Debate Future

[Michael Clark]

4 hours ago, Stephanie Goldberg said:

So a question for those who have posted here more frequently - if I see an older thread which deals with a subject of interest, should I piggyback a new question onto that thread?  Or would it be more useful to start a new thread and add the link to the older thread for reference?   

That depends, and there is no affirmed practice. I will use an existing thread unless the other thread has descended into chaos or has otherwise become undesirable. If there are are multiple threads on a subject I have done round-up threads, with one thread that lists all the related ones, and also link those threads to the round-up thread. For example:

Using an existing thread shows that you have done at least some research, and implies a base of exposure so one can know where to start when answering or assisting you.

[Larry Hancock]

I would second Michael,  for those of us who have been around for awhile it would be best to resurface the old thread and let us catch up...lest we just repeat ourselves.

[Stephanie Goldberg]

Thanks for the replies!  

[Mark Knight]

If you post to an older thread, it brings that thread back to "the top of the deck." Some like to check these older threads so they can refresh their memories about the previous discussion before replying.

[Denny Zartman]

I'll throw in my two cents. This is an interesting thread. @Stephanie Goldberg  @John Kozlowski @Darrell Curtis - I appreciate all of your posts and questions. They can provide insight and give us some fresh perspectives, especially for some of us who occasionally can't see the forest for the trees. Thank you for being on the forum.

I feel much the same way you all do about posting and participating here. I thought I knew a bit about this subject, but the depth of information on this forum continually shows me how little I really know. There are so many experts and published authors here as well, and I hate to reveal my lack of knowledge and embarrass myself in front of researchers I admire. I always feel presumptuous whenever I post on this forum, because I feel I don't measure up. On the other hand, I feel that when I do post, I am trying to up my game and keep my standards as high as possible. I try to post mainly when I feel I have something of value to contribute. So, ultimately I believe it helps in my critical thinking skills and my overall understanding of this case. At least, I hope it does.

I had to step away for a few months because of burnout. I have been trying to write my own thing about the JFK assassination for years and basically feel defeated by it. I am no one to criticize anyone else's efforts to bring this subject to younger generations because I'm unable to do it myself. The subject seems too big for me to handle. It's a shame, because this is such an endlessly fascinating case filled with drama and mystery, and there always seems to be something new to learn. It's also important for us to know the truth of our history. I'd love to be able to present this subject in a clear and compelling way to an audience that knows nothing at all about it, and somehow capture what it is that keeps me interested.

(And to all the people lurking right now, come on in and join the conversation!)

[Cliff Varnell]

Don't sell yourself short, Denny.  Your work on the throat wound is superb.  Your critique of my "JFK Conspiracy for Younger Generations" was spot on, and led me to make changes in the presentation of the material.

You're a top tier poster in my book.

[Joe Bauer]

11 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Don't sell yourself short, Denny.  Your work on the throat wound is superb.  Your critique of my "JFK Conspiracy for Younger Generations" was spot on, and led me to make changes in the presentation of the material.

You're a top tier poster in my book.

I second that.

And relating to Denny's occasional "stepping away" from the forum;

The JFK assassination story and this forum are so damn stimulating to me that at times I also must take breaks to keep it from becoming more of an obsessive compulsive disorder focus than it already is.

And semi-regularly I do feel I should go back to being just a reader and letting our resident scholars share their higher level research on this forum unimpeded by less informed (although passionate) postings such as mine.

And I do. 

But sometimes I come across a new thread ( or older one ) on the forum that piques my passionate JFK truth seeking interest to such a degree that I can't help but inject my thoughts and questions into the discussion despite my layman research credentialed self-consciousness.

Forgive me...but this forum is addictive.

Edited July 14, 2019 by Joe Bauer

[Joe Bauer]

2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Don't sell yourself short, Denny.  Your work on the throat wound is superb.  Your critique of my "JFK Conspiracy for Younger Generations" was spot on, and led me to make changes in the presentation of the material.

You're a top tier poster in my book.

I second that.

Edited July 13, 2019 by Joe Bauer

[James DiEugenio]

Joe, since you already seconded it, you should have written, I third that.

[Darrell Curtis]

11 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

I'll throw in my two cents. This is an interesting thread. @Stephanie Goldberg  @John Kozlowski @Darrell Curtis - I appreciate all of your posts and questions. They can provide insight and give us some fresh perspectives, especially for some of us who occasionally can't see the forest for the trees. Thank you for being on the forum.

I feel much the same way you all do about posting and participating here. I thought I knew a bit about this subject, but the depth of information on this forum continually shows me how little I really know. There are so many experts and published authors here as well, and I hate to reveal my lack of knowledge and embarrass myself in front of researchers I admire. I always feel presumptuous whenever I post on this forum, because I feel I don't measure up. On the other hand, I feel that when I do post, I am trying to up my game and keep my standards as high as possible. I try to post mainly when I feel I have something of value to contribute. So, ultimately I believe it helps in my critical thinking skills and my overall understanding of this case. At least, I hope it does.

I had to step away for a few months because of burnout. I have been trying to write my own thing about the JFK assassination for years and basically feel defeated by it. I am no one to criticize anyone else's efforts to bring this subject to younger generations because I'm unable to do it myself. The subject seems too big for me to handle. It's a shame, because this is such an endlessly fascinating case filled with drama and mystery, and there always seems to be something new to learn. It's also important for us to know the truth of our history. I'd love to be able to present this subject in a clear and compelling way to an audience that knows nothing at all about it, and somehow capture what it is that keeps me interested.

(And to all the people lurking right now, come on in and join the conversation!)

Thanks for that Denny. I really respect your humility. That's such a rare quality anymore.

[Joe Bauer]

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Joe, since you already seconded it, you should have written, I third that.

Yes, Jim Di.

I third that.

And I just corrected my initial response post mentioning "Steve" versus Denny.

 

[Stephanie Goldberg]

Thank you, Denny!  I appreciate your thoughtfulness and encouragement.  🙂

[Denny Zartman]

And thank you all for such kind comments. I'm very grateful. It's an honor to be on the forum with you all.