Viewing all threads involving JackJuggles
After all this record talk, I browsed a bit through the record database...
There seem to be so many 'silly' records, tricks that many people can do but which I'd never consider to run for as long as possible. An example: 3 ball (4x,4x)(4,0)
What are the purposes for juggling/recording such records?
Would anyone be interested in a 'record of the day/week' challenge, where we all work on the same stupid trick for a day and have like 10 new entries for a random trick?
Haha! I can guess at the history behind that (4x,4x)(4,0) record, and the story I've invented in my head is most amusing :)
In general though, people can record what they like - it's a practice log as much as it is a league table. If someone wants to work on "silly" tricks and run them for endurance, who are we to judge?
Your "record of the day/week" challenge is pretty much what prompted the "make this thread a competition" link when posting a new thread.
by which I mean "the only way you'll know is to try running such a compo" :)
I see this button every time I create a post, and have never dared to press it yet. I'll do, soon!
The purpose of most of those silly tricks was for Ethan to get to the top of the hall of fame.
Does anyone think Ethan isn't banned anymore, he's just too embarrassed to come back? After being banned from the edge for a little bit, I think he kind of snapped back into reality, and realized he was being irresponsible, and read some of the other small talk threads and just felt like a complete fool.
I just don't think he has the guts to come out and say something like "hey guys, I'm sorry for the way I talked to everyone, I know it's not cool, won't happen again." Even though that's not the best apology, I still think Ethan won't do that. I think his ban has ended, but he will never come back, not because of anger, but because of embarrassment.
You made all that up, didn't you?
You have neither the (moral) right, nor the competence to analyze Ethan's motives.
The more not in a disrespective derogating way.
And not, because he doesn't seem to be here to state on it.
Tell him in the face when he's back!
Also, he didn't get banned for "the way he talked to everyone", but for flooding on burrage.
So, think, before you speak, plz!
[I'm posting this reply as a voice for Ethan only. (which - of course - he doesn't need, but I can't have those offenses unobjected)]
Ethan's suspension (I've always thought ban was permanent, suspension was temporary but everyone seems to insist on using ban?) has been lifted, but owing to me forgetting that multiple log in attempts would have locked his account he was not able to log straight back in. I have since fixed this & have logged in using his details myself to confirm they work, I sent him an email late last night to confirm all this, but I think timezone differences were working against us.
As for the rest of your post, I don't know what Ethan thinks & neither do you or anyone else.
Geez, making one prediction is hard enough, but making 8(!) predictions all dependent on each other, that is insane!!!
What would you have rated the chance that your made up story is true? This guess was luckily predictably wrong.
Ethan if you read that, I'm sorry, it was kinda stupid for me to post and I take back everything that I said there
So it's been 12 days since Ethan has posted. I'm curious to know weather he was blocked by that many people or has he left the site as a result of being censored. Whilst not condoning his attack on Luke I would hate to think I would be blocked from posting if I said something to upset the God Emperor. I would prefer to see a more democratic approach to the running of the site whereby a vote could be taken before such a draconian measure as excluding a member is taken. I feel Ethan would have benefited from an open discussion of his behaviour rather than a somewhat petulant exclusion.
Here's hoping my post gets past the censors.
I didn't block Ethan for attacking me. I blocked him because he was flooding the forum, and I needed rest. He did this after we tried to have an open discussion about his behavior.
After re-reading the thread in question a couple of times it seems to me that the discussion of his behaviour started after Orin temporarily barred Ethan from posting.This meant he was not afforded the opportunity to either appologise for his behaviour or try to explain it. I can fully understand anyone wishing to block his posts as they are often childish or intentionally provocative however I would have preferred to make up my own mind about reading them or not. In fact having an option to block any poster I feel is not contributing to the site makes excluding anyone unnecessary as I can make an adult decision myself and not need to rely on an arbitary decision made on my behalf.
Margaret Thatcher talked about denying the IRA the "oxygen of publicity" but it was not until John Major sat down with all parties that the good Friday accord was signed putting an end to the violence caused by excluding republicans and loyalists alike from discussing the future of Northern Ireland. "Better jaw jaw than war war" as Arabella's grand father once said.
As you can probably tell I feel the principles of free speech go much further than some immature comments made by a young lad on an unimportant juggling forum.
I'm totally with you on the free speech thing. However, in this case, Ethan's flooding of the forum was getting in the way of other people wanting to speak freely. When one person's actions end up silencing or driving other people away, how is that person not also restricting free speech?
You have the option to block any user so you can (and did) stop him flooding your forum.If I choose to allow him to flood my uncensored view of the forum that should be my decision not the God Emperors.
Well, I disagree on this. If I had come to this forum for the first time, and seen Ethan's posts before anything else, I would simply have never read anything on the forum, nor would I have created an account, nor would I have started posting, nor would I have then decided to block him.
This happens to me very often! If my first contact with a website, forum, facebook group, or any other kind of online community is even remotely non-positive, let alone negative, I simply never return.
This reminds me a bit of rec.juggling and viewing it through IJDB - there was a lot of spam. Someone made a really quite decent spam filter, you installed it and forgot there was any spam. Which was great for any existing users, but it did mean that any new users got a poor first viewing of rec.juggling, and might have been put off by all the spam.
Of course, periodically a newish user would suggest sorting out the spam problem, and all the old users would say they used this script, and all the users who had spent months wading through the spam since the last time that the filter was mentioned could install it.
The point being, in general (not commenting on this specific case) you want problems to be sorted by default - obviously some things have to be left to user preference, but there is a big downside to saying, yes this is a problem but users can fix it like this.
This is EXACTLY why I haven't been keeping up with this forum as much as I should this past week or so. When I saw all the Ethan drama, I felt like I had wasted a bunch of time reading things that have nothing to do with juggling. Looking again today I am pleased with all the new posts.
He seemed young and not very self aware.. a bit annoying maybe, not sure he was silencing or driving anyone away though. I don't like any kind of blocking, rec.juggling was just fine for all that time without it.. if I'm not mistaken?
You are not mistaken ... mostly. Many USENET feeds had pretty good spam filtering, meaning that penis enlargement potions rarely hit the radar, but other than that it was what is laughingly referred to as unmoderated, by which people mean that someone else is there to protect their delicate sensibilities and prejudices, like a magic outrage fairy bestowing pixie dust of decorousness on the unseemly.
r.j was great because it was in fact user-moderated, like most things in life: Don't like something/somebody/whatever? Ignore it and move on. It was really liberating, and the small price to pay was that you would often need to - gasp! - ignore the rest of a thread that didn't interest you. The benefit was conversation that could not be stifled, or indeed be edited post hoc.
Consequently we had loads of posters just like Ethan - paging Sondre! - who flooded the board with piffle and either got bored, or learned better ways to engage with the conversation if they were so inclined. The unimaginative trolls tended to tire of the effort, or even entertained us with an amusing flounce, whereas the misguided but well-intentioned contributors modified their behaviour because they did in fact want to engage and realised that they were putting people off. The key difference is that lots of people blowing you off is way more persuasive than a single moderator doing the same, even if they have broad support.
I'll admit I was baffled and disappointed by Ethan's banning from a forum well equipped to allow its users to self-moderate, and equally by Luke's and others' inability to move on, just like they did in the r.j days. But I also admit that I have some pretty clear ideas about how people should get the best out of a forum like this, and that not everyone shares my outlook. Ethan struck me as a small kid in a big kid's playground, who couldn't quite get to grips with the prevailing culture here, and I remain mystified why he wasn't just allowed to find his niche or fade away.
For the sake of nostalgia: Chris Chiappini, Dr. Jerry/Lion Juggler, Soular Influx, Dick Franco, Anthony Gatto ffs!, Chris wossname, Jason Garfield post-Sean McKinney, and hundreds of others besides dipped their toes in the r.j water and failed to make the connection. Who on earth would wish that their efforts had never seen the light of day? Share your memories of r.j car crashes Edgizens!
I think Pumpkineater was specifically asking about ignoring users. Most usenet clients had a 'bit bucket' where you could set up email addresses that you wanted to ignore. There were many messages which had a single line of *plonk* which was the sound of someone hitting the bottom of said bucket.
I used to enjoy poking the trolls back in the early days, but I never saw the people that it turned away. Now I do. It definitely feels a lot different when it is my hard work that is negatively impacted. Sorry Colin.
My favourite rec.juggling car crash by far was Zuko. Yay for HQJD's!
>> If you guys want to tell me where I can find paraffin in the Dallas
>> area, I'll try some.
>Oh, please don't, Stephen. If you continue to use gasoline on your fire
>torches, there's a good chance that the world will soon be a better
Andrew, I used to have a fair amount of respect for you. The
fact that you are too stupid to realize that I've used it safely in
the past and can use it safely in the future hurts that. The fact
that you actively *want* me to kill myself, and feel it would be
an improvement, tells me more about you. Fuck off.
I'm out of here for awhile. Fuckhead thinks that he can call me
names, tell lies, etc. You're just making it worse, and it appears
intentional. It's clear that you guys are just assholes, and that
I'm not going to stop you from being assholes. It's clear that no
matter what I say, you plan to abuse me.
So fuck off. I'm out of here. I may be back, or I may not. I'm
sure you would rather have Nigel trolling and trying to start trouble
than real conversation anyway.
Believe it or not I am doing what I think is right to protect him. I have more information than you. I mean this to be a simple statement of fact, I don't mean to be condescending.
I understand that I'm not saying much but I wanted to say that I acknowledge that you disapprove of my decision, it's certainly not something I'm pleased with & I appreciate you mean well.
I don't know anywhere near as much as Orin, but I do know the decision wasn't a knee-jerk response, it wasn't the first resort, and that it wasn't a decision that was taken lightly at all.
Im as much for free speech as anyone, but at the same time if a kid is repeatedly bashing you in the shins with their new toy fire engine, there's nothing wrong with taking it off them and sending them to sit on the naughty step for a bit until they calm down.
Ethan's posts have not been vetted, censored of redacted at all - Orin just took his fire engine away for a bit.
Also, yes. At least this many people have him on ignore.
I thought this was a 'mischievous community of jugglers'. If it's not just childish trolling and there's something more sinister to it then let us know! Why the secretiveness? Also.. the vagueness as to how many people blocked him? I find it hard to believe that more than twelve people did. Most of us make mistakes, I know I do, Luke Burrage does and Little Paul does too (with his serial blocking). I was interested to see how the Ethan thing panned out.
Reading back at my comment - I hope that doesn't sound like I'm complaining or anything like that. The Edge is awesome and Orinoco does an amazing job on it. Perhaps it's just that this is actually none of my business. Sorry I'll just keep out of it.
I blocked Ethan, on the day he was flooding the forum with barbs at Luke, because he was being so in-your-face irritating to the whole community. Then I unblocked him because I found that I couldn't read the discussion about blocking him as he'd started it (or at any rate some other ongoing thread). Don't know if my brief block counted there or not, or whether I'll re-block once he's back. Hopefully he will reflect and become the positive humorous contributor Void said he could become.
Chris you can not know weather a person is "irritating to the whole community" you found him to be irritating so you blocked him. Others could have found him funny so should be allowed to decide for themselves.
I understand that Orin was trying to protect him from making a fool of himself however making a twat of yourself may lead to self enlightment and be a good way of curbing future behaviour. I know I have certainly learned from my mistakes and the disapproval of others over things I have done or said in the past.
Fair enough Monte, that is my personal interpretation, not something I can know for sure.
I'm sorry Paul but if someone is not allowed to speak that is censorship.
Whilst you might find it intolerable to have your shins bashed others may be more tolerant than you. You could argue that taking a child's toy away will stiffle his independence and his individuality and lead to him being resentful and full of spite. Far better that you remove yourself from his vicinity and let other more tolerant people explain to him why bashing your shins was unacceptable behaviour and suggest a more productive way to play with his fire engine.
Feelings of exclusion and marginalisation has led to many followers of Islam becoming radicalised and left them feeling justified for their acts of atrocity. You may have turned Ethan into a suicide poster.
Ok Void I do realise there have to be some limits to freedom of speech on the net or otherwise. No-one should have the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theatre or preach violence against vulnerable minorities or commit acts of cyber bullying but that is not what we are talking about here. Ethan just reacted in an immature and witless way to a slightly provocative comment by Luke about "finding the block feature" In my opinion banning Ethan from posting is an over reaction to a minor infringement of the rules of polite society and no more. Freedom of speech has it's downside for sure but the alternative ie censorship and oppression is worse. I just feel the situation could have been managed better and that it would be a shame if a young juggler leaves the community out of either anger or shame and now feels too bitter or too embarrassed to return.
Again, I'd rather one annoying young juggler leave if that means many other young jugglers would join or stay. He was only blocked for a few days, so he can always come back when he's decided to be less annoying.
I am with Luke here. There are plenty of communities that I have not joined because of the maturity of its users.
If seems unlikely to me that anyone would leave the site because one poster out of hundreds makes an occasional annoying post. Also we have no information about how long he will be blocked for. And who is going to decide if he is being less annoying and therefore be allowed back. Hopefully not you as you have already admitted that you scroll past most peoples posts as they are not worth reading unless someone else has replied first. A little more tolerance of others would be a good thing in my opinion.
There aa big and relevant difference between 1 post in 100 and 1 poster in 100.
Aaaand usual proof that my tablet's autocorrect makes my posts worse more often than better..
Sorry Brook I'm not quite sure what point you are making. Either way most of the posts on this site will not drive users away. Are you suggesting that all of Ethan's posts are annoying enough to make people leave the site?
Yes. That is it exactly.
If I look at a new forum, and see any text by any member that was/is as bad as Ethan's or 7b_wizards, I would immediately close the browser tab and not bother checking again.
Seriously. I have done this many, many times.
Yet you are still here despite being more annoyed than most, thus proving my point no-one leaves they just ignore.
I believe both of them have also posted serious points concerning juggling or performing which no-one could fairly consider to be annoying so it is untrue to say either posts 100% annoyingly.
You are looking at it backwards Monte. You'll notice that Luke's UserID is 21, Ethan's is 904. I have personal experience that recent outbursts have directly stopped 3 people joining the Edge. & that's just from the limited number of people I met in person at a festival. People won't sign up to block one person. They will just ignore the entire site & everyone on it. I don't have the luxury of second chances. I too used to think the ignore function was the answer to everything, but I was wrong.
I've just sent Ethan a very long email which I'm sure he will read & then he'll be able to reactivate his account. I've no idea how he will take it but I'm going to give him a chance & I ask that everyone else do the same. I have asked him not to antagonise anyone, but that goes both ways. Please be mindful that Ethan is only 14 years old. You've all heard the quote about democracy being two wolves & a sheep deciding who's for dinner, I don't want to log in tomorrow morning to find a mob brandishing pitch forks.
Are you saying it is ok for Luke to make rude posts because he has been a member for a long time but because Ethan is relatively new he will be excluded for rudely defending the wiz against such attacks from Luke. That is the type of rank cliqueism which I predict will eventually be the death of open discussion on this forum.
No. We're trying to tell you that new users are put off joining forums if they see negative behaviour. Your point that Luke is still around is moot because Luke joined first.
Yet people are still joining the forum. If it were universally true that bad behaviour puts people off joining forums then all forums would be in terminal decline and there seems to be no evidence for this. There are more forums now than ever yet most have at least one dick trolling for effect.
Did you spot my note above about my conversations at Camvention? Yes a few people are still joining the forum, but others are not. Your argument is akin to saying it's ok that these patients are not receiving treatment because these patients are. I'm not happy with that.
And how many people might decide not to join a forum which practises censorship and exclusion. Besides which I would judge a forum on the quality and variety of the debate not dick swinging about the number of members. If someone is shallow enough to not join because they find some posts to be annoying whilst not considering the vast majority of interesting debate then perhaps they would not be missed anyway.
Could you not decode my smiley with twinkle, nose, upper lip, underlip with tongue, as not meant sooo serious?
THAT was a smiley? Nope, could not decode that... I thought your cat walked on your keyboard as you pressed 'submit'
None that I have any evidence for.
You may judge the people we sadly won't get to see as you wish.
Things do not have to universally bad to be bad. Things that put off x% of users may still be worth fixing, even if x is not 100%.
Also... if I am no longer allowed to antagonise people I may exclude myself from posting.
I happen to find geeky discussions on siteswap numbers and endless posts on computer coding to be tedious in the extreme but I would never butt into the thread to say so. I just scroll past and look for something more to my liking.
I have not told you you are not allowed to antagonise people. I asked everyone to give Ethan a chance which I think is a perfectly civil thing to do. Either you honestly think that is an unreasonable request, if so why? Or you are trying to provoke me, again if so why?
I think asking people to give Ethan a chance is a perfectly reasonable thing to do . However singling him out by asking him and not Luke or myself to refrain from antagonising anyone is not.
I am trying to provoke you because I disapprove of your actions but i am glad you have finally decided to join the discussion at last.
I believe that labeling yourself as the God Emperor and exersising total power makes you a valid target for my disapproval.
You first complain that you are no longer allowed to antagonise anyone, then you complain that I didn't. Your multiple positions are making me dizzy.
I ask that everyone else do the same
That includes you & Luke.
Please feel free to continue your disapproval.
My postion is solid. I ask that you treat all members the same. Either you insist on a sterile forum where no-one is allowed to antagonise or you allow all to do so. If you read your own post "I ask everyone to do the same" was in relation to giving Ethan a chance not in refraining from antagonising. Luke was not excluded for antagonising the wiz and I have so far not been excluded for antagonising you.
Maybe you overread (or forgot about) the "both-ways"-part in [Orin : ] "I have asked him not to antagonise anyone, but that goes both ways." ?
As Mr Wizard pointed out the 'both ways' part was my way of appealing for tolerance, but in hindsight I should have explicitly stated rather than alluded to it.
Regarding my inconsistent treatment. I don't have a set of hard & fast rules, I just do what I feel is right. Luke, 7b_wizard, you & I have all been around long enough to look after ourselves. Given his relative inexperience I just felt it would be better to isolate Ethan from the storm for a bit.
Funny how Ethan has ended up looking more mature than all of us...
Enough said, no hard feelings your highness, or is it your excellency, how does one address a God Emperor?
Indeed, no hard feelings at all. Please continue to question my decisions. I will get some things right, I will get some things wrong. As tough as being questioned is I think everyone understands each other better now which is a good thing.
Sometimes I get addressed as 'sir', sometimes 'oi wanker', I respond to both equally.
Ah a benevolent dictatorship. My father used to argue that was the most efficient form of government. As opposed to all that time consuming consensus gathering.
> I will get some things right, I will get some things wrong.
I would be delighted if this came to be a touchstone for all at The Edge.
I'm not sure about all the talk about maturity here. Is that a metric we need to compete on? If blocking people is seen as an immature action, why is it built into the forum?
I have used a forum for about 8 years now with include the following rules in the top post of the forum. In total there have been three people banned ever. There is no ignore or blocking function. These rules can work:
These forums are a little different from other online communities, in that they will never be allowed to descend to the depths so common on "teh internets." The rules are simple:
1. Be mindful of your grammar and spelling.
2. Post intelligently
3. Don't be annoying.
Failure to abide by these rules will result in warnings and an eventual banning.
Unless it is relevant to your argument, don't admonish other forum members about their grammar or spelling: our moderators will handle that.
Don't post unless you have something to contribute. Otherwise empty "QFT" posts are considered annoying (see above).
Our moderators can and will correct in red your errors in order to maintain the readability of the forums. There is a spell-checker available, as well as a "Preview Post" button: use them. Repeated violations of the third rule can result in banning via court martial. To date, three people have been banned. If you post intelligently and are an intelligent person, you will have no trouble here. We trust our members to conduct themselves reasonably, and thus don't feel the need to create an extensive code of conduct. It should be obvious to everyone what is and is not appropriate.
Jesus that sounds like a godawful way to run a forum.
1, some people struggle with spelling and grammar that does not make their opinion less valid.
2, elitist nonsense, some people are less intelligent than others but it does not mean they can't contribute meaningfully to a debate.
3, annoying is so subjective. Would I be right in assuming your court martial panel is self appointed or are you at least democratic in gathering such a jury before you decide on an expulsion?
God Emperor your wankerness I withdraw all previous objections there are clearly much worse ways of running a forum.
Yes, elitist. It fits do that forum. Only three people have ever been banned. The court martial was a thread which was open for anyone to comment and try to sway the moderators. You know, just like his very thread we are currently chatting in, in which you are happy you have swung the moderator to your view.
These exact rules aren't appropriate everywhere. My reason for posting them was for the exact reason you wanted, which is some guidelines so it isn't just one person doing what they feel is right at the time, and upsetting people who think the forum should be run in a different way.
Clear rules, whatever they are, reduces ambiguity. The "don't be annoying" rule is specifically left vague though, to catch behavior that is generally found to be unsuitable that can't be caught by nitty gritty lists. A moderator being able to point to such a rule is very good motivation to someone to stop being annoying.
Seriously, don't be so kneejerk in your reactions to this stuff. I suggested these to back you up in that a single God emperor might need some help.
I object to your assertion about a knee jerk reaction. I went away and chopped some firewood and formulated my objections to your rules. I then came back nearly 40 minutes later and posted my thoughts.
Ok there need to be restrictions to what people can say I don't want to read racist comments or personal attacks but I just don't think vague rules about "being intelligent" are the answer. I think Cedric's opinions on self moderation are more useful.
also "yes,elitist it fits do that forum." perhaps you should follow your own advice about using the preview button to make your post more readily comprehensible.
Your post is missing one comma, one full stop (or, for argument's sake, a hypen or colon) and one capitalisation.
What's the name of that internet law about posts which criticise the grammar of another post? I have forgotterisified.
I hate to be a pedant as you know, but I was making a point about comprehension not grammar. But well done, the post count is creeping towards a double century. I'll be happy if it reaches double Nelson.
I wrote that on my phone. The text is small, and there's no edit function. Nobody is perfect.
Why are you still nitpicking? I didn't say those should be the strict rules for this forum. I'm saying maybe there should be some basic guidelines somewhere, to give people a general target to aim for.
And the rules aren't about "being intelligent", but mention "post intelligently". That's a big different. Someone can be very intelligent, and yet post unintelligently, or even unintelligibly. Who knows, maybe 7b_wizard is the cleverest person on the forum. Who knows? His posts certainly don't make it easy to see, if he is.
If you were to write a very simple set of guideline to this forum, what would you suggest?
I would suggest a simple link to "Wheatons Law"
Then we can all be banned because we've all broken it at one time or another.
"If you post intelligently and are an intelligent person, you will have no trouble here"
I'm sorry that after over 20 posts on the subject you still misunderstand my position. I am against censorship and exclusion. I don't want any rules concerning banning members. I don't want to write any guidelines for this forum. I believe open debate is the answer to bad behaviour.
Annoying when people are rude and condescending towards you isn't it Luke?
However I will give you the same politicians apology you gave Ethan. I'm sorry if I caused offence.
Also I would like to apologise to Void for constantly starting sentences with a preposition I know it must annoy the hell out of you.
You've got nothing to apologize for. But at least I now understand that literally nothing I can write will help you, and nothing you reply with will help me. You want no rules or guidelines at all, and I'm starting from the idea that if we were to have some rules or guidelines, it's good to discuss what those might be, or where they might begin, if a moderator wanted to easily show someone the desired behavior of forum participants.
Personally I don't want open debate about the behavior of everyone who starts abusing the forum. I don't want debate about different levels of English writing and comprehension. I don't want open debate about spelling and grammar mistakes in individual posts. It's super tiring. I want a single moderator who can say "Make a better effort to write more intelligibly/not be annoying or else face suspension" and that be the end of it.
And no, you aren't annoying, and I don't find you rude or condescending. I hope that wasn't what you were aiming for, because you failed.
So to sum up;
I am against censorship and exclusion and for open debate.
You are for censorship and exclusion and against open debate.
We must agree to disagree and leave it up to our peers to decide which position they prefer.
We were talking about ways of talking about juggling but feel free to ignore if it bores you.
Maybe if you believe in a block function a possible improvement would be the ability to block a thread in addition to blocking a person.
That way if you are fed up with me talking about off topic things you wouldn't have to risk missing something I have to say about BBU for example.
Of course you may have already blocked me in which case you won't be seeing this post anyway.
Totally with you. This thread is incredibly tiring. Every once in a while I think about sharing my opinion on the subject, then I realize (just like all but 4 or 5 of us), that it just isn't worth it.
I'd like to think there is a lot more grey than this pure black and white view, but whatever makes you happy.
1. It wasn't my own advice. It was an example set of rules.
2. The rule isn't to have perfect spelling. It states "Be mindful of your grammar and spelling." That is very different to holding everyone up to the level of perfection.
3. That wording isn't an accident. Not everyone can be perfect, and there are many people for whom English is a second or third language, or are dyslexic and such. But the rule is for people to write with the aim of using their best spelling and grammar. If this rule was in place, it would be a very, very handy thing to point 7b_wizard at. If he carried on ignoring the rule intentionally, it could help Jon ban him for a while until he at least attempts to raise his standard.
4. Your criticism of my spelling might avoid failing this guide: "Unless it is relevant to your argument, don't admonish other forum members about their grammar or spelling: our moderators will handle that." Which is fine. If you really didn't understand my "do" = "to" mistake, that's fine. I kinda find that hard to believe though. Again, the spirit of that guideline, and the wording, is no accident.
5. Despite any leniency in point 4, you telling me that the rule doesn't work because I myself made a spelling error is exactly the thing the phrase "don't admonish other forum members about their grammar or spelling" is written to negate. You failed at reading comprehension if you thought the rule said only perfect spelling was allowed, and you failed again by picking me up on a single mistake in contradiction of a following guide that is to stop people negating other people's arguments due to errors in their spelling or grammar.
If this rule was in place, it would be a very, very handy thing to point 7b_wizard at. If he carried on ignoring the rule intentionally, it could help Jon ban him for a while until he at least attempts to raise his standard.
And what if someone cannot help the way they write? Some people cannot help it, nor should nor should they adhere to another culture's norm. Direct translations from other languages can be odd to read especially if you didn't know that was the case. Since this is a world wide forum then we don't have the right to enforce it (except the Emperor... then he would be a Tyrant).
Regardless... What is any of this going to achieve? The forum works pretty well these days, apart from a few users posting in alternative styles (of which they are frequently being reminded of). How about we let them be, they're already improving.
Until the next person. And then the next person.
The entire point of "hey, everything's fine, and there are tools for fixing it once people have joined, logged in, discovered the tools, and then used them" is that it isn't working. As in, people are not signing up to the forum because they see the type of posts we are discussing in exactly this thread. This is the point. The point is the very thing we are discussing, over and over.
I also am a member of a (non-juggling) forum with very very similar rules. It has repeatedly been called 'elitist', but besides that it has shaped and contributed more of the culture than any other board in its genre. It after many many years it is still the only correct place to have an in-depth discussion about its topic and has never let me down.
Yup. Same with the forum I took these rules from. At first I couldn't believe that a moderator would actually take the time to correct the spelling and grammar of a new person's post with red text. But you know what? They only ever had to do that to someone once, and rarely at that.
I LOVE the elitism of that forum. It's the reason why I've been chatting there for eight years and am friends with many of them, even meeting up with people on my travels, and staying at their homes sometimes too. And yeah, the amount of creative output by the members of the forum is continually inspiring.
I always feel free to disapprove it's one of the advantages of democracy over totalitarianism.
However I approve of your approval of my disapproval.
A dictature is not "bad in itself" as a states-form or as a social ruling model. It depends on how it's fulfilled. One advantage of a dictature is getting a hold of great and complex diversity of social members (systemic "agents"). The more, when there's potential for conflicts. ( One strong hand will then avoid chaos. Russia e.g. is a wide-spread country with borders to and peoples towards asia, near-east, europe and just as many diverging interests and mentalities - so it's not coincidence that one strong hands have ever been ruling there whilst small countries can 'afford' democracy).
The dictature of the majority is an example for how democracy can be unapt as ruling model (2 wolves vs. 1 sheep).
