Yagoro
Member
Ikkyu in Kendo and Kenjutsu Practitioner
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by Yagoro on Aug 31, 2022 4:19:35 GMT
I appreciate everyone taking the time to give me some feedback. Moving is harder than I expected but I am turning a corner and should have some content soon. It will give me some time to consider what I have read and see how it fits. Thank you again to everyone who chimed in. My pleasure. Your videos have helped a lot of people and are a great resource for people new to the hobby
|
|
|
Post by blackprince on Sept 20, 2022 0:13:41 GMT
I love your videos! I do enjoy the rambling videos because it makes me almost feel like I’m chatting about swords with another enthusiast. Though, I suspect I that I am rare.
Improvement idea: for a destructive reviews, I’d like to see the sword deflect an incoming strike and be deflected when striking, edge to flat contact, and how the sword handles it… not sure how to do that safely without setting up some sort of rig, so feel free to ignore.
One other suggestion: add a some text on the screen when getting to the destructive part of the video that says “do not try this or you will die” when performing destructive testing. Maybe talk about the fact that you have a lot of experience destroying swords and know where the razor shrapnel will fly.
Hope the move goes well!
|
|
|
Post by takitam on Oct 3, 2022 17:48:29 GMT
Thanks for all your hard work, Matthew. I enjoy listening to your rambling and the fact that you always present the swords in detail while talking. I think your reviews are perfectly fine the way they are. You have your own distinctive style and it works well. IMHO, the sweet spot for your videos is 8-12 minutes. It's enough to present all the relevant info about the sword and ramble a bit. Your reviews have gotten longer with time and this is the only change for the worse that I have noticed. I also have a feeling that some of your older reviews were a bit 'lighter' in tone and had more sense of humour.
The only thing I would like to see in your videos are distal taper measurements, the way alientude does it. I also find a lot more pleasure in reviews of Albions and quality custom Euro/Japanese swords, rather than another 200$ Chinese katana.
IMO, there are a few good sword review channels, like KaneShen and LIER, who have a lot of potential but fail to capture my attention for a few reasons. One is providing too much information, like Oakeshott typology stories and historical info, (I have spent/wasted almost 20 years browsing myarmoury and reading about historical weaponry) and not enough about the sword in question. Another, more important one is - they film themselves for 15 minutes talking about the sword. This time could be much better spent showing the sword and it's details/use rather than reviewers faces. But this is a common thing in TV shows, which I also dislike and depends on the ego of the presenter, I think. They can do whatever they want though, they are the creators after all, I'm just a consumer. On another note, alientude, has shown improvement with time. The way he presents information seems a lot better now and he seems to have gotten better at editing. I also really appreciate the newish youtube functionality that divides the video into topical chunks.
All the best with the new house and videos. I really appreciate what you have offered sword nerds community so far.
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 3, 2022 18:59:35 GMT
Hello all, I am in the middle of moving from my home of 15+ years and it got me thinking about change. I have made YouTube reviews for a long time with the very specific goal of helping people make informed decisions about buying swords. The move marks a change in my life and has me reflecting on what I have done and what I can do. This is my channel - www.youtube.com/krunanIf you have a moment, I would love to know what I can do better. YouTube cultivates a community t hat enjoy what I currently do but is not always great at providing insight on what can be done better. I have learned a lot over the years and I am grateful for everyone that has helped me along the way. It would be great to learn more and be better. If you have any suggestions on what I can do to help people make more informed decisions about buying swords, then please let me know! As a side note, I appreciate the criticism. I don't really have a thick skin but I am asking for genuine feedback. If you don't like what I do, then that is fine. Still, I would love ideas on improvement. I get told to "die from cancer of the ass" at least once a week, so anything constructive would be lovely. Cheers, Matthew, your reviews are perfect the way they are. Your work has inspired a number of reviewers in terms of style. I can see that even Matt Easton's recent sword reviews are starting to talk more about fit and finish and show close-up footage of the details of the sword in question. I like that you have provided a strong framework of a sword review, and individual reviewers can add on top of that to talk further about the details they are interested in, but all the essential information and structures are already kind of set in stone by you. I don't mind the bandwidth consumption of 4K footage at all. I enjoy the minute details it can demonstrates. But then I'm on 5 gigabits fiber with no data limit, so I understand not everybody has that. Still, the beauty of YouTube is when you upload higher resolution videos, anyone can watch on lower res as well. Very much looking forward to your future reviews filmed at the new location. Moving house is a daunting task, especially when you have kids. Take some time off from reviews, if you need to. Stay healthy. There's already an extensive library that you've built, which viewers can enjoy. I'm exciting to see the reviews with the new set and backdrop. I do think that the best place to ask for advise is the YouTube community tab updates. There are lots of useful functions like voting there and they reach primarily your core audience. A forum isn't a particularly great place to ask about this. As you can see, most people responded in good faith are your viewers to begin with. As for the rest, let's just say despite the common trope that social media bring out the worst in people, you can still see older platforms like forums have plenty of cave trolls dwelling, and a good-faith thread such as yours can easily invite those...characters. Rarely you will see any honest suggestion even intended to be vaguely constructive or helpful from them. It's like when Disney asks a bunch of blue-haired landwhales who spend 22 hours per day on Twitter "intersectionality" topics how to improves their studio content. Not gonna end well. Bending the knee to a small number of socially awkward people who can't even afford the Internet, while alienating your core audience, so those few basement dwellers can sing praises for you on Twitter? Doesn't seem to be worth the effort at all. It's your channel. You always have the creative directive on how to move forward! Best of luck!
