-
I think I've finally unearthed what it is about forums that cause the most trouble.
The dreaded potshot.
Defining what a potshot is, is difficult. Many times, a cognizant comment can be interwined within the potshot. This tends to make the potshot that much more of an irritant. Attempting to untangle the potshot from the comment is next to impossible.
A potshot involves the following; from a hidden, burrowed position, the potshotter scopes out the intended target, rises for a better view, takes aim, and fires, attempting to kill the target, all in one post.
Buckshot potshots can be just as annoying, or damaging. Fire as many insults as possible, all within one post, again, following the modus of the potshotter.
The worst kind of potshotter is from the idiot that isn't even a regular to a forum. This type of potshotter lurks, absorbs, and perhaps has even benefited by reading previous posts made by the soon to be victim, but fires away as if this person's past contributions mean absolutely nothing.
Potshotting, I believe, causes most of the unsavory turmoil that occurs on discussion forums.
It's taken me over two years to identify the action by a specific name. [img]confused.gif[/img]
Potshots. [img]graemlins/thumbs_down.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/wilted.gif[/img] [img]graemlins/broken_heart.gif[/img]
-
I get the 'shots'. Why 'pot'?
-
The American Heritage Dictionary defines "pot shot" as...
"A shot aimed to kill", "without regard for sporting rules". "A random shot".
---------------------------
Yes indeed.
I think it's time we give this term a place in the internet forum community.
Calling someone a Potshotter would be the worst kind of insult to give to another poster, and, if the term has been correctly applied, it should be easily proveable by simply posting the "offending" comment and using the criteria I described in the previous topic post about what constitutes a Potshotter.
What's interesting to me is that when I look at the list of what I considered devious, manipulative, or simply "unfair" posts (and after posting 8,000 times, there have been a couple tossed my way), they ALL fit the above pattern.
I just never had a name for them.
I'm not clumping all anti-posts as being potshots, but the ones I have complained about DEFINITELY fit this description of Potshotting.
-
I believe if whenever I had a "complaint", I could have simply said, I think this was a "potshot", and the term potshot was known to be a bad term, I could have saved many long winded discertations.
Oh well.
-
Now, lets play a game.
Name a forum where potshots are a way of life.
The answer would be...THE!
Right, they inhale potshots.
But now, lets say, an informational type of forum has members that occasionally blurt out potshots...
such as the Medical Procedures Forum..., clearly, a potshot on such a forum would and could have far reaching consequences to a person's standing on that forum, as compared to the forum "THE".
A potshot on one forum and you are a hero, on another forum, a zero.
-
post some of your own 'pot shots', alex...
i'd like to see some of yours that you deem as
a 'pot shot'
-
Do you mean ones that I felt were a potshot at me?
-
no.
i mean ones you have made to other people.
-
[img]eek.gif[/img]
You start. [img]graemlins/angel.gif[/img]
-
That doesn't appear to be fair.
-
nope.
its all you.
since you are the one claiming to pick out a
'pot shot'... you post yours. i want to see
the ones you have made to others.
-
it is most certainly fair.
you claim to distinguish 'pot shots'... particularly
when they are toward you and your posts. you also
claim to rest on the term 'pot shot' for X behavior.
now... let's not make this thread become a run-around.
we've all seen a bazillion times... the 'wrongs'
done to you by other posters.
its time you post your own.
bring it.
-
ah but one point is being overlooked. I have already posted that in many instances in the past year I could have described a situation as a potshot, but I did not.
That is the key. As a result, the experience of describing what happened was almost as bad as what happened.
So to know give examples of the others, when I did not get a chance to properly use the term in the past, is not doable.
But you can give examples if you like. You might find that there were some that you view as potshots that may actually be close calls only.
-
so.... what you are saying is....
nothing remotely like a pot shot doesn't count
because you have only come up with the term recently.
if that is true, then no 'pot shot' given to you
prior to the day you dubbed the term is worthy
of the term.
methinks you are just squirming out of providing
the evidence of you being a hyprocrite.