To quote Winston yet again;
"Democracy is the worst possible form of government - apart from all the others"
The fascination of siteswap digits lies in them being actually real aiming points, both, of a pattern, and in your range of air-space controlled by you.
Ethan and 7b_wizard weren't 100% annoying. They were 100% ignorable. They were 100% stressful to decode and find any worthwhile meaning in. I ignored them for the entire time they were participating in the forum.
I did that for however long it was because I want to read and chat with jugglers I've known for 15 years or so. There's a load of really good discussion here, and I read all of it.
If I was new to the forum, and didn't know the value of the non-spamming, non-understandable posts from a tiny minority but yet still flood the forum, and didn't know there was an ignore function for the non-unannoying posts, I wouldn't have ever joined.
Hey, now, .. WHAT?! Calls "any" my texts "bad" after not even reading them lol ! :o))) haha .. What a statement!? .. now °really° ..
If you were to write using English and appropriate sentence structures/syntax I wouldn't ignore most of what you write. I have no interest in decoding posts, even fairly basic ones like this one.
You appear to have forgotten that communication is passing information to other people in a way that they understand. Good communication means less opportunity for misunderstanding.
I rarely agree with much that Mr Burrage posts but in this case he is correct to state that the majority of your posts are unreadable. Unlike him I try to read most posts.
Just to provide a different view point; whilst I struggle with parsing what most people post, I do tend to find that 7b_wizard's style of writing is easier to get an idea of the tone. The way everyone else writes is so clinical.
I sure the content of some of Ethan's posts were brash, but at least he was enthusiastic. Gave the forum a different feel to the same routine of posts I'd constantly see on here on. Kinda got very samey and formulaic. Which tends to be the case when the same people frequent.
If you want more "young blood" to join then we'll need to accept different writing styles and personalities (within reason). Just remember that behind the wall of text there's a real person and there might be a reason they act the way they do. Don't assume everyone is normal, no one is.
Also quite funny to read these past posts as I usually have Luke blocked/ignored. Made for odd reading.
I also don't see a way to "not accept" people speaking how they do and saying what they want unless they don't harm or offend. (in a world-wide forum)
You're not among yourselves here like .. say .. in your club or on a convo, but if all 1000 users started posting whatever their concerns with juggling are, this maledict thread would be gone with the wind in no time.
I just thought I'd mention that 7b_wizard's posts have been much more readable recently, and it's worth giving him another try.
This is simply not true.
There were very few posts of mine on complicated topics ( e.g. "droppists, hobbyists, creativists" versus "perfectionists, non-droppists", e.g. qualifying a trick and qualifying a trick after a trick) , .. topics, which are in themselves highly liable to inflict misunderstandings by inexact writing (\refering).
Most of my posts were - not always easy, I admit - but understandable.
If there was something, you didn't understand, you could have asked! (instead of chewing on it for a while to come out with it in a witchhunt later on joining a choir, right?)
People here post a lot of insider-stuff liable to not be understood by anyone not adept. So if there is a lack of communication issue, it's thoroughly a mutual one. I of course skip these posts as they don't seem any of by business. I wouldn't think of answering one these posts by saying: "Hey, I skipped that!" lol
I'm here as a juggler for juggling and jugglingcontent. Not as a communication expert or english writer going for Pulitzer.
I had the impression, newbies were even welcomed here if Orin didn't .. it seemed kind'a "his business" even talking to new members on their hi-posts. So where's your "com-mu-ni-ca-tion" then? right.
read-my-lips-italics and - quote-marks.
" .. " - just a short speaking pause to fetch new breath.
"his business" - mixed irony and fixed expression italics and quote-marks.
"right" - minuscule at start of sentence where Capital would be required: the sentence before wasn't finished with the question mark.
.. just as you speak it. How do you guys read comics? or do you only read scientific texts and literature? how do you cope with Shakespeare's punctuation???
Jus' leave me alone with that generalizing my posts as all unreadable sh..rubbish, would yer!
And one more "com-mu-ni-ca-tion"-issue: Why don't you all put all that energy into editing your profiles!
Or post some juggling-content in the first place ..
And btw .. "another try"? .. Else what? Am I on court here? U the judge? What the heck 'd I do to earn all that?
I defend you, pay you a compliment, and suggest that people have another go at reading your posts instead of skipping over them and you fly off the handle!
There's no pleasing some people! :)
yeh, I know. lol. thk!
But you didn't exactly hit the point. Who think, they should skip .. let them skip. As I said before above: I'm mainly writing my posts for those who read them. Not for those who don't lol.
I was also not answering you only, but .. well .. the whole bunch of witchhunters, and them using words like "all, every, always, never, a.s.o." a lot, generalizing a final judgement from one read post only. [Which is - btw - a consequence of the modern information flood also .. before my inner eye, Bowie appears as "man who fell from the sky" watching like twelve tv-s at a time .. you have to filter somehow]. But mainly answering that "communication"-issue uttered by several.
In the post I replied to I understood what you wrote on the second read through. My problem with that is that is that I don't want to have to read your posts twice or more to understand them. I try not to quickly dismiss a poster as unreadable as often there are communication problems caused by the poster writing in a second language, being dyslexic or writing without editing but it appears that you have a deliberate policy of using non standard ways of expressing yourself. This may make it easier for a few people to read e.g. Ian Mrawa but will definitely make it harder for others. As you often post on subjects on which I have no interest it rarely concerns me but as we are having the rather lengthy meta-discussion I thought it might be good for persons other than the usual posters to express a view. That it was immediately countered by Ian is for me a good thing as I don't mind reading others viewpoints. I have no intention of blocking you or even Ethan but I will tend to skip your posts and only read them if others have made interesting comments. A policy that Luke has also suggested he does.
1. burrage publicly states, that he blocked me after finding only one post of mine unreadable.
2. In his post, that I replied to, he calls " a n y of Ethan's and my texts b a d ".
3. Now, how can you judge (any) posts "bad", that you haven't even read (due to having blocked me, remember?) ? That was my simplest logic-reply. If you didn't understand that at first reading, well, then, I don't know what exactly was lacking to understand it. Does this only happen with my posts? Honest?
[ "simplest logic-reply" = That was my reply using most simple basic evident logic. ]
I have read you and Ethan. I have not blocked either of you. I understood what you wrote on the second read through.
May I read that as admitting that - for whatever reason - you were lacking the whole information to understand that post of mine and having to read it twice? And not me writing bad english with queer punctuation?
I'll chime in: I often have trouble reading your posts because if your strange use of punctuation and formatting. Two recent examples:
" a n y of Ethan's and my texts b a d ".
I had the impression, newbies were even welcomed here if Orin didn't .. it seemed kind'a "his business" even talking to new members on their hi-posts. So where's your "com-mu-ni-ca-tion" then? right.
Both of these slowed down my reading. When I logged on just now, there were 120 unread messages, and I make a point to read everything here. Thus, I don't like when I have to slow, or worse, re-read something due to someone's deliberate bending/breaking of English.
If I have to slow because the topic is difficult to me, that's my problem. Again, this is probably not new information to you, but it seems like we're casting votes. So that's mine.
Would this, your vote, go so far as to have me banned for doing that?
It's mere formatting issue .. and .. like I said
It's mere formatting issue, and, like I said before
a) you have queer formatting in comic strips,
b) it is a mutual thing: I also don't understand everything and then want to or then have to skip it or ask what it means,
c) [ forgot c writing below first :o| ]
And, I explained what I meant by formatting that way in that post below it in brackets. Well, that didn't avoid slowing its reading down for you then, I admit.
I do think, formatting can make up for a lot of missing mimics, emphasis, ironic tone, undertones, sidethoughts uttered amidst a sentence when speaking .. short: to write like you speak. That's common in modern chat, small talk, short messaging and hasn't made halt from forums and letter-like postings, newsgroup. It's a question of gotten used to it for readers and writers.
I don't for every trifle want to write a scientific style or only just a correct english like being at school or something. It's my credo of gone with the wind writing to whom it may concern to here and there write down what i think or speak in a brainstormish way or like I'd speak it. It reads fresh and not so elaborated when you're open for it as a reader. I am like that!
Be that however - I got a whole lot of complaints about that here now and I have more than once stated I'd account for that and already changed my posts.
I'd be okey if you skipped such posts of mine (just like anyone skips anything, he doesn't understand or wanna go through). I'd welcome if you'd take them two or three seconds to read again or slower if it's a topic that interests you or even ask me what I meant, but regret if you entirely ignored all my posts categorically.
I want to make this clear again ( @ all critics ):
It is impossible that everyone understands everything. Be that content, formatting, abbreviations, specific (juggler's) lingo, insider stuff. I could give a lot of examples where the average juggling forum user wouldn't know what was going on ( IJDb history allusions; allusions to other platforms' content; HLAIB, drops, levels; "Otherwise empty``QFT´´ posts"?; a lot of local club's insider stuff; and many many more ) Picking one or two or a whole set of posts of mine out to make that "the wizard-can't-be-understood-just-like-an-alien-writing-hieroglyphs"-bubble for a witchhunt on me in general is just boosting a trifle to a storm where simple asking what I meant or a "Hey, can you explain that again?" or skipping that one post would have sufficed.
It's really a bubble that shouldn't be fed anymore now, please!
(In this case, it was a distinct example pointed out from you, though, what exactly I had been asking for) Sry 4 the long read!