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 3, 2022 19:26:43 GMT
Thanks for all your hard work, Matthew. I enjoy listening to your rambling and the fact that you always present the swords in detail while talking. I think your reviews are perfectly fine the way they are. You have your own distinctive style and it works well. IMHO, the sweet spot for your videos is 8-12 minutes. It's enough to present all the relevant info about the sword and ramble a bit. Your reviews have gotten longer with time and this is the only change for the worse that I have noticed. I also have a feeling that some of your older reviews were a bit 'lighter' in tone and had more sense of humour. The only thing I would like to see in your videos are distal taper measurements, the way alientude does it. I also find a lot more pleasure in reviews of Albions and quality custom Euro/Japanese swords, rather than another 200$ Chinese katana. IMO, there are a few good sword review channels, like KaneShen and LIER, who have a lot of potential but fail to capture my attention for a few reasons. One is providing too much information, like Oakeshott typology stories and historical info, (I have spent/wasted almost 20 years browsing myarmoury and reading about historical weaponry) and not enough about the sword in question. Another, more important one is - they film themselves for 15 minutes talking about the sword. This time could be much better spent showing the sword and it's details/use rather than reviewers faces. But this is a common thing in TV shows, which I also dislike and depends on the ego of the presenter, I think. They can do whatever they want though, they are the creators after all, I'm just a consumer. On another note, alientude, has shown improvement with time. The way he presents information seems a lot better now and he seems to have gotten better at editing. I also really appreciate the newish youtube functionality that divides the video into topical chunks. All the best with the new house and videos. I really appreciate what you have offered sword nerds community so far. Talking about ego, your suggestion seems more egocentric--to be perfectly frank. It sounds that people should spend their time and effort revolving around you, to tailor make their content for your needs specifically, instead of a broad community in general. I don't know about others, but when I watch or read anything that I already have knowledge of, I don't immediately get triggered and think my time has been wasted. I feel affirmed, and agreeable, while relieved that the general population can take in such piece of information to be educated, like I have been--instead of getting fed some misconceptions. There's no such things as "too much information", most YouTube reviews are chaptered, and you can easily skip one or more sections to reach the parts that interest you. On the other hand, providing too little information is definitely a problem for obvious reasons. If we all have to cater to the people who spend 20 years on myArmoury, our size of audience would be in the single-digit. Matthew has a dozens of reviews on Albion swords, and European swords by numerous custom makers, why don't you watch those instead of whining about another section of the audience can enjoy what they want to see? Does your own individual need carry such gravitas that it trumps all others'? Sounds plenty egotistical to me. As for showing our faces, that's what almost every reviewer does, because it's the most effective way of communicating, while looking genuine and honest. If a reviewer is lying (because of special interests) on screen, his face would easily betray that, unless the person is a psychopath. There's often the need of doing demonstrations with the sword--techniques, comparison with other swords. The context is the key. The only viable way to do these is showing up in person on screen, while holding the swords. I don't know why you get triggered when you see other people's faces, but good luck finding a review with just the hands holding the sword(s). About the details of the sword in question, I show plenty of close-up footage in 4K showing the things I'm talking about. I see that in pretty much everybody's review videos. Kyle, Lier, Matthew. Of course, you have to watch to see it. Speaking of which, why don't you get off that comfortable couch, and film your own reviews. After all, like you have characterized: you have wasted more than 2 decades browsing on myArmoury and likely SFI (anybody cares for some "Rain of Castemere" to weep o'er yer empty halls??). Perhaps your can start contributing? By chance you may humble yourself learning about filming 100GB of footage in the cold, or in the heat while holding half a dozen swords for hours, and editing for hours, for a single video.
