F1 Fanatic

This was one of the first forum threads that I saw on the F1F forum when I joined it two years ago and I recently remembered it. I didn’t have much to say about the topic then but I feel like I could tell you some of my thoughts and feelings about commenting on this website now.

1) I don’ t think there is a general recipe for a good comment or a COTD. It can be a good joke, a thorough analysis, an unusual look at things, a debate-inspiring thought, a story about personal experience, etc. Anyway, I think it’s better if you don’t post comments thinking ‘Now I’m going to write a comment that will probably be picked by Keith as the COTD’. Almost all of my COTDs came when I absolutely didn’t expect them.

2) The length of the comment generally doesn’t matter. If someone is too busy to read it or simply doesn’t want to read long comments, then so be it. I have seen (and read) a great 3-word comment and a fantastic comment that was 1777 words long. I often read the long comments as well, particularly if they are written by my friends. Of course, I try to avoid overexplaining but the length of my comments really depends on the situation (and perhaps my mood, too).

3) I usually try to post comments and talk to other fanatics only when I really feel like it, without other considerations. I have posted long comments at relatively ‘ordinary’ articles that have been written several days ago and not said anything on hot and extremely popular topics at times.

4) I try to avoid lengthy discussions unless I happen to enjoy them or I really feel like something important that I would like to point out has been left unsaid. It’s pretty hard to make people change their minds and that’s never been my aim, too. I think that people should exchange their views and have a good time here, not desperately try to prove that Kobayashi is better than Kovalainen or vice versa.

5) I try to find the right balance between emotions and cool-headed analysis in my comments. If I like Maldonado (by the way, I really do), I don’t hide it but I also don’t say that Perez was to blame for their collision at Monaco. My emotions and preferences undoubtedly sometimes have impact on my comments (which probably isn’t a bad thing as F1 is all about passion) but I try not to let them take me over and make me sound ridiculous. I try to show the necessary respect where it is due and avoid confusing likeability with performance.

6) I try not to be populist or aggressive. These things can bring you some attention and even some fans in short term but they usually degrade the level of the discussion and scare the many intelligent fanatics away.

7) I try to be open to other views and am ready to change my opinions, too.

8) I don’t like people, who come here only to praise and defend their favourite driver. There is nothing bad about having a favourite driver and defending him but it can get annoying if that’s all that one is capable of.

9) Sometimes I post jokes or half-jokes but I think one needs to be very careful with them as I sometimes find other people’s jokes dumb and I obviously shouldn’t expect that everyone else will get my ‘humour’, too.

10) Finally, I try to remember that I’m not an F1 insider and, even though I might know a lot about the sport, compared to the average Joe, I still am far from it and can mostly only speculate or assume something but not be 100% sure. For sure, I form my own opinions and tell them to the others as well but I try not to take them deadly serious.

It’s pretty hard to make people change their minds and that’s never been my aim, too. I think that people should exchange their views and have a good time here, not desperately try to prove that Kobayashi is better than Kovalainen or vice versa.

I can only wish the politically empowered (in my country) would adopt that view. More often than not their rhetoric can be summed up as: “the opposing party sucks, and we’re better than their supporters.”

Pardon my American Keith.

Disagreed @magnificent-geoffrey, and the reason is simple: percentage-wise, iambic pentameter beats the ever-living cr*p out of “regular” prose for surviving the ages. Also, how many spelling mistakes have you ever counted in iambic pentameter?

I would say when it comes to discussions, it is important that people try to prove themselves right rather than prove others wrong. That might sound like it’s the same, but the difference is that the latter invites ad-homs and other irrelevant distractions, whereas the former invites research and introspection into how your opinion is formed and why it is held.

For example, if I had been trying to prove @magnificent-geoffrey as wrong as he clearly is in this instance, I might have said “he clearly doesn’t know anything about pentameter and probably just looked up the term in a dictionary”. Which has a) no basis in reality (it can’t have, because I don’t know the person behind the handle) and b) has a derisory slant which means that, intentionally or not, if could very easily be read as an insult in turn inviting more insults and c) doesn’t actually address the issue he raises which is should one write in iambic pentameter or not and therefore isn’t even an argument for or against his point. As opposed to the entirely sensible, non-insulting (and correct) statements I started this post with ;)

Also, distinguish between facts and opinion, both from other people and yourself. You can argue one, but not the other. Arguing one might lead to discussion, trying to argue the other will only lead to butt-hurt.

Keith, write the following guidelines next to an article:

“A comment should be like a woman’s skirt – long enough to cover the subject, but short enough to keep it interesting”

:D hehe

Ah yah, that reminds me of another one:

Don’t write a comment to get CotD, but rather to make your view public :p