No, my vote isn't for a ban or suspension or anything like that. It's from one human to another, saying: I'd like to read what you have to say, and I'm finding it difficult. If you changed a couple aspects of how you write, it would be much easier for me (and probably most others). You are under no obligation to help me, but should you be open to helping me, I thought it useful to outline how you could.
I don't like skipping your posts (especially on subjects that I care about) because you often have interesting things to say. It takes me much longer than a typical post, but 95 % of the time I understand them in the end, and most of the time I find them useful.
I'm sorry that using a couple of your posts as examples came across as witch-hunty. I meant them to show certain aspects of your posts that I found difficult. When critiquing an aspect of someone's writing, I try to be specific; otherwise, they might put lots of effort into "fixing" something that was fine in the first place!
Sure. Shouldn't have doubted.
Changing .. trying .. [ <-- jus' 4 joke that one .. sry 4 slowing you down ;o]p ]
Behalf "changing": Trying to ..
Also .. if no one had stopped me, I think my 'bracketing, interjecting & emphasizing' might even have gotten worse to read - me thinking it would be understood. So, this is a good development for both, readers and me writing.
With all the superfluous punctuation, I prefer to read it as if it was spoken by William Shatner.
.. and - btw - "dismiss a post (or poster)" .. OR ask what they meant wasn't ever an option to you, it seems, now? But giving me lessons in "communication" ..
When I logged onto Juggling Edge today there were more than 60 unread posts for my perusal. I did my best to read them all. I replied only to posts that were replies to my post and I felt needed a response. I don't generally have time (nor the inclination) to ask a poster to explain what they meant. My view is that the obligation is on the poster to try and communicate with their audience and not the reverse. Hopefully all my posts have been understandable on the first reading. I certainly try to make them so. I don't develop a code that others have to interpret to understand my posts. I read through my posts to make sure there are as few spelling mistakes as possible (occasionally I write there instead of their, even though I know the difference, it is a problem I have had since I was about 6). Even so, there are probably people out there who dismiss my posts just because it is me writing. It doesn't worry me. If my dismissing what you write worries you then please try to make your posts clearer. If it doesn't then ignore me and move on.
Is now wondering how many people have blocked him and whether Orinocco can create a little table (maybe anonymised apart from person logged in) of numbers of blocks. Just for the fun of it.
Perhaps you could try posting in a foreign language and then see how many people misunderstand you Nigel. Sometimes one has to make allowances.
Thanks. That is actually a point - I do mainly - not always - think german (e.g. nested sentences and thoughts, e.g. lumping substantives together for abbreviation). And I grant the criticism my partly elaborated and highly correct english which makes them think I could do better ( \right ) if only I wanted to, which is not always the case.
I'm also looking forward to days ahead, when e.g. the chinese jugglers discover the Edge and pidgin will be good enough to convey all the relevant content. ;o]p
You're right. And I'm right. I'm using the forum. I contribute or state in different ways.
Vice versa - when reading or skipping - I go by content, not by person. Also when judging. I judge posts, not a person behind it for being what I think they are. (But I'll make an exception °mhehe° for burrage who just won't quit publicly offending and doing it increasingly bluntly all the while giving him the probable benefit of insane genius).
= So, I'm not ignoring you, but I would - on another day - have flown over e.g. this last post of yours here above, then skipped it for being way off any my topics.
Orin has already stated somewhere else, that that there is actually few blocking going on all in all. It's just become a bubble about principles that imho shouldn't be fed.
My point was it's possible for 1% of the posters to make a lot more than 1% of the posts - it doesn't matter (talking generally here) if only 1% of users are annoying if they make up for it by making 10/20/50% of the posts.
I think I'm going to agree to disagree with you on this one, as you clearly see the world in a very different way to me with much less room for nuanced responses to antisocial behaviours.
Feelings of exclusion and marginalisation has led to many followers of Islam becoming radicalised and left them feeling justified for their acts of atrocity
Has godwins law been updated recently? I think it probably needs an extra clause or two.
I have tried really hard to resist rising to your Godwins law comment but after 24hrs I am still irked by it so I am going to have to respond.
Fair enough if it was an inane thread on your favorite colour bean bag and I had pointed out that only a Nazi would choose all white props then Godwins law would be rightly invoked but this is a thread about censorship and exclusion so although my statement was extreme for effect it is hardly irrelevant to the discussion.
I therefore propose an amendment which states; Anyone invoking Godwins law without proper thought to it's relevance shall be deemed to have run away from the debate and no longer be thought to be of value to the discussion.
I was going to put in a feature where Marvin would instantly close a thread if Godwin's law was invoked. But I thought, "nah, that'll never happen..."
Hahaha - best post winnarrrr!
To answer, yes he has, but not if you didn't notice.
Ahh. Monte, thank you for standing up for me. I can appreciate someone who stands up for what they believe in, and what they believe to be right. However, I would like to state that in no way was I "Censored". As Li'll Paul has said, Orin just took my toy fire engine away for a bit.
I believe I was standing up for the Wiz and myself, and I believe that I should stand up for what is right. However, I may have not delivered my opinion in the correct way, that is true....I do NOT have the right to flood a forum, and I'm sorry my actions pissed some people off.
I see that my words had no effect on Luke whatsoever. You can not change someones behaviour, only Luke can change his behaviour. And it appears Luke has not looked at himself and realized that he sounds like a jerk.
And Monte, you were right about my feeling of bitterness and anger...When Orin first blocked me, my first action was to beat all of Orin's records on video, and then make a rap song dissing Luke...I did that, and the video is still sitting on my desk top....Why don't I post it? I will never post it because during my ban from the edge, I realized and heard a few things that changed me...
My juggling coach told me during one of my lessons, "Don't just juggle for the competition and to beat people, juggle because you love to juggle." After my lesson I realized something, I don't juggle because I love to juggle, I juggle because I want to be THE best. I juggle because I want to beat people, and I want to beat records...This is no longer what I am going do. Because my juggling coach was right, I need to juggle because I love to juggle. So, from now until my death, I will NEVER post a record again. Even if I juggle 9 balls for 20 mins, I will never post it....
The other thing I realized during my time away from the edge, is that I'm not part of a juggling community in real life...When I was banned, I felt a sense of loneliness. I don't really have any good friends, and I don't go to juggling clubs, so it's obvious why I felt that way. Behind the computer screen, I am a dude who (in real life) thinks before he says anything, and is not viewed as immature. I am immature behind the computer screen, and I fully realize this fact...This is not the first time I've been banned from a site...And every time I'm banned it's for the same reason. And that reason is my anger that blows when somebody says something that pisses me off. I don't like it when people are rude to me or to other people...Infact I especially hate it when people are rude to other people! It annoys me...I believe that Luke was rude. I don't like it when people act as if they are above other people. And that is how Luke was acting, and is exactly how he is still acting.
The last thing I would like to say is: Thank you Orin for giving me another chance, I know I have been given many. But I'm glad you still believe that I can change...I will try to tone things down, and I will try to engage in actual conversation instead of being an annoying troll.
This I have to say is by far my favourite thing that has ever been posted to the Edge. Thank you.
For anyone that has Ethan on ignore, please unblock to at least read this post. You won't regret it.
...but I'd love to see that video!
I have no idea how to unblock people. I've looked all over and can't find a link or list of blocked people anywhere.
It took me a while to find it too. Click 'Me' in the menu. Then click 'View all users'. Then find the person you blocked, go to their profile page and unblock them
That could probably be improved, the list of who you're ignoring should be all in one place - like on your profile or settings page
But meta is over ---> there
Indeed it can, from the home page or your profile:
Settings > Other settings pages >
Manage blocked users Manage blocked users and threads
Thanks. Ethan is unblocked. 7b_wizard was unblocked for a single reading of this forum, and I've had no problems with blocking him again almost immediately. Sorry if that offends anyone, but I just can't cope with it all.
"and then make a rap song dissing Luke..."
You got me laughing out loud! Thanks for making my day :), I hope I can get a copy of that through the dark sides of the net some day...!
Welcome back, don't worry about all the fuss. I cringe when I read back what 14 year old Daniel posted on the web, even still what 18 or 22 year old Daniel posted!
I am forever glad to belong to the generation of people who were unable to post stupid shit on the web when we were teenagers because we didn't know it existed.
Welcome back Ethan, I hope you're able to get to a convention sometime.
Welcome back Ethan. I'm very glad you have decided to come back and I am glad you are a big enough man to admit your mistake. The fact than Luke is not big enough to admit his mistakes is his problem not yours. I suggest you take a leaf out of his book an choose to ingnore him. I also feel you should stand up for what you believe just remember that personal attacks do not further your argument and even if you are attacked in a personal way yourself it is far better to rise above it and let them be judged on what they have said rather than sink to their level.
Also don't be afraid to post off topic in future as it keeps me much more entertained than dry discussions of pure juggling content.
I'd also like to take this chance to thank Orin for giving you a chance to redeme yourself, perhaps in the future this will be afforded to all users regardless of their age,longevity on the site or their ability to form a coherant sentence.
Well said Ethan. Thanks for the apology re flooding, fully accepted by me (noting as Monte said that I can't speak for anyone else!)
I'm considerably older than you, but I still find it hard not to antagonise people online at times (usually over politics not juggling). I usually start out with the best of intentions and then, like you, sometimes overreact to something someone says. In fact your very good post above reminds me I should go and apologise to a friend over an over-critical reaction to something they said only yesterday.
I hope you and Luke patch things up too, and I'm sure you won't regret it if you do.
Actually I said you can't speak for everyone. It is possible to speak for someone if you know them well enough' I was just pointing out that you couldn't know how the whole community thinks.
