Ignore a user question


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Ignore a user question

Postby norunner » Wed Jul 03, 2013 2:30 pm

When half of the threads in "current events" are started by the same person and not one of them is about a current event, i know something is wrong. So i put added that person as a foe, but that still leaves his threads visible. So i assume "foeing" someone only means i won't see his posting, but still see his threads and there is no way to change that?
norunner
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby tandfman » Wed Jul 03, 2013 5:31 pm

I've never "foed" anyone--don't know how and probably wouldn't want to. But I must say that those threads are really too much. Many of them are absurd--just not worth responding to. Best way to deal with them is probably to ignore, but people do seem to be engaging in the silliness. :(
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby gh » Wed Jul 03, 2013 5:50 pm

calling threads "silly" is kind of a no-no here.

If I were to fault the initiator it would be for overwhelming the board all at once. Those kinds of questions are best tackled like one day at a time.

I found the questions all quite intriguing.
gh
 
Posts: 46294
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby tandfman » Wed Jul 03, 2013 6:04 pm

Some of these threads posed reasonable questions, but when you start talking about 12.50 for the 110 Hurdles or 10 meters for the long jump, you've lost me. I can't take that seriously.

Of course, in a few centuries, when humans are routinely genetically engineered, anything is possible. But if you assume that kind of bio change, there's no point in trying to quantify performance potential.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby TeWaio » Thu Jul 04, 2013 2:47 am

tandfman wrote:Some of these threads posed reasonable questions, but when you start talking about 12.50 for the 110 Hurdles or 10 meters for the long jump, you've lost me. I can't take that seriously.


Each to their own - I really enjoy pondering those sorts of questions.
TeWaio
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:01 am
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby Pego » Thu Jul 04, 2013 3:55 am

tandfman wrote:in a few centuries, when humans are routinely genetically engineered, anything is possible


Engineered creatures (genetically, mechanically...) should no longer be considered human for purposes of athletic competition, but some sort of droids. A different statistical category.
Pego
 
Posts: 10196
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby kuha » Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:26 am

Pego wrote:
tandfman wrote:in a few centuries, when humans are routinely genetically engineered, anything is possible


Engineered creatures (genetically, mechanically...) should no longer be considered human for purposes of athletic competition, but some sort of droids. A different statistical category.


Precisely. These are apples-to-oranges comparison without real meaning. When we ask questions like "Can someone run X time," we actually mean "Can someone within the physiological framework of the sport as we know it today run X time." Otherwise, none of it means a thing.
kuha
 
Posts: 9010
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby AFTERBURNER » Thu Jul 04, 2013 5:51 am

I was simply trying to start what I tought would have been intersting speculations in certain events about what could be the ultimate human barriers, that's ALL!

It seems that I have irritated many people around here, so REJOYCE PEOPLE I'm done!
AFTERBURNER
 
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 2:10 pm

Re: Ignore a user question

Postby tandfman » Thu Jul 04, 2013 6:00 am

kuha wrote:
Pego wrote:
tandfman wrote:in a few centuries, when humans are routinely genetically engineered, anything is possible

Engineered creatures (genetically, mechanically...) should no longer be considered human for purposes of athletic competition, but some sort of droids. A different statistical category.

Precisely. These are apples-to-oranges comparison without real meaning. When we ask questions like "Can someone run X time," we actually mean "Can someone within the physiological framework of the sport as we know it today run X time." Otherwise, none of it means a thing.

That is exactly what I meant when I said ". . . if you assume that kind of bio change, there's no point in trying to quantify performance potential."
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 13 guests