-
That's not what I'm saying.
Lets say you buy a really nice sweater, and before you can wear it, a friend asks to wear it.
If you've already worn it, it's one thing to loan it out, but if you've never worn it, that's another story.
I have yet to make a potshot list from the past, I'm certainly not going to aim the potshot at myself first.
And frankly, I doubt you'll find very many, if any.
-
i don't understand why it has taken 10 replies
to comply...
i expected as much...
but that doesn't mean that i understand the reasoning
why it is so.
the key here, alex, is to use self-reflection in
order to prevent yourself from looking hyprocritical...
at least before someone calls you on it.
now... it doesn't really matter how many you have
made... the fact is that you have made them.
which is what i would like you to show.
if you refuse to do so... then any you display (not your own)
beyond this point is merely a 'pot shot' in itself.
bringing this thread to a close...
unless you would like to list them.... yours.
-
Actually, I've been completely consistent with my position (insert Shaty's rejoinder that my position is flawed).
Just as I won't repeat a Potshot aimed at me before responding to it, (because that would mean that the insult is posted twice, the response only once), I certainly won't play a guessing game on what you think has been a potshot from me in the past.
I remember many posts, Shatzy, what you think is a potshot is probably a reply to a previous position the other party had in the past, and is continuing
with in the present.
You start, I'll gladly listen and respond.
That is fair.
-
wrong.
and this thread has now closed.
-
-
i can give an instance of alex potshotting!
twice!
just give me the cue.
(i will give link if alex allows it as i don't wanna be starting a pot shotting war here.)
-
Bless you soulfilms. Real, substantive action.
-
SF.... even i can post an adequate amount
of alex doing such... but the reason why i have
yet to do so... is because i know it will be a
futile effort.
X will post a 'pot shot'....
then alex will come along and give a long, drawn-out
explination about blah blah blah...
taking this thread waaaaaaaaaay off topic...
in the sense that alex has made the claim that
when a person 'pot shots'... they do so with
the motive.
therefore, i have asked alex to provide the
unsubstantiated proof that his claim to the
term is valid. he has yet to do so.
i rest my case.
edit--
i just wanna add that... since alex claims that
pot shots are done with motive, then it should
be very easy for him to post his own pot shots.
playing into the game and giving alex what he
wants will not deter me from believing that alex
is merely skirting the issue i have brought up.
we all know it.
even alex.
-
actually, i was referring to alex pot shotting me.
-
yesh yesh! me too....
but here's what i'm saying:
alex claims that pot shotting is founded in a
sinister motive to perform said action against
another poster
if this were a true claim, then the pot shotter
premeditates his action... and can clearly label
that post accordingly.
therefore, since we all know that alex has pot
shotted... and since that means that alex had
premeditated his pot shotting actions....
alex can certainly provide his own examples
of times when he has pot shotted someone.
h.e.l.l.... all he'd have to do is venture into
his S8 forum for some quick examples....
but instead, alex wants to play this game....
fine... go ahead...
i'll sit here and watch... making appropriate
comments along the way. *raises eyebrow*
but don't say i didn't warn you
*whispers to SF: i know which ones you are talking about*
-
[QUOTE]Originally posted by shatzy:
[QB]SF.... even i can post an adequate amount of alex doing such... but the reason why i have yet to do so... is because i know it will be a futile effort.
X will post a 'pot shot'....
then alex will come along and give a long, drawn-out explination about blah blah blah...
taking this thread waaaaaaaaaay off topic...[QB]
Now that is an example of a potshot, it portends to predict the future while trivializing the unknown answer.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by shatzy:
[QB]
i just wanna add that... since alex claims that
pot shots are done with motive, then it should
be very easy for him to post his own pot shots.
