why so quiet

[Scott Nelson]

Thanks, Lynn. Not to mention any Lechmere/Cross or Druitt threads.

But any Diary thread is ok in my book.

[Lechmere]

The marginalia?
Actually I think this forum is still suffering from the after effects of the mass suspensions of about a year ago - mainly over the marginalia and overspill disputes associated with that.

Actually last December.

[Beowulf]

I came to this thread expecting a discussion of how the Ripper was able to kill and mutilate his victims apparently without making much noise.

occasionally come here and read some of the things about Jack, the maps, facts put out there with some really intelligent comments. The photos of 1880s London are pretty good for a couple of lost hours here.

hard to comment when I haven't much to say that would be worth saying but that statement made by Damaso Marte (above) is an interesting thought.

[Mayerling]

I discovered some time back that unless I think I have something worth noting (and sometimes it is tangential to the threads) I won't say anything. Why just chatter for no reason. On that idiotic "Van Gogh" thread the other day I noted a side discussion between two fellow Board users regarding the Emperor Nero and how accurate his reputation is. I decided to tell them about a book I read by one B. H. Warmington about Nero and his posthumous reputation. It had nothing to do with Van Gogh, but it was on that thread.

[By the way, since Walter Sickert and Vincent Van Gogh represent British and Dutch (though painting in France) painters, may I suggest it was either Winslow Homer or Frederick Remington (as an American painter as a ridiculous suspect). - Only fooling. ]

As for flogging dead horses, please remember:

You can't lead dead horses to water, but a pencil must be lead.

[Monty]

....Said the stallion.

The two Robs (Clack and House) sum it quite neatly.

When the likes of SPE are told quite simply that they are outdated and have no idea what they are talking about then its time to shake your head at the realisation of the situation.

And leave.

Monty

[Ausgirl]

I'm a bit loath to lay fingers to keys in general, as a few here can be really (and persistently) rude and condescending, as well as quite kneejerky and unable to percieve the actual intent of any post with 'Sickert' in it, and the like.

But the rest of you make up for it. It must get so boring to keep explaining things to people who aren't as dedicated to the case. But -- thanks, those who do.

I'm primarily interested in 'aberrant' human behaviour (I've even argued that there's is no such animal, that was fun) and JtR's one of the more interesting subjects. The murder of Mary Kelly is an iconic example of how far from the norm some people go.. I've always wanted to know what's made these people tick, so that's sort of why I'm here.

Theories as to who he was come in a distant second from that, but it'd be good to be able to poke a stick at even the very deadest horses (an analogy that could be stretched unpleasantly, ehehe) without being regarded as a complete idiot. You've all been through the thrill of discovery and exploration - let us noobs have our turn, I say!

Though I don't mind being told to shut up, if it's actually warranted. And sometimes it probably is.

Point being, nice manners might mean more new members posting, etc. If that's the thing desired.

[Monty]

I was once like you Aus girl.

Take a good look at me....in 13 years, I am your future.

Monty

[Graham]

The marginalia?
Actually I think this forum is still suffering from the after effects of the mass suspensions of about a year ago - mainly over the marginalia and overspill disputes associated with that.

Actually last December.

I agree with you re: the suspensions, which with all due respect to Admin did I think knock a little stuffing out of the Forum. I myself am a suspendee...not that I really contributed much to the JtR threads, but I did enjoy taking part in the A6 discussion. Ah well, there are other things in life I suppose.

Graham

[Tecs]

As for flogging dead horses, please remember:

You can't lead dead horses to water, but a pencil must be lead.



Hi all,

My favourite has always been

"You can take a whore to culture, but you can't make her think..."

regards,

[Phil Carter]

[QUOTE=Tecs;274611]As for flogging dead horses, please remember:

You can't lead dead horses to water, but a pencil must be lead.

QUOTE]

An observation..

Pencils are made of graphite....not lead.



Phil

[Phil Carter]

Point being, nice manners might mean more new members posting, etc. If that's the thing desired.

Hello Ausgirl,

Believe me, it doesn't help in some cases. The meaning of written politeness in public via a message board went out of the window a while ago.

Verbal bashing is the mode..I am sorry to say. Like the thought though.


Phil

[Phil Carter]

Hi.
Is it me , or have we all gone extremely quiet in the last few days, only a handful of posts daily. on topics overcooked.
Surely we have not all emptied on ideas, we need some new blood[ excuse the pun] to freshen us all up, and get the taste buds working again.
I am as guilty as any , I guess their comes a time when one has to recharge ones batteries, and find the enthusiasm to continue on.
Regards Richard.

Hello Richard,

As to your original point.. I believe that in this year of all years, some are very busy doing things that will show some product... be it towards the 125th Anniversary meet up, or an article or two for Ripperologist, or some research or such like.

The trouble with new blood (a point with which I totally agree by the way) is that the "fresh look" is easily misconstrued or labelled as being either "old hat" "lacking knowledge" "plain ridiculous" "disrespectful of what we have been led to believe or our peers" or just plain "stupid". Not at all encouraging. Even when people of over 40 years knowledge in the genre produce a very well presented, never before seen nor thought of idea..it gets pounced upon like a mole popping it's head up through a hole on a golf course (see reaction to Simon Wood's two pieces of finely tuned and excellently researched material). Nothing must change and nothing must be seen to change UNLESS it gets officially ratified by a representative of the "inner sanctum".

It can be interpreted Richard, that if the story or the idea doesn't get the acceptance of the generally recognised group of the "inner sanctum" of all-knowing, all-seeing and all-agreed peers... then nothing Richard, will ever be ratified, if that be the correct wording, as being even possible.

What chance has a newbie got when the response is always the same...namely..

"we know better than thou"

The final point being that for some, the actual idea of things NOT being what other peers have believed and concluded being 100% correct, is just not concievable. Disagreement is only allowed as long as it doesn't cause all out anarchy for the "inner sanctum".

And if people have contrary opinions, Lord help them if they air them in public, even though they themselves are convinced by them as much as the "inner sanctum" are convinced by their views.

Some people, like yourself, show respect to other viewpoints. Your views are "reasonable" and don't "cause waves". You are therefore "accepted" and not discouraged to continue to air your views.

But then again, you don't take on the "inner sanctum" so you are safe.

But rattle a cage or 5... and watch the hawks gather.....and ANY tactic is used to belittle an idea or the person doing it.

This post will do a "Scott Nelson".. and "liven it up a bit" (Sorry Scott old fellow, just saw the reference..) and give some the ammunition they crave for their ego to be presented and attack. Not that they actually need the ammo anyway. Their opinion rules...ok? Duh!

Hope you are well! Always nice to read your thoughts on Ripper matters.



Phil

[Graham]

Good post, Phil. But the thing is, at least one member who seems to consider himself a member of that 'inner sanctum' is himself a relative newcomer to this Forum. I think with Admin's current stance against personal abuse (with which I don't disagree, by the way) it's no longer possible, as it used to be on the pre-crash Forum, to tell such a person what you think of him. It probably did no good at all to do so, but by God it made you feel better! I used to get long threatening rants via PM from one particular 'gent', long gone, because I dared question a very minor point in his views regarding the subject we were posting on; more than once I was threatened with personal harm! Them was the days!

Graham

[Phil Carter]

Good post, Phil. But the thing is, at least one member who seems to consider himself a member of that 'inner sanctum' is himself a relative newcomer to this Forum. I think with Admin's current stance against personal abuse (with which I don't disagree, by the way) it's no longer possible, as it used to be on the pre-crash Forum, to tell such a person what you think of him. It probably did no good at all to do so, but by God it made you feel better! I used to get long threatening rants via PM from one particular 'gent', long gone, because I dared question a very minor point in his views regarding the subject we were posting on; more than once I was threatened with personal harm! Them was the days!

Graham

Hello Graham,

Thank you. Kind of you to say this.

PS. Been threatened with personal harm you say? That's novel. On a JTR website linked private message board?....that's..err... slightly more than creepy...


Phil

[Rob Clack]

The trouble with new blood (a point with which I totally agree by the way) is that the "fresh look" is easily misconstrued or labelled as being either "old hat" "lacking knowledge" "plain ridiculous" "disrespectful of what we have been led to believe or our peers" or just plain "stupid". Not at all encouraging. Even when people of over 40 years knowledge in the genre produce a very well presented, never before seen nor thought of idea..it gets pounced upon like a mole popping it's head up through a hole on a golf course (see reaction to Simon Wood's two pieces of finely tuned and excellently researched material). Nothing must change and nothing must be seen to change UNLESS it gets officially ratified by a representative of the "inner sanctum".

What a load of crap. Typical from you.

Any idea, whether it is presented by someone with 40 years or 4 years knowledge has to stand on it's own two feet and needs to be well researched and presented and to stand up to close scrutiny. Especially these days.

If a new idea gets shot down in flames it means it isn't well researched and presented and is typically based on a lot of speculation than actual facts.

And who are the members of the 'Inner Sanctum'? is this a new name for the cabal? I don't expect you to name them and you don't have the balls.

Rob