|
|
|
Post by takitam on Oct 3, 2022 22:55:36 GMT
You are correct about the part of my comment referring to ego, it was unnecessary. As for the rest, it seems I'm poor at communicating my thoughts, based on your response. Good luck with the reviews as well Kane, I appreciate your efforts.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Millman on Oct 7, 2022 12:45:53 GMT
Dear Kane Shen,
Your reply to takitam seems rather unfair. You review swords; takitam reviewed your reviews. If you put a product in the public forum, you have to expect some consumers' opinions won't please you. To my mind, takitam is far gentler to you than you've often been to sword manufacturers. I note that as I read it, takitam is impersonal, and merely cites your reviews as an example of a style they don't like; but your reply is a personal attack. Would you agree that if takitam has to produce sword-review videos in order to comment on yours, then you should spend some time making swords for a living before you review them?
As for ego, do note that in an open marketplace, consumers may, can, should, and do ask for whatever they want. What they can't do is expect to get it; but they can certainly ask, and they can choose the products that suit their tastes best. That's not ego; that's freedom of choice. Note that takitam never asks you to change your review style, but explicitly says:
Exactly correct: You should make reviews in the way that suits you best, and takitam should choose to watch the reviews that suit them best.
I see that takitam is gracious enough to apologize to you, although they did nothing wrong. I think it would be gracious of you to apologize to takitam.
Sincerely,
Mark Millman
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 7, 2022 18:34:35 GMT
Dear Kane Shen, Your reply to takitam seems rather unfair. You review swords; takitam reviewed your reviews. If you put a product in the public forum, you have to expect some consumers' opinions won't please you. To my mind, takitam is far gentler to you than you've often been to sword manufacturers. I note that as I read it, takitam is impersonal, and merely cites your reviews as an example of a style they don't like; but your reply is a personal attack. Would you agree that if takitam has to produce sword-review videos in order to comment on yours, then you should spend some time making swords for a living before you review them? As for ego, do note that in an open marketplace, consumers may, can, should, and do ask for whatever they want. What they can't do is expect to get it; but they can certainly ask, and they can choose the products that suit their tastes best. That's not ego; that's freedom of choice. Note that takitam never asks you to change your review style, but explicitly says: Exactly correct: You should make reviews in the way that suits you best, and takitam should choose to watch the reviews that suit them best. I see that takitam is gracious enough to apologize to you, although they did nothing wrong. I think it would be gracious of you to apologize to takitam. Sincerely, Mark Millman Dear Mark Millman, Let us address some of the mischaracterization of my response and the false equivalence in your post. It is clearly a false equivalence to compare my reviews of swords to his "review of my reviews", as you can see one is based in facts and logic and only demonstrate those objective qualities, and one is utterly subjective, lacks any evidential basis (at least he did not care to demonstrate any) but instead resorts to false accusations. When I review a sword, if I critique some of the aspects of a marketable product, or its maker in general, it is always based on demonstrable facts, and when a negative light is shone upon it, it is always undisputable that in aspect alone, either all or most other makers of the same price range are doing objectively better. I always take great pains to demonstrate that it is feasible for the maker to do better and they simply would not do it. It is not harsh, it is quite often very lenient. It is also incredibly fair and charitable. In takitam's "review of my reviews" as you put it, everything portrayed as objectively negative is ultimately shown to be completely subjective. Things like "you talk about stuff I already know makes it objectively bad and a waste of my time", or "you show your faces on screen, but I don't want to see your faces". It revolves solely around his personal needs and feelings. It is the dictionary definition of egocentrism. Yet, he goes on to associate reviewers showing their faces on screen to their ego--which is demonstrably false BTW. It is an textbook example of hypocrisy in the most obvious way possible, and seemingly coming from a practice of projection--"I assess the world's usefulness and quality as whether it is tailored fit to my tastes and needs, and mine alone; therefore I must assume when somebody does anything, it must be coming from the same egotistical places". The same hypocrisy is again on display when he gave the suggestion to Matthew Jensen that he should make European sword reviews only, and stop making those "cheapo Chinese made katanas", because he does not enjoy watching that, therefore no one should make those or watch those. Or maybe they technically have the liberty to do it, but it is then deemed objectively bad reviews because it is unnecessary. Now