This is ok then

[Sliced]

Nothing to be particularly proud of, I'd imagine it's a line of reasoning that most people could follow. I'll do it semi-diagrammatically, see if it helps:

Life experience = wisdom = better-informed writing

Anything...?

That's not semi-diagrammatic, life experience doesn't necessarily equal wisdom and as for wisdom equalling better informed writing it depends on the subject. It's possible to be wiser in general but to be less informed about the subject you're writing about as time progresses.

A virologist may work for 20 years, then take 10 years away from work, and undoubtedly will be able to write "better-informed" articles about his topic before his 10 year hiatus as the subject progresses so quickly year upon year, despite having greater life experience after his 10 year hiatus.

Other than that you're spot on

[bradesbaggie]

This is the person hired by the Tories to investigate the Greensill scandal. 

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]“The man investigating why the chancellor pushed his team to give Greensill Capital access to the CCFF works for the law firm that advised the Treasury on the CCFF."[/font]

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021...ll-inquiry[/font]

[Bortolazzi's Barnet]

Nothing to be particularly proud of, I'd imagine it's a line of reasoning that most people could follow. I'll do it semi-diagrammatically, see if it helps:

Life experience = wisdom = better-informed writing

Anything...?

That's not semi-diagrammatic, life experience doesn't necessarily equal wisdom and as for wisdom equalling better informed writing it depends on the subject. It's possible to be wiser in general but to be less informed about the subject you're writing about as time progresses.

A virologist may work for 20 years, then take 10 years away from work, and undoubtedly will be able to write "better-informed" articles about his topic before his 10 year hiatus as the subject progresses so quickly year upon year, despite having greater life experience after his 10 year hiatus.

Other than that you're spot on

It is semi-diagrammatic. Even if it isn't, I don't think it'll keep me awake as it's quite clear to anyone with a scintilla of intelligence that I was being sarcastic and not striving to make a serious point.

You will see from my original post where I mentioned wisdom that I said: "You can't see the link between life experience, wisdom and their reflection in any writing a person may do?" In general, wisdom will tend to increase with life experience. A given person is wiser at 60 than 20. That is not the same as saying that life experience means someone is wise, which is what you think I am arguing. What you have done is seen a sarcastic reduction of this point in the message you quote and attributed an argument to me that I never seriously made.

I also didn't say that wisdom means better-informed, so you are arguing against a point I never made. As per the aphorisms on this, I don't think wisdom is knowledge (and nor does it come from an accumulation of knowledge). I think it is something that comes from realising the gaps in your knowledge and what you need to know.

Your virologist example is not great for 3 reasons. Firstly, you are discussing the virologist's professional knowledge in a specific field, which isn't the same as wisdom. I am talking about journalists who write on a range of topics. A person's wisdom will increase over time. No-one can can take a hiatus away from life which renders them less well-informed when they return so a journalist will be wiser at 50 than 40 (even if only marginally).
 
Secondly, even if I was discussing academics in a given field and professional knowledge, it is fair to assume that an academic would be better-informed at 40 than they are at 30. You wouldn't ask for their career path to date before making this assumption and would do so on the assumption of no significant gaps having been taken.

Thirdly, your own example doesn't work. I would assume that the virologst would keep abreast of some developments in the field out of interest during his break so will be better informed at the end than at the beginning of the hiatus.

Other than that, you're spot-on.

---

This is the person hired by the Tories to investigate the Greensill scandal. 

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]“The man investigating why the chancellor pushed his team to give Greensill Capital access to the CCFF works for the law firm that advised the Treasury on the CCFF."[/font]

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021...ll-inquiry[/font]

I think this is a scandal that will blow-up like expenses did 10 or so years ago, with all parties implemented.

Good. Let's get rid of vested interests.

[JOK]

JOK what percentage of your posts on this board are directly or indirectly to me? 70, 80, 90%?

I have made 631 posts.
87 of which are in response to one of your posts with which I disagree.
 3  of my posts made reference to you.
 4 I have made were positive responses to a post you made. (i.e. I agreed with you.)
 8 of my posts were responding to your criticism of one of my posts.
(of the 87, those include multiple posts in a running discourse  in a thread)
 
SO, 16% of my posts have concerned you and 8% of them have been responding to your criticism of me or my posts.

You have posted 182 threads. Many of them simply re hashed with a different title on the same two topics; how vile the Tories are (allied with how useless and terrible Britain is) and how stupid Brexit was. Also, you’re the one who makes the most outlandish, inaccurate and myopic statements. I assume you only want people to respond to your posts who agree with you or at least you do not want anyone who disagrees with your views to comment.
 
114 political threads Plus 1 on the main board which should have been on political board.(What better than 2010)
 
64 on main board. 12 of which were posts on Covid 19 mainly attacking the government’s handling of the crisis and still political so that makes 127 threads of a political nature.
18 non football related. That doesn’t make them bad topics, mind.
 
