Dan Minette wrote: >Let me use this as an opportunity. As one of the top ten big mouths on the >list, I've always wondered about people who read the list but don't post. I >find discussing things with folks here a lot of fun. But, I have a bit of >trouble understanding why people enjoy just reading what we write. > I probably don't qualify as either a semi-lurker or an active poster, but I can contribute to this... The intellectual and academic calibre of the active posters is extremely high, and quite daunting to many. Is a lurker going to get into a debate with someone when that someone has a PhD on the subject, and the lurker has only his personal convictions? A lot of stuff that isn't really flaming seems like it when a theory put forward is met by an avalanche of contrary opinion and evidence.
A lurker gets the benefit of hearing all these viewpoints and facts and sources that the active posters submit, without risk of being belittled for being wrong. None of us would intentionally belittle someone here, but with such an enormous depth and breadth of knowledge among the posters, it can be overpowering. Even the recent who are we thread contributes to this. The lowest level of education we've seen is along the lines of a BSc in Maths or a BA in Philosophy. (Please, by all means continue to contribute to this thread - it really is enlightening to see who we are). People like Zimm, Alberto, Dan (what does a nuclear geophysicist do anyway...) and the like have jobs I can barely comprehend and even if I lurked for eternity, I would be fascinated by their input. Cheers Russell Chapman Brisbane Australia PS How many network administrators and similar computer types do we have - seems to be an awful lot...