Matthew Jensen can do whatever pleases him, if it is his prerogative to obey and stop making those budget katana videos, he can. takitam has every right to make such "suggestions" because Matthew solicited it. I'm just here to point out the rampant hypocrisy of him calling others egotistical. It is also unfair--or rather flat out false to say I don't show or talk about the sword in question enough (while simultaneously stating there is "too much information about the sword", mind you). I cannot speak for others like LIER (even though at least I can see in every video he puts the sword in question in the foreground the entire time), but go to ANY video review of mine, there is not only plenty of 4k footage highlighting the specific aspect I am talking about the sword in question at any given time, I also showcase the comparison of the sword to other sword of the same type, or different types, or different ethnic origins. So characterizing that I "don't talk about the sword in question enough" is just a false accusation. It might be coming out of malice, or out of ignorance. I'm going to be charitable to assume it's the latter. Because I (or other reviewer) waste his time by talking about topics he already know after "wasting 20 years of his life browsing myArmoury"--his word not mine, he is then not going to watch my video- so he wouldn't know I talk about anything about the sword in question, and thusly voids anything I do talk about it. If this indeed qualifies as a "review" (of reviews), it would be the equivalence of making a sword review and stating "this Lockwood sword is unimpressive because it tries to replicate the Bresica Spadona, but I already own a replica of it by Albion". It would be ludicrous. What would you feel if someone posts a "review" of you as a seller on myArmoury and titles it as "Mark Millman is a dishonest seller" and you find out about the reasons in the body of the thread as "he is a bad seller because he sells models that I already own"? Would that be fair or would it be unfair? How about if someone posts that "Mark Millman is a bad buyer--because he doesn't buy the stuff I've listed"? What if someone demands an apology from you after you respond to this ridiculous claim? Is this contributing to the health of a community or not? Or how about "I've never bought from Mark Millman, and that makes him a bad dealer". How is pointing out the hypocrisy and egocentrism unfair? Is it a "free marketplace of ideas" like you've described, or is it one way street that a small number of people can declare open season on a group of people, without the fear of ever being challenged, and without the need of ever showing a piece of concrete evidence? And also you are wrong in that takitam has not apologized to me (neither do I need him to--it's the "free marketplace of ideas, baby!!" after all--allegedly), he characterized it as miscommunication. Well the problem is not the communication, as I have heard the idea loud and clear. It's the attitude, which brings us to my last point when I ask how he and the few other keyboard warriors and worse--cave trolls are going to fare when they make a multimedia review. It is completely fair, as people are completely capable in this day and age of making such reviews. It doesn't require some skills like swordmaking and professional equipment that is inaccessible. It only requires effort, which is more than what most keyboard warriors are ever willing to take. A lot of the casual insults to the content creators--instead of constructive criticisms focusing on individual aspects--are ultimately coming from the disrespect to other people's time and effort. Nitpicking some minor mistakes (such as camera out of focus for a few seconds) or often worse--downright spreading lies about someone are usually done when you have no idea about the amount of time and effort spent. As a viewer myself, I don't laser focus on some errors a content creator makes, because I know how many hours and gigabytes worth of footage and filmed and have to be edited. Sometimes it is difficult to detect minor errors during editing as the preview windows in video editing software are cached and display only a fraction of the resolution. Rendering alone after you are done with everything, usually take hours--even dozens of hours. Uploading and processing at hosting websites take hours and sometimes days. No one is perfect, and obviously every sensible person welcomes constructive criticisms, but it is not difficult to differentiate those from downright trolling like "the best way to improve your YouTube reviews is to stopping making YouTube reviews, because I can't be bothered with flipping up the couch cushions to search for spare cash to pay for the Internet bills". Hope this clarifies the confusions. And no, I don't demand an apology from you because I'm not an egomaniac. You are free to commentate as I am free to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Oct 7, 2022 19:40:32 GMT
Gentlemen, keep in mind the rules on personal attacks and being nice. Some of the statements in this post are borderline at best. Thanks,
Your Loving Mod Team
|
|
|
Post by Mark Millman on Oct 8, 2022 10:12:41 GMT
Dear Kane Shen,
I fear that your reply to me adequately illustrates the reason for my posting, so I won't bother to reply point by point. But I would like to make a few brief comments.
