Is it worth it???

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

But the forum has something that no print media has: an immediate feedback loop which is just as unvetted and mostly uncensored. So if JR says something stupid he'll be immediately called on it. JR can write an article for a magazine and never have to publicly respond to his critics.

Exactly. And some of the articles that I have read on the paid side certainly deserved critical response imo.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I stand by my statement. The magazines do a better job of developing an idea and presenting it from start to finish.

And I disagree. If the idea is basically flawed, ill thought out or lacking anything resembling new ideas or concepts, what value does it really have?

I'm not saying that the paid side would not be of value to some officials. I'm saying that it's not really of value to all officials. It's a personal choice.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And I disagree. If the idea is basically flawed, ill thought out or lacking anything resembling new ideas or concepts, what value does it really have?

Unless you're suggesting that every article in the mags, or even most of them, are basically flawed, ill thought out, or lacking new ideas, then your point is moot. Some of the "content" here at the forum is also flawed. However, the true value in these resources (mags or forums) is not diminished simply because some of it is flawed. And my statement regarding the nature of the two beasts is correct.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I'm not saying that the paid side would not be of value to some officials. I'm saying that it's not really of value to all officials. It's a personal choice.

And in other news, the sun came up this morning and a dog bit a man.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

But the forum has something that no print media has: an immediate feedback loop which is just as unvetted and mostly uncensored. So if JR says something stupid he'll be immediately called on it. JR can write an article for a magazine and never have to publicly respond to his critics.

This is true. He did. I called him on it.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

As for the off-topic, semi-humorous BS and predictable sniping you see here? Lighten up is all I can say. It's all part of human interaction.

I was merely responding to JR's absurd argument in kind. To wit, if my assessment of the value of an officiating magazine is false because not every article is valuable then his statements about the value of the forum must be equally false because not every post is valuable. The one statement is as absurd as the other.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

This is true. He did. I called him on it.

He says something stupid every other time he opens his mouth (or in this case touches his keyboard). I aint gonna defend him.

I was merely responding to JR's absurd argument in kind. To wit, if my assessment of the value of an officiating magazine is false because not every article is valuable then his statements about the value of the forum must be equally false because not every post is valuable. The one statement is as absurd as the other.

I'm not sure I follow but it seems you and JR need to settle this like Bert & Ernie would. (Don't bring up Cookie Monster, he's still a little sensitive...)

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I'm not sure I follow but it seems you and JR need to settle this like Bert & Ernie would. (Don't bring up Cookie Monster, he's still a little sensitive...)

What's that? I can't hear you. I've got a banana in my ear!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

What's that? I can't hear you. I've got a banana in my ear!

Me too. Oh yeah, I've lost a little weight.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

1) Some of the "content" here at the forum is also flawed.

2) However, the true value in these resources (mags or forums) is not diminished simply because some of it is flawed.

1) Sure is flawed. But I don't have to pay for the flawed content here that is useless to me anyway. I can pick out what I personally feel is beneficial. And I also have access to the minds of experienced posters here that I have come to know and trust as being excellent sources of officiating knowledge and acumen. And, to be honest, I've seen some articles on the pay side that were obviously based on subjects that were fully discussed first on some of these various forums.

2) Are you serious? Why should anybody in their right mind pay for something that is flawed? Whatintheheck value is it to me or anyone else to have to wade through flawed material that is of absolutely no benefit to the reader?

Good luck in your writing career, BITS. I ain't sponsoring it though. The good thing though is that you don't have to worry about criticism or feedback over there, unlike this particular forum.

JMO.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) Sure is flawed. ... I can pick out what I personally feel is beneficial.

2) ... Whatintheheck value is it to me or anyone else to have to wade through flawed material?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

That's called feedback. It something that ain't present on the paid side. Unfortunately.