MikeTX wrote:Bob Sihler wrote:Should I even bother?
yes, what does the english teacher say?
Chief used
opine as a noun, specifically as a predicate nominative. Grammatically, it has to be a noun where it is because the possessive pronoun
his is modifying it, and possessives modify nouns or stand alone. Moreover, he pairs it with
right, also a noun. While it is neither illegal nor impossible to join different parts of speech with a conjunction, it is almost always awkward.
I believe in his argument, Chief is mistaking context for intent.
But he's right on the substance!
ksolem wrote:You're grinding the gears of grammar to crash land the verb in the structure created for a noun.
If you made that up yourself, you should copyright it. It's great!
Neophiteat48 wrote:Bob Sihler wrote:I have no idea what the original comments were and cannot therefore comment on them. But these incidents produce strong feelings from different viewpoints. Criticism, even tough criticism, is fair. Attacks are not. And if you are going to open up in public, you had better accept that not all will see it your way.
On this site, I find that far too often members are happy to rip into strangers but feel it's some kind of no-no to criticize other members. You can't have it both ways. And there's also a contingent that seems to think we should never criticize another climber. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
That being said, I want to reiterate my preference for civil discussion and constructive criticism. I think Pellucid had a lot of guts to write what he did, and I thought it was a good article; I read it and voted on it several days before it was on the front page and was among the first to do so, so I haven't jumped on some feel-good bandwagon here.
Even though the original comments were deleted, he came back with more. I would be interested Bob, in all honesty, if you view this guy as giving criticism or he is attacking.
I read the "new" comments. To me, they are a harsh criticism, not an attack. While I would not like to be on the receiving end, I can't, from a neutral perspective, view it as a vicious attack. In poor taste, yes, but criticism nonetheless. Plus, Eric makes his points by using examples from his own and Mark's past experience as support, and he is obviously bothered by the article. I disagree with his assessment of the motive behind the article, and most others here seem to as well, but that does not make his view wrong or mean he lacks the right to express it.
Sorry, but this thread reminds me of the kind of crap that led to the fiasco on this site this past January.