First: It's clear that you're interested in education and improving the sword community, which I find laudable. If you had simply written the second, third, and fourth paragraphs of your reply to takitam without the personal references, you would have explained why you've chosen the review style that you use and perhaps persuaded takitam to reconsider the aspects of reviews in that style that they don't like. Instead I'm afraid that your posting may have driven them away.
Second: I do not think I find takitam's posting quite as self-contradictory as you seem to do, but in any case subjective reviews are not the less reviews for their subjectivity, nor is it impossible to compare them with more objective ones. They're simply a style of review that you don't happen to like. Also, you have much more experience in reviewing than takitam does. No doubt practice improves even purely subjective reviews, just as it does more objective ones. As you observe, even takitam agrees that their posting was not well executed; but more practice may result in clearer writing.
Third: It is certainly unfair to say that
It requires the time, energy, and confidence to make reviews, as well as a certain amount of equipment. I, for example, do not own a camera (no, not on my 'phone either), so while I could write an unillustrated text review--which I imagine many people would find unsatisfying--I cannot easily make a video review. If the reviews are to be good ones they also require a certain level of knowledge and, at least on video, presentational skill; and certainly better equipment is likely to result in an esthetically superior product. For comparison's sake, I've seen very respectable swords made with an angle grinder, a vice, files, and sandpaper, so the investment there need not be great.
Fourth: Do please note that when takitam writes,
that it constitutes an apology, despite the lack of the words "sorry", "apology", or "apologize".
Fifth and finally: I am sorry that you interpret my posting as a demand for an apology to takitam. I see it as an invitation to be, as I say, gracious. Graciousness contributes to the civility of our community.
Sincerely,
Mark Millman
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 9, 2022 6:37:00 GMT
Dear Kane Shen, I fear that your reply to me adequately illustrates the reason for my posting, so I won't bother to reply point by point. But I would like to make a few brief comments. First: It's clear that you're interested in education and improving the sword community, which I find laudable. If you had simply written the second, third, and fourth paragraphs of your reply to takitam without the personal references, you would have explained why you've chosen the review style that you use and perhaps persuaded takitam to reconsider the aspects of reviews in that style that they don't like. Instead I'm afraid that your posting may have driven them away. Second: I do not think I find takitam's posting quite as self-contradictory as you seem to do, but in any case subjective reviews are not the less reviews for their subjectivity, nor is it impossible to compare them with more objective ones. They're simply a style of review that you don't happen to like. Also, you have much more experience in reviewing than takitam does. No doubt practice improves even purely subjective reviews, just as it does more objective ones. As you observe, even takitam agrees that their posting was not well executed; but more practice may result in clearer writing. Third: It is certainly unfair to say that It requires the time, energy, and confidence to make reviews, as well as a certain amount of equipment. I, for example, do not own a camera (no, not on my 'phone either), so while I could write an unillustrated text review--which I imagine many people would find unsatisfying--I cannot easily make a video review. If the reviews are to be good ones they also require a certain level of knowledge and, at least on video, presentational skill; and certainly better equipment is likely to result in an esthetically superior product. For comparison's sake, I've seen very respectable swords made with an angle grinder, a vice, files, and sandpaper, so the investment there need not be great. Fourth: Do please note that when takitam writes, that it constitutes an apology, despite the lack of the words "sorry", "apology", or "apologize". Fifth and finally: I am sorry that you interpret my posting as a demand for an apology to takitam. I see it as an invitation to be, as I say, gracious. Graciousness contributes to the civility of our community. Sincerely, Mark Millman Dear Mark Millman, It is incredibly expedient to not directly respond to my arguments, but instead cherrypick a few small segments of my response out of context. takitam's post was entirely self-contradictory by its very nature, as I have explained it plenty, but feel free to shy away from addressing my arguments directly, but instead opting to rephrasing his statements to whitewash them to sound more reasonable. I explained that his criteria are completely subjective, but being subjective in itself doesn't make it bad or invalid. His statements are nonsensical because that none of the "criticisms" are based in reality, and that they are framed with the most bizarre circular reasoning. He portrays my reviews negatively BECAUSE I talk about things that he already knows. It is a both