"love to juggle" - wonderful!
" [..] sounds like a jerk." - .. [ choir : ] sounds like jerk praise the lord.
" [..] NEVER post a record again." - ?? oh. Hope your coach will casually find a chinese saying implying that records, winning at combat or in any competition or challenge are not bad 'in themselves' !
@ all doubters & blockers & skip-ers [else 't is "skippers" hm] :
I can appreciate someone who stands up for what they believe in, and what they believe to be right.
.. now who's the grown-up character? And who was "annoying"?
@ Ethan: I don't think, your 'whole person or personality' was at stake .. just that one bunch of flood-posts.
Welcome back. That was a great post and very well considered. However, I hope that you eventually come to a compromise and post some of your records. I suggest that you think of it simply as a way of tracking the progress of the tricks that you're most interested in.
I suggest, he think of it as "beating the world's best" .. with "love" then .. °mhehe°
No, serious .. competition is part of the fun and the love of juggling. And I remember one trick that Ethan gave up on, granting his opp that one record .. so [oupps, sry! Fullstop.] . So, respecting your opp's achievements allows for a lot of hard but fair competition. Also, there is not "the one best" in juggling, but several of them with own specialities or in their distinct discipline.
That's a shame that you're not part of a juggling community in real life.
What country do you live in? Hopefully there are some clubs or conventions that you could get to. It's definitely worth it. Most of my social life revolves around jugglers I met at clubs and conventions, even if they don't juggle any longer!
Welcome back Ethan.
Please consider posting records for the fun of it, not to beat people.
Thanks Ethan, for posting this. I didn't mean to be rude when comparing your posts to 7b_wizards. It's just combined with his, your collected posts were becoming too hard to process. Sorry for any offense.
Also, since then, I've not had any bad feelings towards you, or any beef at all. Nothing personal at all. Your sudden flood against me was just a bit much, and once I discovered the ignore feature, it seemed way easier to remove the problem via software, not using a mental filter. That might not have been the best course of action, as I might have missed any improvement from you or any discussion that might have helped diffuse the situation more diplomatically.
So welcome back!
Hurray, problems resolved, apologies all round and no hard feelings.
Maybe I should apply for that post at the U.N. after all. I could have that little Sunni- Shia problem sorted out in under a week.
So cats versus dogs anyone? I fancy breaking the record for the longest ever thread on the edge.
ok no takers on cats v dogs then. I'll try something closer to your hearts.
Biscuits v cookies then?
By the way nearly all the recipes for biscuits posted on here are actually cookies. I'm sure you don't need me to explain biscuit means twice cooked in French.
I'm on my phone today rather than a proper computer, and this deserves a longer reply than I can stomach typing on my phone...
That said, welcome back! and thank you for responding positively rather than rage quitting :)
Oh, and please don't give up posting your records,
but perhaps just post your actual records instead of gaming it? Everyone wins then.
I just wanted to comment on the part about you juggling to beat people and beat records. I find it a bit funny how different people can be. I mean, sure, I like it when I can impress someone (usually non-jugglers) with my juggling, but being the best or beating records has never mattered to me. Well... To be honest, I wouldn't really have a chance if I wanted that either, since I started juggling at age 30. I want to become better than I am mostly to be as good as the other jugglers in my club, to be able to do more advanced passing patterns. Actually, one of my favourite things about juggling is that it is so non-competitive. Most jugglers I know don't see juggling competitions as something important. Most jugglers I meet are happy to share tricks and give advice about how I can improve my technique.
I use the "records" on the Edge only to track my own progress, and so far only for my 4 clubs juggling, because that is what I am working on the most. I don't see any reason not to post any records at all, I probably would too if I found one that I knew I can beat, but I practice what I want to learn and juggle the patterns that are fun to me, I don't care if a thousand people can already do those things way better than me. Well, I guess I'm just not a very competitive person.
Oh, and I do hope that you can find your way to the IRL juggling community too, because it's an awesome community! I have felt very welcome since I was a beginner (really... at my first juggling convention I found it difficult to throw a "double" from a 3-club cascade...). Besides, passing is the best kind of juggling, and that is difficult to learn without other jugglers. ;)
Welcome back Ethan and congrats on your very thoughtful, honest and brave post.
I also want to add my vote of confidence for Orin - I think Ethan's return post is clear evidence that you made the right call in this situation.
(I know I'm a few days behind - I've been a bit scared of this thread)
7b is 21 times harder than 5b (data from jugglingedge.com/Records)
According to data from the Records section of this site, 7b cascade is 21 times harder than 5b cascade (see full data and calculations in the spreadsheet below).
My calculations are simple. I merged the data from 5b cascade Records with 7b cascade Records.
To find the relative difficulty for each juggler, I took 5b Personal Record, devided by 7b PR.
For example, Orinoco has a 5b PR of 1412, and a 7b PR of 72. His relative difficulty is 19.6:
7b PR / 5b PR = Relative Difficulty = 1412 / 72 = 19.6
The average relative difficulty for all jugglers is 21.
I hope this provides solace for those learning the 7b cascade. On average a juggler with a 5b cascade PR of 210 only has a 7b cascade PR of 10 catches.
Jugglingedge.com records can be downloaded in one .csv file (at the bottom of the Records page). My hope is to use this data to find my strengths and weaknesses, and to more efficiently allocate my practice time.
Link to spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10DM2Xw_MWW2gJQF1j5Wp-mzeiRSaKqvW60ySwzdND84/edit?usp=sharing
5b data: https://www.jugglingedge.com/records.php?PropNumber=5&PropType=b&Trick=cas&
7b data: https://www.jugglingedge.com/records.php?PropNumber=7&PropType=b&Trick=cas&
um........why do I have the lowest "relative difficulty"???? Is that bad news doc? How long do I have to live???!!! ;)
it means that you can (more) easily improve 5b endurance (rather than improve with 7b not equally improving with 5b) .. easier said: with your level of 7b cascade, you would - in average O,o - expect to endure way longer with 5b.
Over the years, I found a whole bunch of differences between learning the 5b and the 7b cascade (where you might think, there wasn't any, but "higher & faster & more narrow") ..
- posture: you don't have to necessarily look up and put your head into your neck soo much with 5b,
- posture: you can keep 5b up juggling (too far) ahead in front of you (more or less easily) for a whole while
(30-50-100 throws?) which - with 7b - exhausts after two or three periods - when first getting to that level -
and makes your arms burn after a while (so with 7b, you'll have to soon or late come near the body).
- pattern: the top of the pattern is way more compact with 7b .. there's two to three balls at the top to cope
with (find a `tunnel´) and you can partly throw (\aim) at(!) the last ball (that will be out of the way when
your throw gets there) .. also you can throw 5b in a way less acute angle, if you don't juggle so high,
- the balls, with 7b, - coming from pretty much higher - land considerably faster, thus, you'll have to either
react earlier (the ball being then higher) or faster,
- having to throw higher with faster handmovement requires another throwing technique (or more force or
rowing more and faster with arms),
- five to six balls in the air doing 7b is really more than the brain-eye-coordination can take when still lear-
-ning (with three to four balls in the air doing 5b, you have one about to land and two high up out of the
way and out of `panic-threshold´, one about to reach its highest point - when learning 7b, there's
always two to four balls in a `blind´ zone, where you can only rely on having thrown them well in height
- ( .. ? )
.. more differences arise when considering fast correction throws to be made or saving a pattern out of beat or out of shape (explosiveness, fast & efforty-ish skills).
(( = all in all 21 x harder ;o]) .. ))
I updated the spreadsheet (linked in the thread starter) to compare the difficulty of 645 and (6x,4)*. I calculated that 645 is twice as hard as (6x,4)*. Those results look a lot better. This method works better for patterns that are of a closer in difficulty level.
After some consideration, 5b cascade and 7b cascade are such different levels of difficulty that no real comparison can be drawn. Aside from the points that you raised, general physicality may be a problem for a lot of jugglers. Going over 100 catches with 7 balls requires quite a bit of physical stamina. I think that a (physically) average joe can juggle 5 balls for quite some time, but it takes athleticism (from training) to keep 7 balls in the air for longer than 20 seconds.
There is absolutely no way 645 is twice as hard as (6x,4). 645 is if anything slightly easier and if you look at little more closely at your data, you will see better jugglers tend to have longer runs of 645 than (6x,4). You also have data such as lucasgabd, where it looks like he just hasn't really spend time on 645, skewing the data.
I thought that would copy & paste the statistic in for lucasgabd... His runs are 116 (6x,4) and 18 (645)
One could strike most outstanding data falling out of the average and would surely need lots of data to get such meaningful average.
Mybe (6x,4)° is slower, therefore easier? .. and you have the 6 liable to collide with the 5.
I'm surprised you feel that 645 is easier...my longest run with it was probably 18-30 catches, while I can run (6x,4)* for a while (>1 minute). I've practised (6x,4)* for around 2-3 times as long as 645.
I'm also surprised that (as you point out) the very good jugglers in the spreadsheet tend to find them about even in difficulty!
It is a fundamental flaw of this kind of analysis: people need to take the patterns about equally seriously. I don't think that's the case with 645 and (6x,4)*.
This analysis works best if the patterns are very popular, taken seriously, and can be run for 100+ throws.
If only the data from 'good' jugglers (100+ catches of each pattern) is considered, 645 is only 1.14 times harder than (6x,4)*.
Relative difficulty changes for pattern duration. For example, it's probably several times easier to qualify (6x,4)* than 645, but only slightly easier to run (6x,4)* for 100+ throws.