[QB]
Wrong, it would be very easy for YOU to post what you term to be a potshot.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
alex claims that pot shotting is founded in a
sinister motive to perform said action against
another poster
if this were a true claim, then the pot shotter
premeditates his action... and can clearly label
that post accordingly.
therefore, since we all know that alex has pot
shotted... </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
That would be a potshot. It attempts to make a foregone conclusion in which no evidence has been supplied. Your good at this Shatzy!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
and since that means that alex had
premeditated his pot shotting actions....
alex can certainly provide his own examples
of times when he has pot shotted someone.
h.e.l.l.... all he'd have to do is venture into
his S8 forum for some quick examples....</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
That is a potshot and a half. For you to trivialize the good work I do on that forum is definitely a buckshot potshot.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
but instead, alex wants to play this game....
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Another potshot, calling what I have discovered in earnest, a game.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
fine... go ahead...
i'll sit here and watch... making appropriate
comments along the way. *raises eyebrow*</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
aka...You'll just sit here and, and, take POTSHOTS!!!
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
but don't say i didn't warn you</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ridiculing an outcome before it happens is another form of a potshot.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
*whispers to SF: i know which ones you are talking about*</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Alex whispers to Shatzy, "no you don't".
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ February 14, 2003 03:55 AM: Message edited by: Super-8mm in the DigitalAge ]</font>
-
alex....... quoting me and calling it a pot shot
is hyprocritical. making a claim without evidence
is not called 'pot shotting'.... or do you want
to have another semantics war?
and secondly,
i do know what SF is talking about because i
saw the GD threads she was in... so don't tell
me what i do or do not know.
thank you
-
-
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
alex....... quoting me and calling it a pot shot
is hyprocritical. making a claim without evidence
is not called 'pot shotting'.... or do you want
to have another semantics war?
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Here is my quote, once again...
"ridiculing an outcome before it occurs is a potshot"
That's what you did, and that's what it is.
-
are you trying to suggest that it ISN'T hyprocritical?
when are you going to post your potshots?
-
Making a claim WITHOUT evidence IS potshotting, if the claim is derogatory towards another.
-
Well it's clear that Shatzy has kidnapped this topic. Soulfilms was going to post something of value, until Shatzy stepped in.
-
please don't try to sidestep the issue with one
of your usual ploys, alex.
i am asking you... and have asked you since the
bigging of this thread... to post your own potshots
you have made to other people.
i realize that with your last post here, you
are attempting to get SF to do the 'dirty work'
for you... as i have seen this ploy performed
many times before.
and EVERYTIME you have used it... it works.
i simply do not understand why you refuse to
answer the request. there is no logical explination
for this kind of behavior.. unless that explination
leads to further hypocrisy....
-
Your tactics and ploys are an attempt to circumvent the primary purpose of this topic post.
I started this topic, I discovered, evaluated and defined what I think a potshot is. It appears you have a desire to hijack this topic post and make it fit your missive, which is a form of a potshot.
You have possibley interfered with Soul films, who had potentially valuable input to give, and has yet to give it. That has now become an additional potshot, interfering with the progress of others who are communicating.
There is plenty of time and topic post space to have your discussion. Your agenda need not happen on this particular topic thread, but your agenda can still happen.
<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ February 22, 2003 05:14 PM: Message edited by: Super-8mm in the DigitalAge ]</font>
-
i'm sorry. i failed to read your complete post.
i got as far as your first sentence... which is
complete BS and you know it.
i merely went in time with the original thread
topic to ask you to supply 'potshots' that you
have given to other people.
now you claim that i have attempted to 'hijack'
the thread for blah blah blah...
you can't be this dense.
-
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#ffffff"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by shatzy:
i'm sorry. i failed to read your complete post.
</font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>
Which means you aren't sorry.
-
of course i'm not sorry.
i laughed as i typed it.
keep up.
-
Keep up? You claim to have only read one sentence, I commented on that one sentence. Not much to keep up with really.
You choose to be either a menace or a minus.
-
just so we're clear.
shatzy and i did not have any covert agreements for me to refrain from posting. i chose not to do it on my own accord.
ok.
resume.