unreasonable and useless criterion. How is anybody supposed to know what a random person on the Internet knows? Furthermore, why should anyone care to center their reviews around what this specific person knows?? He then went on to state as a fact that my review doesn't talk or show the sword in question enough, which is not rooted in any reality and he refuses to demonstrate any proof. I already explained several times that all of my reviews have plenty of close-up footage in 4k resolution specifically showing the aspect I am talking about, not to mention the comparison and juxtaposition to swords of other types, of the same type, of different ethnic origins, of different makes. Lots of these demonstrations have to be done with me holding the swords on screen and switching back and forth, or doing demonstration of myself handling the sword, or cutting with the sword, which he falsely attributes to ego. Not only is he mistaken about the intention, and ignores the complete necessity of it, he also ignores the fact that almost all other video reviewers show themselves on screen because of the same reasons. He is also contradictory that when his accusation of me showing myself on screen due to ego, while it is done out of necessity, simultaneously grading others' reviews completely on his personal needs. If the topic isn't related to his personal interests, it is a bad review, and unnecessary to be ever made for anybody. There's a pattern to be established here, when the only piece of suggestion he can give Jensen is that he should stop making reviews of those "cheapo Chinese made katanas" because obviously if he doesn't need them, nobody should need them, and then when he once again suggest if anyone talks about anything he knows, it makes it a bad review. So he is the one talking and acting purely out of ego, but he falsely accuses others of it. It is self-contradictory, and it is hypocritical. And then with these false information he spreads, he seemingly pleads ignorance--because talking about stuff within his vast domain of knowledge makes my review bad, which in turn causes him to not watch the parts that talk and show what he doesn't know about the sword, which then voids the effort of showing it altogether (just because he personally does not care to see it), which further makes my reviews "badder". Isn't it a self-fulfilling prophecy, in the most comical way? If someone posts a review of you as a seller titling "Mark Millman is a crook, as I paid him for a sword, but he sent me an empty box, and no I did not waste my time checking what's actually inside the box". Should I invite you to give this poster an apology, or does he owe you an apology instead? If someone portrays you publicly in a negative light, but done in not only a complete subjective way, but also not base anything in reality, what would you think? "Mark Millman is a toxic member of myArmoury, because I don't like his name, plus he never talks about anything useful." Is this reasonable or not? I think spreading false information about someone publicly to portray them negatively does constitute a personal attack, and should be dealt with according to the forum rules. I completely agree with our moderator here that it should be strictly policed, as it is up against the etiquette and the spirit of civility. On the other hand, responding to such personal attack with facts and logic is indeed the epitome of civility. Your last point of smithing requires very few tools and can all be acquired easily is demonstrably false. While one can spend dozens and dozens of hours to stock remove steel to shape a blade out of a metal bar, it is utterly inefficient if you consider all the unnecessarily labor (which is why people need to invest tens of thousand--if not more on a CNC mill, or the entire set of tools and machinery for a forge), you also completely ignored all the machinery needed for the heat treatment. So you are basically suggesting people should send out un-heat-treated metal bars to customers, and that somehow is the rationale you need to suggest I need to make swords myself in order to review swords made by others. Because even if I can afford all the expensive machinery and tools needed for a forge, I also need a spacious spare private property to house them--completely ignoring that one can easily record a video review with any 200 dollar phone in his home so it is ludicrous to suggest that nobody is in a position to make a multimedia review while I should go out to build a forge and make swords myself as a prerequisite to review any sword. And no, those are not cheap equipment. Even when contestants win 50 thousand dollars, 90% of them admit they would invest the money into their forges by buying more equipment, even though they already have what is needed to win a FIF championship--and no, none of them grind a steel bar with a $50 grinder and hand it in un-heat-treated. I further explained in my previous posts that if I ever point out a negative aspect of a sword in my reviews, the criterion is never "it is bad because I can make a better sword", it is always "plenty other makers of the same price range do this better" or "here is this concrete evidence that this maker can actually do better with the same budget". So yes, what you are suggesting is just a false equivalency. Hope this further clarifies your confusion. Best regards indeed, Kane Shen
|
|
