Masters Running

Two's-Day Nov. 25th Runs and Rests (Read 794 times)

    Why must it ALWAYS be the other person's issue? ALWAYS. Could it possibly... perhaps... maybe... be because you didn't express yourself clearly enough for others to follow the points you wanted to make? Maybe?
    srlopez, this is a fair question. I am unable to give you a definitive answer. However, I have a theory, which may be worth elaborating because it has a bearing on many internet discussions, not just this one. Posting to a thread leads to an argument being broken up into several pieces. The author of the several pieces (in this case, me) has a good idea of the totality of what what he has written, and presumes that the audience does, too. However, the audience generally does not make an effort to assemble all the pieces into a coherent whole, but glances hastily at the most recent post and makes a perhaps-not-well-though-out response to a small piece of the argument. Other hasty and pehaps-not-well-thought-out responses from other people follow. Soon, a cloud of misapprehension descends, obscuring the author's actual statements and hindering productive discussion. Let us move from my general statement in the previous paragraphs to a particular case. In my post at 3:50 p.m., I clearly stated that "Hormonal imbalances, metabolism, heredity" were among the impediments to losing weight. At 6:43 p.m., JustAl cited my post in full, so he at least noticed it. At 8:03 p.m., I wrote in response to Ilene, "You are correct, Ma'am. I do not believe anyone here has argued this point. Aging, with its typical slowing of the metabolism, is a particularly significant factor." Lou responded to me, "Whoa. Non sequitur." I responded to Lou, "Not at all. Read more carefully." Then you, already carrying a load of resentment toward me for my dismissal of your earlier statement, weighed in. Not surprisingly, you suggested I was at fault in failing to express myself clearly. I do not agree that I failed to express myself clearly, but I do suggest that the structure of an internet thread may not lend itself to the audience following the argument accurately. And so I offer you half a loaf. Dark Horse
    I'm a dark horse, running on a dark race course.
      I'm making a hasty and not well thought out response: this forum has become mean spirited. As Jim Rome would say, "I'm out."


      Prince of Fatness

        I rarely post in the daily, partly because I don't have the time to go through it an post every day, partly because it's sometimes more of a social thread and not a running thread (which is perfectly fine), and partly because sometimes there are heated discussions like this that I normally just prefer to avoid. But I was intrigued, so I figured I'd post tonight.
        I will never forget a conversation I had once with a very obese woman. She was telling me earnestly that it was impossible for her lose weight because her thyroid was under-active or some other B.S. excuse.
        Dark Horse, when you make a statement like this, why are you surprised when a few feathers are ruffled? Yes, it is very simple that to lose weight calories in must be less than calories out. But that's where the simplicity ends. Otherwise everyone would be thin, no? Oh, and I did run today. ~ 4.5 miles. After PT for my shin splits. Which are slowly getting better. Happy Thanksgiving everyone.

        Not at it at all. 


        Marathon Maniac #3309

          I'm making a hasty and not well thought out response: this forum has become mean spirited. As Jim Rome would say, "I'm out."
          No way girl fren...nooo way. It's only one person, and sooooo many luv and cherish you here. Don't give in, ok...paaalease! This forum is NOT mean spirted at all....you know that...you really KNOW that!! See ya in the morning, ok...you have to keep me grounded girl! Tim

          Running has given me the courage to start, the determination to keep trying, and the childlike spirit to have fun along the way - Run often and run long, but never outrun your Joy of running!


          #artbydmcbride

            Please don't leave JLynne! I'll be good, I promise. Ran at the track tonight; 6 x 660m (400 @ 5k race pace and 200 hard) then cross field recoveries. With warmup and cool down: 5 miles total.

             

            Runners run


            Marathon Maniac #3309

              Damn DH, don't you have somewhere else to be right.. now? We are fine BTW...with out cha...why oh why, are you doing this? I am sticking up for my RA Buddies.. Ok, sorry now for a "non" post say'n I am sorry tomorrow... Tim On a poitive note, Ball U - Ball State U , is 12 and 0 this season...they rock!!!

              Running has given me the courage to start, the determination to keep trying, and the childlike spirit to have fun along the way - Run often and run long, but never outrun your Joy of running!

                Thought I'd try wandering back in here. (((looking carefully around all corners))) Hey Timbo - Where you bean all day?

                Leslie
                Living and Running Behind the Redwood Curtain
                -------------

                Trail Runner Nation

                Sally McCrae-Choose Strong

                Bare Performance

                 

                evanflein


                  There are times in life it's important to say your piece and speak your mind. Then there are times it's very important to just shut up and move on. I think we've come to that point.
                    At 8:03 p.m., I wrote in response to Ilene, "You are correct, Ma'am. I do not believe anyone here has argued this point. Aging, with its typical slowing of the metabolism, is a particularly significant factor." Lou responded to me, "Whoa. Non sequitur." I responded to Lou, "Not at all. Read more carefully."
                    Of course the metabolism comment was relevant. Just so it is clear to everyone, my "Non sequitur" was about the Tallrunner comment, which I didn't get last night. (Upon reflection, I do understand the comment this morning, and don't want to get into a debate on the aptness of the analogy. However, I will retract my "Non sequitur"). I am truly sorry if anything I said contributed to anyone thinking the forum has become mean spirited. JLynne, please stay.

                    Lou, (aka Mr. predawnrunner), MD, USA | Lou's Brews | lking@pobox.com

                      Yes, it is very simple that to lose weight calories in must be less than calories out. But that's where the simplicity ends. Otherwise everyone would be thin, no?
                      You are correct, sir. The theory is simple, the practice is hard, perhaps because it involves exercising the will. But not everyone understands this distinction. Witness the people who argued about the theory yesterday, as if the theory were at fault. Perhaps if they could fully accept the underlying theory of calories in, calories out--some people seemed a little wobbly--they could move on to the more valuable step of discussing what practical lifestyle changes were necessary to achieve their goals. Dark Horse
                      I'm a dark horse, running on a dark race course.