That makes only 39 threads that you have made of a footballing nature on here “which is just a message board about football”, as you have said on a number of occasions.  Just over 1/5th of your threads are football related! Over 2/3rds of your threads are Political!
(Partly Collated before you deleted a number of your threads !)
 
(you posted 124 out of 562 political threads = Nearly 1/4 of them out of 900 members)
 
If you make the most political posts, it stands to reason I will have more political responses which are to you. It is not personal. I think you are a little paranoid and a bit full of yourself.
 
Now, is the term you used. “It is the new norm” fair and accurate?

[Sliced]

Nothing to be particularly proud of, I'd imagine it's a line of reasoning that most people could follow. I'll do it semi-diagrammatically, see if it helps:

Life experience = wisdom = better-informed writing

Anything...?

That's not semi-diagrammatic, life experience doesn't necessarily equal wisdom and as for wisdom equalling better informed writing it depends on the subject. It's possible to be wiser in general but to be less informed about the subject you're writing about as time progresses.

A virologist may work for 20 years, then take 10 years away from work, and undoubtedly will be able to write "better-informed" articles about his topic before his 10 year hiatus as the subject progresses so quickly year upon year, despite having greater life experience after his 10 year hiatus.

Other than that you're spot on

It is semi-diagrammatic. Even if it isn't, I don't think it'll keep me awake as it's quite clear to anyone with a scintilla of intelligence that I was being sarcastic and not striving to make a serious point.

You will see from my original post where I mentioned wisdom that I said: "You can't see the link between life experience, wisdom and their reflection in any writing a person may do?" In general, wisdom will tend to increase with life experience. A given person is wiser at 60 than 20. That is not the same as saying that life experience means someone is wise, which is what you think I am arguing. What you have done is seen a sarcastic reduction of this point in the message you quote and attributed an argument to me that I never seriously made.

I also didn't say that wisdom means better-informed, so you are arguing against a point I never made. As per the aphorisms on this, I don't think wisdom is knowledge (and nor does it come from an accumulation of knowledge). I think it is something that comes from realising the gaps in your knowledge and what you need to know.

Your virologist example is not great for 3 reasons. Firstly, you are discussing the virologist's professional knowledge in a specific field, which isn't the same as wisdom. I am talking about journalists who write on a range of topics. A person's wisdom will increase over time. No-one can can take a hiatus away from life which renders them less well-informed when they return so a journalist will be wiser at 50 than 40 (even if only marginally).
 
Secondly, even if I was discussing academics in a given field and professional knowledge, it is fair to assume that an academic would be better-informed at 40 than they are at 30. You wouldn't ask for their career path to date before making this assumption and would do so on the assumption of no significant gaps having been taken.

Thirdly, your own example doesn't work. I would assume that the virologst would keep abreast of some developments in the field out of interest during his break so will be better informed at the end than at the beginning of the hiatus.

Other than that, you're spot-on.

---

This is the person hired by the Tories to investigate the Greensill scandal. 

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]“The man investigating why the chancellor pushed his team to give Greensill Capital access to the CCFF works for the law firm that advised the Treasury on the CCFF."[/font]

[font=GuardianTextEgyptian, "Guardian Text Egyptian Web", Georgia, serif]https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021...ll-inquiry[/font]

I think this is a scandal that will blow-up like expenses did 10 or so years ago, with all parties implemented.

Good. Let's get rid of vested interests.

Someone with a "scintilla of intelligence" wouldn't have misused "semi-diagramatically", and then said "Life experience = wisdom = better-informed writing" followed by "That is not the same as saying that life experience means someone is wise" in a post where they are trying to make someone else look stupid.

[Protheroe]

I don't have a problem with politicians and ex-politicians having outside "interests", the pay is so awful for the job it's hardly surprising. However like Robin Williams I also believe they should wear sponsor jackets like NASCAR drivers so we know who owns them.

[Ossian]

The back of Hancock's jacket would have more writing on it than a Motorhead World Tour T-shirt.

[Derek Hardballs]

I don't have a problem with politicians and ex-politicians having outside "interests", the pay is so awful for the job it's hardly surprising. However like Robin Williams I also believe they should wear sponsor jackets like NASCAR drivers so we know who owns them.

I imagine Durex would be absent from Johnson jacket.

[baggy1]

Matt Hancock and sister own shares in NHS contract firm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56768601

How this bloke is still in a job is incredulous, complete fuck up from the start of covid, fingers in so many pies, cronyism of the highest order but just a normal day for the modern day Tory. Criminal.

[backsidebaggie]

Matt Hancock and sister own shares in NHS contract firm https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56768601

How this bloke is still in a job is incredulous, complete fuck up from the start of covid, fingers in so many pies, cronyism of the highest order but just a normal day for the modern day Tory. Criminal.

Totally agree. It’s beyond unbelievable.