|
Post by Mark Millman on Oct 9, 2022 13:07:52 GMT
Dear Kane Shen, Clearly, we disagree on this. I see takitam's post as containing an admittedly unflattering reference that is not actually an attack on you, and you obviously feel otherwise. I also think that you don't apply Hanlon's Razor as broadly as I'm inclined to do. I read takitam as being less articulate and less careful in writing than you clearly are, and I think you may be mistaken to hold them to your standard. You write: As I say above, I don't see takitam's statement as a personal attack, as it's explicitly an opinion about a broad range of people including television presenters in the abstract. You merely happen to be among the named examples of people practicing the style of review that takitam dislikes. I imagine that the overwhelming bulk of reasonable readers put very little stock in so broad a statement, and certainly they don't think that takitam knows you well enough to comment on your character. I trust you noticed that takitam's posting did not draw any comments from the moderation team. And of course, takitam apologized and withdrew the statement when you complained about it. I disagree that responding even to actual personal attacks "with facts and logic" is the "epitome of civility". The epitome of civility is to ignore them, followed closely by forgiving the originator and then by passing off the objectionable statement with a joke. Those responses show magnanimity. They probably also result in less personal stress, but your mileage may vary on that. Very sincerely, Mark Millman
|
|
|
Post by Mark Millman on Oct 9, 2022 13:10:19 GMT
Dear Matthew.Jensen, I apologize for derailing your thread with this silliness. Best, Mark Millman
|
|
|
Post by takitam on Oct 9, 2022 17:06:17 GMT
I really wanted to forget about this unfortunate thread, but I don't want to leave Mark alone, as he tried his best to be the voice of reason - thank you Mark! It was also my post which unintentionally derailed Matthew's thread - my apologies. This is my last post in here. There was nothing combative in my OP, simply a few opinions about Matthew's channel that he asked for, with a few comments about me and other channels for context (which described them as good and with potential btw.). It was up to him to decide what it's worth. As for Kane... tough nut to crack. The friendly version would be to encourage him to take another, closer look at my original post. To see what's there and what isn't, as he debated his interpretations of my writing, not my words, in his lengthy posts. But I have a feeling that my remark about ego was unfortunately justified and none of my potential arguments would work, as he seems to know everything already. Good for him but there is a small drawback in knowing everything - there is no space to learn anything Looking at his posts, he will soon convince himself that he's Napoleon. Last but not least, because he wrote a lot of toxic and sometimes nonsensical things about me - take another look at the last few posts and notice who the 'keyboard warrior' here is. I have no wish to spend more time debating a random internet guy. PS Last free piece of advice - Lowering your voice to sound more 'manly' does not make a good impression. Quite the opposite, sounds like you are compensating for something.
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 9, 2022 19:40:21 GMT
I really wanted to forget about this unfortunate thread, but I don't want to leave Mark alone, as he tried his best to be the voice of reason - thank you Mark! It was also my post which unintentionally derailed Matthew's thread - my apologies. This is my last post in here. There was nothing combative in my OP, simply a few opinions about Matthew's channel that he asked for, with a few comments about me and other channels for context (which described them as good and with potential btw.). It was up to him to decide what it's worth. As for Kane... tough nut to crack. The friendly version would be to encourage him to take another, closer look at my original post. To see what's there and what isn't, as he debated his interpretations of my writing, not my words, in his lengthy posts. But I have a feeling that my remark about ego was unfortunately justified and none of my potential arguments would work, as he seems to know everything already. Good for him but there is a small drawback in knowing everything - there is no space to learn anything Looking at his posts, he will soon convince himself that he's Napoleon. Last but not least, because he wrote a lot of toxic and sometimes nonsensical things about me - take another look at the last few posts and notice who the 'keyboard warrior' here is. I have no wish to spend more time debating a random internet guy. PS Last free piece of advice - Lowering your voice to sound more 'manly' does not make a good impression. Quite the opposite, sounds like you are compensating for something. Ahh, yes, quite a comedy of that declaration of your intention being "not derailing" Jensen's post. What a Floydian Slip it is, ironically! You saw a thread of a YouTuber asking for advice in good faith, but hadn't been tanked by the couple of forum resident trolls yet despite the thread being under-policed, you deemed it the perfect opportunity to attack some other content creators simultaneously rerailing OP's thread, and you logged on your good ol' alt troll