as a tech genius; maybe you can help me. I am receiving harassing text messages on my cell phone. They are coming in anonymously from a number /state that I am unfamiliar with and do not know anyone in that state. Is there anything I can do to stop this? Is this reportable? It’s starting to make me feel very uneasy.
(Report comment)
Hopefully you are saving the messages.
(Report comment)
thanks bill; I am saving the messages; I am not opening them at this point (but I know that probably doesn’t help) I tried finding info on the internet myself (the number is coming in with an internet address) but of course it’s not available. Not life threatening but scary and weird.
(Report comment)
You will have to push it with them, just get the report filed, then you can get the D.A. to get the I.P records pulled and proceed from there.
I don’t think opening them makes any difference as the really important info is stored on your cell phone providers servers.
Don’t expect much to any help from the police though, this kind of thing does not help their crime stats at all, and they are loath to expend any time on it.
You may be able to call your cell phone provider and have your number changed, then keep close track of who you give it out to.
(Report comment)
I’m on it. Not many people have my cell phone number, and I don’t share my cell phone with anyone. I’m hoping that the area code was just inverted by the caller. If I get anymore calls I am going to call the police because it does make me feel like looking over my shoulder constantly; especially when I’m alone with the kids.
(Report comment)
no calls today. Hopefully ‘it’ gave up.
(Report comment)
Only for Bill: Site looks much better now. Print size and box placements.
The “colophon” makes one wonder. In the Cloud, might you put (instructions) or (faqs and assorted answers) or (Administrater), or a combination thereof? It was the last place I looked for information I wanted and I was one of the first of the general public in the area to have a computer.
(Report comment)
Colophon, it is usually the end notes of a book. I like the word.
(Report comment)
Bill, Tried phone, you wrre absent. I always thought of myself as being computer semi-literate but your site still throws me. I wanted a SG letter to Ed and another item on your site but cannot get in it. School Board meeting is WED. so I will try to call you again later.
(Report comment)