It's also a difference, if someone is still learning or, or if they `got it´ and doing it as matter of endurance .. even though already enduring for many catches (e.g. with effort or ardouus savings), wholly mastering a pattern easily fluently isn't yet granted. The compared patterns - once mastered - might give different difficulties, than when still learning them ..
If "taken seriously" could be taken into the statistic by evaluating frequently logged data e.g. by a factor or by striking all single logs ..
I find running (6x,4) muuuch easier than running 645, I've practised both just a little bit but I can't do more than 2 rounds of 645 while I can easily hold 6x4 for at least 10 seconds, maybe half a minute
For the 7 ball versions I find (8x,6)* easier than 867 because the collision problem becomes more of a problem.
.. are \ were easier for you to learn and \ or to endure or perform (both 5b- & 7b-versions) ?
Regarding the statistical approach, I'm afraid, there won't be enough data to be found of jugglers doing 7b-versions (and both of them and equally `seriously´), .. so statements of jugglers doing these is worth way more as a #difficultyRating, than any #statistics could be for time being.
I see both approaches (statistics + polls) complement and or fruitfully compete with one another.
6x4 has less different heights to control
6x4 has crossing 6's, high throws are easier for me when they cross
6x4 is less collision prone
6x4 repeats itself more quickly
It is a statistically valid approach to rate difficulty by catches done. It should, though, then be considered, personal favorings or popularity of patterns distorting the results. And interpretation will not give clear statements. As additional to polls or jugglers' ratings, it could be very interesting to compare.
That's pretty smart of you to think of that. I've been doing that stuff in school(not the juggling part, just the math part) and that never came close to my mind
That info could help a lot. If you recorded how many hours it took to learn the 5 ball cascade, let's say 1000 catches, the average person would have to calculate how many hours multiplied by 21 to find roughly how many hours it would take to learn 7 to 1000 catches. I will experiment this if I ever juggle 7 balls
This is amazing! I tried yesterday to see what my records are, I tried 5b and 7b both for about 5 minutes, I got a run of 603 with 5 and 30 with 7! That is very very close to your statistic, this seems super realistic!
Cool :D, now I'll know how to explain how hard 7b is in the future :).. And I know how far away I am from 100 catches.. :(
Please log your progress every couple weeks in the Records section of this site. This will improve the quality of the data.
My hope is to use the data to find efficient practice strategies. I want to find links between things like practicing 744 and 7 ball cascade progress.
There's some more data around on the web .. e.g. on archived IJDb https://web.archive.org/web/20120418145054/https://www.jugglingdb.com/records/index.php.
And I found a chinese records site https://juggling-donuts.org/record/local/patio_jug/index.html. The sections for 5b cascade [in the first paragraph] is 5ボールカスケード , for 7b cascade it's 7ボールカスケード and 5b-744: https://juggling-donuts.org/record/local/patio_jug/index.cgi?mode=seeenmokudata&enmokuid=2-0-744 .. but it's lotsa work to decode the chinese signs per e.g. babelfish https://www.babelfish.de/dict?query=%E3%83%AB%E3%82%AB%E3%82%B9%E3%82%B1%E3%83%BC%E3%83%89&src=auto&dst=de&submit=%C3%BCbersetzen or some online-translator
I'm quoting 7b_wizard, because he made a mistake.
...& his posts have been much more readable recently!
'kay. However. I'll make sure then to include some general information for everyone in every my replies ;o])
I apologize for your paranoia. Ignoring users posts was a gaffe. I'll consider others ideas more carefully in the future.
Thanks Stephen but it's not just you.. with all this blocking going on I wonder if anyone has blocked me. I think it might be helpful if a blocked person was notified that they had been blocked. Not just to avoid confusions but also for their own personal benefit.
Just as I expected LP! I knew you'd try to cover up all your sneaky blocking with a joke. So then, how many of us have you blocked? Who has access to the special LP clique?
Typical blockers response LP. And I wouldn't believe Orinocco for one one second either.. he's another classic blocker, an obvious member of the clique with all the blocking power at his fingertips no less.
Don't worry, you are currently being blocked by all of zero people. In the grand scheme of things I think there is very little blocking going on. I'm reluctant to add notifications of being blocked because then it runs the risk of becoming a tool to spite someone.
lol .. I've become a real polarizing stumbling stone here by using some punctuation and long nested sentences haha
Thank you for your post. The data on the IJDb looks good. It will be easy to scrape the data and save it in a CSV file. I'll just copy the format that is used on Juggling Edge.
I like the idea of statistics telling me that there's a trick or siteswap that I didn't think of, that I could easily learn or do many catches of.
Ugh, today I tried 5b again, when I was warm but still full of energy, and got 900 catches on the first and only try.. I hope I can match my 7b record (43 catches) soon!
At least you give me a motivation to update my records, and try some long runs :)
It's not only about "long", but by doing long runs, you will partly have to fight for the pattern to stay up, which will train your recovering abilities a lot. And after saving the pattern from flaws with effort or under high tension, you will want to recover and find back into a ground-state that is as relaxing as possible to further endure it, .. so long runs will smoothen your ground-states and merge into swifter and poised technique in general. - At least, that's the experience, I'm going through at present.
Ugh, and today the third time I try 5b I get 1468 catches. My 7b record remains the same (30), but my believe that the 5b cascade and 7b cascade are very correlated is gone...
yeh sry .. typo (meant: > which is html-code for "greater than") >=1000 c.
I set my 5b cascade goal to 1000 catches or more recently, but it turned out to be hard after fighting myself up to almost 900 throws.
So your smileys look like typos, and your typos look like they are supposed to mean something? wow!
I'll set the record to 2000, soon.... I don't suffer from much physical fatigue, and so far the mental fatigue has improved so quickly that I can improve the record by 1.5 every time I tried!
Hey, I've been learning some new skills besides juggling, and I though it would be cool to see if I could do a handstand. Can anybody who is able to or has been able to do handstands tell me how they learned?
Initially I just started sticking my hands on the floor & kicking my legs in the air to see what happened. Didn't get much past 10 seconds. Then in 2006 at the BJC I attended a workshop by Brett Swamp which inspired me to try a bit harder.
I can do quite an okay handstand. It is a long process do learn a good handstand, and not one which I consider a lot of fun.
Gymnastic training as a kid, acrobatics in youth circus and conventions, partner acrobatics courses and regular partner acro meetups, 2 years of circus school with 2 weekly handstand classes... These have all contributed to my semi-decent handstand.
On a good run I can hold it for 30 seconds, with bad luck or when a bit tired, I can't even get up.
Surround yourself with other acrobats, practise with your stomach to the wall, find out what is good posture, find a trainer :)
That is all my advice. Or, if you just want to learn a handstand because it looks cool, and don't care about aesthetics or protecting your spine, train your upper body strength and 'just go for it' until it looks like the arched handstand on this webpage (second image) https://antranik.org/comprehensive-handstand-tutorial/
It is what all old school acrobats used to do, and worked fine for them :)
43 people (almost) throwing a coin into a jar ~5m away in sequence over 2 seconds.
I'm inclined to believe this is real. I think the computer simulations, lines on the ground & the electrodes are just theatrics. I think the throw on it's own wouldn't be that hard to train yourself to do over a couple of weeks, then you'd just need to bring everyone together for perhaps a day's filming.
I can't believe it's real. I think the throw would be extremely difficult for anyone with any amount of training. But lets say it's 1 in 2 for each person, that's 1 in 8.8 trillion for all of them to do it in sequence. Also, the sound is wrong. Some coins hit the water directly but still sound like they hit the glass.
I've still not seen that particular video - do you have a link to it? (Wasn't sure which of the non-working links I saw in other discussions to try to persevere with...)
I only saw it yesterday after signing out of Facebook. It appears that Willy blocked me while I'm signed in but I can't remember what I did for him to do that.
He blocked me also. It was because I asked for the unedited iPhone video of his claimed 8 club record. And maybe also calling him a liar.
I wasn't involved in the 8 club stuff because I couldn't see the video. I think he must have blocked me a while ago during the juggling with a balance controversy. I think I said something along the lines of the fact that his videos don't provide enough for validation.
Thanks Peter, your quick calculation helps put this in the right perspective... :)
yeh .. was tempted to believe it's real, but 5 meters and such a small cup are really really hard for almost all white-frocks to get it on command.
yay, let's calculate some more probabilities!
chance that everybody misses? 1 in 8.8 trillion!
chance that all but one miss? 43 in 8.8 trillion!
chance that exactly 22 people hit? 12%!
chance that exactly or less than 22 people hit? 61%!
chance that something happens? 100%!!
If they did this five times in a row, what are the odds only one person exactly gets 3/5 success rate?
A nice video but I'm deeply skeptical. So much fakery on the interweb these days and I notice the comments have been disabled on the youtube video. Did they all need to be scientists? As if they've been cloned and then trained from birth just to make the video!
The lab coats are also just part of the theatrics. You believe they are all scientists but you don't believe they could throw a coin in a jar?
It's only 43 throws, we've all just watched Ofek do ~4500 odd consecutive throws of a 7 ball cascade. NBA & other professional sports stars make considerably harder shots every game while being hounded by opponents. There were some considerably harder trickshots in the videos posted back in this thread.
I'm not completely convinced but the main thing that makes me lean towards thinking it is real is that it was performed by the Japanese.