account to get down to business. After being exposed as a hypocrite and egomaniac yourself, you had to tuck and run. A sad display, and a poor attempt to get OP's thread locked--I wholeheartedly agree with Mark Millman on that. But here you are crawling on four, back to finish the dirty business. Troll's instinct prevails, after all. I guess it's even in clearer view now: after the "free marketplace for ideas, baby!!" and the "but what about civilitae??" cards were used and failed, it's time for you to go back to the tried-and-true personal insults. A little plain--but not unexpected from you. I refrained from commenting in this thread for a while, even though I think Jensen's own platform is probably the ideal place for him to ask the community--his audience for advice, as we can see here, the number of good people giving honest technical feedback and requests are all his existing viewers. When the couple of your fellow trolls showed up, some of us took note in private and rest assured we were laughing at the sad attempt of your kind. But I decided it was best not to comment for the time being. One, as a viewer I think Jensen's videos are perfectly fine, he has all he needs to tinker with his own creative directions. Two, Jensen is an adult who made it clear that he can deal with the trolls and ghouls himself--part of the online life, and nobody needs to defend him in his stead. That is, until you took it over as your personal platform to attack some other content creators. Now I can't speak for others, but your trolling attempt on me will not go without being responded to. Too much for you to handle? Time to head for your S@feSp@ce But who is the "know-it-all" according to you the Albert Einstein of the sword world. Wasn't that you suggesting people should not talk about things you are well-versed in? Maybe you are going to charge everybody a royalty for daring to talk about it? Think about the amount of wealth you can accumulate by taking royalty from people like Peter Johnsson! And was it me who brag about how much I know anywhere, or was it in fact you that's flexing about your "hardened veterancy of 20 years browsing myArmoury"? Your "suggestion" to Jensen was just a number of unsolicited "fun-facts" about yourself. It was all "me, me, me~~~". Way to make yourself the center of the universe, your Imperial Majesty of forum LARPers And what are you trying to compensate by flexing those 20 years of veterancy of browsing a website? You print that onto your business card, don't you? Did you include it on your resume for summer intern as well . Nice try but I bet it didn't go too well. So according to your logic, if anyone talks about anything you already know, they would be the one claiming "know-it-all", instead of you and your own fragile ego. Talk about self-contradiction, am I right, Mark Millman? And what do you know about anything within one lightyear away from "manliness"? Screeching and mouth-frothing at people who have a life from the safety of your parents' basement? Kudos to you for at least trying, 👍👍👍👍👍 out of 5. And don't...just don't keep projecting your...ahem...ladylike behavior and mentality outward. I'm gonna try and explain it in the simplest terms possible: it doesn't do you any favor. A piece of actual advice as a parting gift: log off your troll alt account to stop your self-owning, try and get a life, perhaps starting from an appointment with a clinical psychiatrist.
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 9, 2022 21:30:38 GMT
|
|
Yagoro
Member
Ikkyu in Kendo and Kenjutsu Practitioner
Posts: 1,577
|
Post by Yagoro on Oct 9, 2022 21:40:53 GMT
Kane shen, while I am not a regular viewer of your reviews, I find them to have lots of valuable information, and the ones I have seen(specifically regarding your experience with DSA lol), I have been entertained by. Imo anyone who reviews swords or any item for that matter should do it because they enjoy doing it. I think that unless there are glaring flaws to a review style, it should be continued if you are passionate for it. Not everything that viewers suggest is something that should be taken to heart.
|
|
|
Post by Kane Shen on Oct 9, 2022 21:46:32 GMT
Kane shen, while I am not a regular viewer of your reviews, I find them to have lots of valuable information, and the ones I have seen(specifically regarding your experience with DSA lol), I have been entertained by. Imo anyone who reviews swords or any item for that matter should do it because they enjoy doing it. I think that unless there are glaring flaws to a review style, it should be continued if you are passionate for it. Not everything that viewers suggest is something that should be taken to heart. I wholeheartedly agree. Anyone can make legitimate suggestions and requests to reviewers and content creators--actual criticisms should be welcomed, as well. It is really is up to the content creators to make the decision one way or the other. Note I am mostly on the viewer's end. I think it isn't exactly difficult to differentiate whether a suggestion or request is made out of good faith, or of ill intention, though--to the content creators, or to other viewers.
|
|
|
Post by Mark Millman on Oct 9, 2022 22:51:15 GMT
Dear The Levin Lance, Mark Millman abstains--courteously. Best, Mark Millman
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Oct 10, 2022 2:32:08 GMT
Locked for review.
|
|