Wikipediaism

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by gonzo, Jan 10, 2011.

  1. bntii
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 731
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1324
    Location: MD

    bntii Senior Member

    Very much how all forums work me thinks- including this one.

    Every thread here is a 'Wiki' though just much more cumbersome to use than a page format for each topic.
     
  2. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 15,494
    Likes: 1,037, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    So, does that make me a quotable authority?
     
  3. bntii
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 731
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1324
    Location: MD

    bntii Senior Member

    Sounds good Gonzo- you're hired!

    Just don't quote me- I am so often tempted to wander far from my areas of expertise...
    :eek:
     
  4. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 15,494
    Likes: 1,037, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Too late, you are in the record.
     
  5. bntii
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 731
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1324
    Location: MD

    bntii Senior Member

    Damn- I suppose you are right..

    We need a method of rating the members 'authority' then.

    Mine will have to be a
    *7

    *Tells entertaining stories but should under no circumstances be allowed to steer the BOAT!
     
  6. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,812
    Likes: 374, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    That is the most important rule. It is no coincidence that it is #1.
     
  7. yipster
    Joined: Oct 2002
    Posts: 3,486
    Likes: 96, Points: 58, Legacy Rep: 1148
    Location: netherlands

    yipster designer

    The free, online encyclopedia features roughly 17 million articles in 270 languages, all created by a volunteer community
    On 15 January this year Wikipedia celebrates its tenth birthday consulted by more than 400 million people every month

    happy birthday wikipedia
     
  8. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    I would say the most important rule is "know what to challenge, and what to accept so you can get on with the job."

    I can design and build you a normal wood-framed house almost entirely using rules of thumb, without having to calculate stresses and loads. For example, a framing member gets one end nail for every inch of width: 2 nails for a 2x4, 3 for a 2x6, etc. The header over an opening should have one inch of thickness for every foot of opening, rounded up. In a 2x4 wall, a 3 or 4 foot doorway would have a 4x4 header; a 5 or 6 foot window would have a 4x6 header, etc. You can span up to an 8 foot space with 2x4 ceiling joists; 2x6 joists will span any ordinary room wider than that. A one or two story house can be framed with 2x4 studs on 24" centers, but it's better to go 16" on center for several reasons, and use 2x6 studs on the exterior walls because they'll hold more insulation. So on and so forth.

    The important thing is knowing when you can go with a rule of thumb or seat-of-the-pants solution, and when you need a professional engineer to do the calc's for you.

    I tried to help my older brother build his own house years ago. I finally gave up in total frustration (even though he was paying me well), because he challenged everything. I couldn't even toenail a 2x4 without him demanding to know why I used three nails, instead of two or four. "Because it works, and has worked for generations" wasn't good enough for him; he'd hold me up for an hour or two trying to decide whether it was the best number of nails to use in that particular spot.
     
  9. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 15,494
    Likes: 1,037, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    I thought the rule of thumb was: Don't hit it with the hammer.
     
  10. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    Now he tells me... years too late.:(
     
  11. Leo Lazauskas
    Joined: Jan 2002
    Posts: 2,696
    Likes: 151, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2229
    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Leo Lazauskas Senior Member

    That's not quite true - some of the content was lifted directly from sources (such as old Encyclopedias) which were not written by volunteers.

    But I love it for what it is, just the same.
    Leo.
     
  12. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,114
    Likes: 1,056, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    What you're describing is empirical based evidence. In other words based upon observation and/or experimentation. Thus the correct spacing eventually became the "norm" based upon previous failures.

    This does not require any understanding other than knowing when something works (doesn't fall down) or doesn't work (fails). To enquire deeper as to why, requires understanding the theory...

    I have come across many "old boys" in my time on the shopfloor. Many of them have great rules of thumb, most work (once i did the calc's to ascertain if it is indeed correct), but not all of them do. Yet when challenged and explain why some are not correct, because it has been engrained into them it has become a fact, they are resolutely steadfast in this "fact".

    Knowing what to challenge is not enough....one must challenge everything.

    Only after being challenged and proven, by theory one way or another, can the rule of thumb be accepted. Without challenging, one is living dangerously. It's the same as those that use software programs without knowing or understanding the limitations of program. No point getting a resistance curve from a bit of software for a short fat boat when the limitations are for long and slender. Thus, challenge everything..
     
  13. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,812
    Likes: 374, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Wikipediaism? Guilty.
     
  14. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 15,494
    Likes: 1,037, Points: 123, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Theories are challenges by facts and not the other way.
     

  15. Ad Hoc
    Joined: Oct 2008
    Posts: 7,114
    Likes: 1,056, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 2488
    Location: Japan

    Ad Hoc Naval Architect

    The sun revolves around the earth, the earth is the centre of the heavens, this is fact. Based upon what fact??....the faith of a select few which drove a misguided observation to prove a “known” outcome to support the faith. Accept it, it is a fact, or you will die a blasphemer.

    But wait…There is now another, the earth revolves around the sun, this is a fact. Which is correct they can’t both correct as they both claim to be the same fact??

    This “new” fact of the earth revolving around the sun is based upon a theory not faith. Since a theory is a system of ideas that explains something, usually something that is observed and repeatable by anyone. These ‘ideas’ are demonstrated by reasoned argument usually in algebraic form. Thus, the theory of planetary motions outlined by Keppler et al is now fact.

    A fact in itself is not self evident, it is merely a statement of “truth”. Birds fly, that is a fact. Fish swim, that is a fact. If I let go of an apple from my hand, it falls to the ground, is a fact. The BOAC comet aeroplane kept falling out of the sky, that is a fact. Why the comet fell out of the sky was explained by theories. How birds fly is explained by theories. Why apples or anything falls when released is explained by theories.

    If there is no system of ideas or repeated observation there cannot be a theory to support the observation or idea.

    In today’s hyper speeded up super duper internet super highway access of instant-ness….people tend to associate the word “theory” with something that is pure guess work, a hair brained idea, something plucked out of thin air which no one believes. It has lost its correct meaning by those that do not work in an environment where theories are common place and part of their daily lives. Archimedes theorem, Euler’s Theory, Bernoulli’s theory and so on.
     
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.