Last evening, after I had just finished writing my blog, I paused for a bit to read a few newly published posts while watching the World Series and was absolutely fascinated and somewhat bemused to read the following in a post by Nan Talley (Trippin With the Talleys):
Nan: “Someone wrote in their blog today that fifteen photos should be the limit………If I post too many photos to suit you, feel free to scroll right past them. I use as many photos as it takes to tell my story/stories. I will continue to blog in that format.”
It didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Nan was referring to my post from a couple of days ago titled Lots Of Nice Comments And Q’s About My Photos Lately, In that post I included a section titled My Own Personal Thoughts About My Blog Photography and stated the following at the end of my bullet points:
The above points are not suggestions, recommendations or guidelines for anyone other than myself. They are simply points I try to follow with respect to blogging.
I guess I mistakenly thought that by twice using the word ‘my’ and once using ‘personal’ that everyone would get it. But, apparently not.
In explaining about how I approach photos for my blog, I included the fact that I like to limit my photos to 15 per post.
- always try to keep the number of photos to 15 or less
To her credit, the one commenter on Nan’s blog who seemed to be able to read what I actually wrote was Judy (The Bird Lady of Blogland) who said:
Judy: I believe that Rick stated that the 15 photo standard was strictly written for himself as a guideline.
The simplest way to correct what I initially thought was a simple misunderstanding was to leave a comment on Nan’s blog restating that I was only speaking for my blogging thoughts and practices and that nowhere in my post did I ever indicate that 15 photos ‘should’ be the limit for any other blogger. Nan uses comment moderation and did not publish my comment. I watched the World Series game and later checked and saw that my comment still wasn’t published. What?
I sent Nan an email asking her to publish my comment so that readers could see what I actually wrote. I told her that if she would not do that then I’d just explain this curious incident in my blog the next day. To my amazement and continuing belief that blogging is always fun, Nan copied and pasted my personal email to her in her blog but still refused to publish my original comment. How very strange?
To make this even more bizarre, Nan then replied to her own ‘cut and paste’ of my email to her admitting this: “But we all know that he was referring to those of us who occasionally use a lot of photos.” Earlier, in response to Judy’s comment Nan replied “I did not say that it was rick”. At least now I knew for sure she was in fact talking about me. I don’t mind that at all as I don’t mind criticism as long as people don’t put words in my mouth. I can get in enough trouble on my own, thank you!
| Hi, I’m a Strawman and I make up stories |
This all leads me to believe that Nan is engaging here in a Strawman Argument. In case you’re not familiar with the term Strawman here’s a definition:
A straw man is a common type of argument or statement and is an informal fallacy based on the misrepresentation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument or statement.
In its simplest definition, it means that if you carefully dissect the argument or statement, it’s not only false it doesn't make sense. The term straw man derives from the use of scarecrows for military practice, such as charges. In reality, a scarecrow is far easier to defeat than an actual person. Well, Nan, I have news for you – I’m a person and not a scarecrow. Even though, sometimes, being a scarecrow would be a lot more fun!!
What Nan wrote in her blog is a classic case of the Strawman argument and it’s a total fallacy. I like Nan. In fact, I have often used TeamViewer to take remote control of her computer to help solve computer problems she may be having. Our political views are 100% opposite but we still talk and may even get together at a neutral site this winter for lunch or dinner. Each of us may bring food tasters along.
Here’s another example of how a totally false Strawman argument can be made and used against someone. I mentioned that one of the Picasa 3.9 edits I use is called Graduated Tint. I said I often used it to darken the top 1/3 of some of my pics. Last night, in his blog, Al of the Bayfield Bunch added this to what I wrote:
Here’s a little tip for you Picasa 3.9 users. Some of you may know you can darken light skies & clouds by clicking on your ‘Graduated Tint’ button but did you also know you can use that same button to lighten either the left or right side of your photo plus the bottom. I think you may like the results. Just a suggestion for you to try.
The Strawman Argument below would be as totally false as saying that I said bloggers should limit their photos to 15:
Al says we should all use Graduated Tint to lighten the left or right side of our photos. I like my photos just the way they are and it’s my blog so I can do whatever I want. If he doesn’t like my washed out photos then he doesn’t have to read my blog. Who is he to be telling me how to edit my pictures!
I just clicked over 1,000 words for this post which goes against my own guidelines of 750 words per post. Go ahead – make my day! Just say I’m telling you that your blog should never go over 750 words!!
Thanks for visiting!
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét