Asking To Test

[dvcochran]

Photon, I just went back to re-read the OP quoted above and here's my 2 cents:

I was was in a similar situation several years ago. it had been a while since I'd been promoted and I was concerned. However, unlike you, I do not have much difficulty talking to my instructor. At a quiet time, I pulled him aside and told him that I was quite serious about furthering my training and would appreciate it if he would give me any suggestions about what I could do to reach the next level. He wasn't offended at all and told me that he would keep it in mind.

A few more years passed and last year (Summer 2018) I tested and earned my next rank. Although it took me a total of 32 years to move up a rank , it only took me barely ten or eleven years training with him to get promoted, and only three more years after our conversation!

So you see, a simple conversation, some hard work, and I'm sure you too can get promoted within 10 -30 years. So why all the worry?

Man oh man do I love this post. It speaks volumes to the degree it takes to acquire something of value.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yes that is exactly what I was trying to say in post #170 and you say it perhaps better than I do.

Since you like this version, let me point out what's different about it. I made it about me - what I need to change. The question you proposed could be taken as being about the instructor, the school, the curriculum, or anything else. An important part of communication (and etiquette) is looking for ways to minimize misunderstanding.

So we were both asking the same question. My version simply makes it clearer what the question is.

 

[Flying Crane]

Because it's bad manners on an internet forum to resurrect a post where the discussion has died.

No, I don’t think it is.

 

[skribs]

No, I don’t think it is.

You would be incorrect. Necro-posting is generally taboo. Usually if you want to rehash a discussion, you open a new one.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

You would be incorrect. Necro-posting is generally taboo. Usually if you want to rehash a discussion, you open a new one.

That’s true in principle. In application, what qualifies as a “necro” varies a lot. In this case, the thread hasn’t been quiet all that long, and the OP still has comments. It would be confusing to start a new thread.

 

[Flying Crane]

You would be incorrect. Necro-posting is generally taboo. Usually if you want to rehash a discussion, you open a new one.

Says who? There is nothing wrong with necro-posting. It doesn’t break a taboo, that’s nonsense.

Depending on how old it is, the original participants may be long gone, but new people might pick up the discussion.

This thread isn’t even that old, who is to say it’s even dead?

 

[skribs]

Says who? There is nothing wrong with necro-posting. It doesn’t break a taboo, that’s nonsense.

Depending on how old it is, the original participants may be long gone, but new people might pick up the discussion.

This thread isn’t even that old, who is to say it’s even dead?

Says every forum I've ever been on?

And I've been on a lot of forums. I have more experience in forums than I do martial arts. (14 years on forums, 13 years of martial arts).

 

[Flying Crane]

Says every forum I've ever been on?

And I've been on a lot of forums. I have more experience in forums than I do martial arts. (14 years on forums, 13 years of martial arts).

Well, you are wrong about this one.

 

[dvcochran]

That’s true in principle. In application, what qualifies as a “necro” varies a lot. In this case, the thread hasn’t been quiet all that long, and the OP still has comments. It would be confusing to start a new thread.

If it is a dead post, why can't it be called a "dead post"? Necro (necrotic) creeps me out and I always think of dead body tissue like we usually see when we have to do an autopsy. It baffles me how words get used sometimes.

 

[skribs]

If it is a dead post, why can't it be called a "dead post"? Necro (necrotic) creeps me out and I always think of dead body tissue like we usually see when we have to do an autopsy. It baffles me how words get used sometimes.

I thought it was more like necromancy, where you're resurrecting a dead post.

 

[Flying Crane]

I think I’m going to go resurrect a few old threads that might get some new discussion.

 

[skribs]

That’s true in principle. In application, what qualifies as a “necro” varies a lot. In this case, the thread hasn’t been quiet all that long, and the OP still has comments. It would be confusing to start a new thread.

This is a rare case where I disagree with you. It was over 3 months gone, and the OP didn't seem to add much with his comment.

 

[Flying Crane]

This is a rare case where I disagree with you. It was over 3 months gone, and the OP didn't seem to add much with his comment.

Doesn’t matter.

 

[skribs]

I think I’m going to go resurrect a few old threads that might get some new discussion.

Are you a teenager? That's the kind of response I'd expect from a teenager. The reaction of someone in their terrible twos, but with enough strategic thinking to go above and beyond in their defiance of a rule.

 

[Flying Crane]

Are you a teenager? That's the kind of response I'd expect from a teenager. The reaction of someone in their terrible twos, but with enough strategic thinking to go above and beyond in their defiance of a rule.

Just resurrected one of your threads.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

This is a rare case where I disagree with you. It was over 3 months gone, and the OP didn't seem to add much with his comment.

He still seems to want to discuss. If he started a new thread, it would need a link to this thread for reference. It seems easier to simply continue where we are.

The most common objection to necroing a thread (in most forums I've been in) is either that the necro replies to someone who's no longer active, the thread is no longer applicable (as with tech threads from years ago), or the new poster started a new discussion rather than continuing the existing one.

 

[skribs]

He still seems to want to discuss. If he started a new thread, it would need a link to this thread for reference. It seems easier to simply continue where we are.

The most common objection to necroing a thread (in most forums I've been in) is either that the necro replies to someone who's no longer active, the thread is no longer applicable (as with tech threads from years ago), or the new poster started a new discussion rather than continuing the existing one.

There are a few more. Most people have moved on from the conversation. A new conversation is a new thread. Especially one that's already on page 9 or 10. People who weren't here the first time don't want to read through 9 or 10 pages to get to the discussion. So it mostly limits the discussion to those who are willing to come back to the thread, who were part of it before.

 

[dvcochran]

I thought it was more like necromancy, where you're resurrecting a dead post.

I have no clue. The Urban Dictionary says Necromancy is black magic performed by black people.
What the heck does that mean?

 

[skribs]

I have no clue. The Urban Dictionary says Necromancy is black magic performed by black people.
What the heck does that mean?

I was thinking more like the necromancers from D&D and video games like Diablo 2. They're usually quite pale.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Because it's bad manners on an internet forum to resurrect a post where the discussion has died.

I've seen people do it before. I've seen people bring back posts much older than this one. It makes more sense to resurrect an old post than to start a new post of the same or similar subject. As for it being bad manners, life is too short to get worked up over internet posts.