Hard shots made by professional sports stars are still probably around 1 in 2. The shots in that thread are probably like 1 in 50. You're only seeing 1 shot and not the fails. In this video you're seeing 43 hits in a row. Throws in 7 balls cascade are much easier and you can move your hand to catch, whereas the beakers are fixed. Also remember that a coin is small, light and an awkward shape for throwing accurately. We have a local pub game called toad in the hole which involves throwing a metal disk (much thicker than a coin) in a hole. You throw from around 2m away and it's still pretty difficult.
Hard shots made by professional sports stars are still probably around 1 in 2
You think so? I once studied fencing under a commonwealth gold medalist. It took me a year to score a single point against him. I think you underestimate professional athletes, & indeed your own ability.
I get that it is a very difficult feat, but the difficulty level is not incomparable to a lot of stuff I've already seen.
Certainty in the NBA case, the best shooter at this kind of distance got 63%: https://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/3-points
Some time ago, I recall seeing a video of two NBA players with >50% 3 point shooting in the regular season shooting 100 three point shots with no opposition pressure just in a gym. They got around 80/100 shots in.
Having played a great deal of basketball and made a surprising number of attempts* at throwing coins into (a slightly larger) target from around 1.5 metres, I would definitely consider the coin throw to be substantially harder.
*Thousands of attempts at least. Circus lol.
Regardless of training, that's a very hard throw. Even if these Japanese supermen could hit the top of the beaker 9 out of 10 it's still a 1 in 100 chance of them all hitting the target.
Assume 10 minutes per shot (having done TV work I'd say that's a very optimistic estimate!) and you're looking at nearly 17 hours to get it. And then you'd probably have to redo it because the tracking shot wasn't quite in sync with the throws!
To misquote James Randi - if they're doing this for real, then they're doing it the hard way.
This is exactly my thought. The hard way would be to do it for real.
The video is a commercial video. If they wanted to do it for real, there would be a possibility that they could film for 17 hours, and still not get it. This is fine for jugglers trying to get a cool trick, because if they don't get it, nobody loses a load of money on a failed commercial product.
At the start you see the modeling of the throws on a screen. There are lines on the floor for ease of tracking motion and inserting fake coins. The camera movement is uses programmed computer motion control, a technology that was developed for special effects shots. Everything points to this being a video editing trick, not a human skill trick.
A shot of all the coins hitting the glasses would be easy to set up. I'm imagining all the coins in a rack with a slide off to one side. All the coins slide down the slide in turn, released in order at the same speed as the camera move. The coins slide off at the right angle to look like they are landing in the glass as though thrown from the right distance.
That might not be how it is done, but it's the "most real" way that doesn't involve actual throws.
Do you still have any fencing equipment Orin? I used to fence and have often thought it would be a great addition to all the other non-juggling activities at Bungay.
Afraid not, the club I went to was exceptionally well kitted out. What style did you do (I practiced Épée)?
I did all three. Sabre, Epee and French foil but mostly foil. Have been waiting for a couple of sets to turn up at a car boot or charity shop. My favorite move in epee was to stab my opponent's foot as he/she came forward.
Heh, I got caught out by that one plenty of times! I liked to stab my opponent's wrist/forearm when they thrust.
same, my coach taught me skills in all three........But Epee was always my favourite, it was the one I placed highest in..............and yes, stabbing the person's foot is a fun move!!!!
The main reason I preferred foil was that the smaller target(torso only)meant more finesse was required. The movement of the foil is mostly from the fingers not the wrist which makes for much faster direction changes of the tip. Also sabre or epee could really hurt when you got hit. Sabre looks the most fun as the slashing and stabbing is more swashbuckling but fewer people seem to practice it. Epee is a more realistic dueling weapon as any part of the body can score a hit but I found it slower than foil as it's a heavier weapon moved more from the wrist.
I think I might try searching Ebay for some kit. I bet Orin and I are not the only two Buttercuppers who have fenced. Also the opportunity to stab Ewan would be fantastic. (after we have flattened his tent with the mark 7 trebuchet)
I did some foil in secondary school. We were the first (perhaps only) year to do so. Previously, they had always run a year with some form of martial arts / self defence as the primary PE activity. For my year they decided that doing martial arts in PE was probably a bad idea; if we were going to be learning how to fight, we should need weird weapons as it would prevent us from trying it out in other classes...
I think the hard shot totally depends on the situation. I play basketball and I can make a hard shot 15-20% of the time, keep in note that is a hard shot for me and not NBA players. Although I do have multiple genetic issues with my muscle memory to cause me to miss these shots more. I think the 1 in 2 chance rises for a superstar if they are under pressure.
OK, fair enough. Good on you for doing juggling. Do you find that it helps your condition?
Alright, look at this website and read the first sentence: https://www.koblikov.com/index.php/resume
If your to lazy to look at the site then this is what koblikov claims: "Alexander Koblikov is currently considered the best juggler in the world." This is a really bold claim!!! I mean, could I say that on my website???? "Ethan Brain is currently considered the best juggler in the world!"?????
It surprised me because I didn't know koblikov was so full of it......."sigh" first it was Gatto, then Garfield, and now Koblikov...........It's weird, it's like all the good jugglers are really egotistical and full of it......hmmmm, I might do a study on it. Give me a week and I'll have a 50 page paper on the subject. No joke.
The source is obviously a non-juggler. Further down on the page:
"Phenomenal technique ... poetic and stylish ... simply the best juggler in the world"
It's helpful to look at this from the perspective of a non-juggler. An uneducated non-juggler may think that there could be a 'best' juggler in the world. While, jugglers know that due to the diversity of juggling, there can never be a 'best' juggler. Most jugglers would agree that Koblikov is the best multiplex-numbers juggler in the world, the probably isn't a majority agreement that he, or anyone else, is the best ball juggler. The skill is too diverse and multifaceted to have a best.
Gatto will always be exceptional in the juggling world because in his prime, he was almost unanimously considered the best juggler by other jugglers. Since then juggling has grown, and now it's only possible to be the best at a given style or aspect of juggling.
On Gattos channel I remember him posting a video about his daily practice routine(I'm too lazy to get the link).
I noticed that he didn't drop much in his practice, he focused on perfecting the basics instead of spending a long time trying to get a new trick. Do you think it's possible that not dripping in your practice, no matter the difficulty, could affect your ego?
I remember Gatto saying on his forum once that he sees things in slow motion compared to other people. I think he literally believes that he has some kind of juggling super power. This attitude is probably what made him so good and the reason why so many top jugglers (and top sports stars in general) have a big ego. They simply wouldn't be able to reach that level of skill without extreme confidence in their potential.
Nice theory, but haven't we all met a lot of humble superstars as well? Maybe they are not at the actual top, but definitely close to the top! Do you consider yourself to have a big ego/extreme confidence in your potential? (I consider you to be a juggling star)
I don't know if Alexander truly believes the statement on his website, but if I were him I'd put exactly the same out there. For marketing to non-jugglers I'd feel very comfortable to repeat the (too)high claims of newspaper.
I do have extreme confidence in my potential because I believe that everything comes down to training and not genetics. By this logic everyone else has the same potential and so I don't consider myself to have any greater potential than anyone else. Some jugglers think this way, while others (maybe Gatto) believe that they have some kind of natural or God given advantage over others. Either way helps to promote confidence. Maybe the second way is stronger psychologically but is too illogical for me to believe in.
Thanks for your praise by the way - that will help my ego for training this evening.
That's an admirably egalitarian attitude, but I don't think it's accurate to say that genetics plays no part.
Some people definitely have a genetic advantage over others for a particular skill - eg. shorter people tend to learn tumbling more readily than taller people. That's not to say tall people can't learn it, but it usually takes them more effort/time to achieve the same standard.
Many high-level skill training institutions (eg. The Royal Ballet) screen/select based on body attributes (ie. genetics). Chinese acrobatic troupes assign acts to trainees based on their physical characteristics - if you don't like the act you're assigned to... tough luck!
I would expect that in juggling, a genetic predisposition to agility would be more valuable than strength - it's just a guess however, I don't have any evidence to back it up. In fact, now I'm thinking about it, juggling requires more hours of maintenance than most other circus skills, so some level of obsession has to be an advantage - perhaps that's the true intersection of training and genetics...
You talk about agility, strength and obsession like they're things you're born with. They can all come from previous experience, which includes training. Genetics can have some effect but as you said, training can overcome any disadvantage. There's quite a lot of flexibility in juggling for different techniques (e.g. high and slow vs low and fast) and so I think genetics has even less relevance. Take Alex Barron and myself for example. We have very different genetic body types but are the only people to have flashed 13 balls.
Ballet is a bit different because it's highly aesthetic, which I'm not bothered about much with my juggling. However, I think that even a ballet dancer's physical characteristics could change with training if it were required.
Could Danny de Vito train himself to be tall enough to play basketball? Could a male gymnast seeking to improve his splits train himself to be a woman so that he could enjoy the extra pelvic span and flexibility that bestows? Can an amputee paralympian train their limbs back?
Some aspects of human genetic disposition are plainly and inviolably expressed. I take your points about training but that simply isn't the whole story, genetics matters, sometimes unavoidably so.
Contact sports are a bit different to juggling, but I do think that Danny de Vito could have become a basketball player. Not all of them are tall. Being a different gender isn't really the kind of genetics I was talking about but I do believe that men and women can train to be as good at most things. Being an amputee isn't genetic but I see your point. Of course if you take it to the extremes then genetics has some influence, but not much in my opinion, especially for juggling.
I'm all for believing that a lot of stuff is down to practise and learning, and certainly in juggling you don't need particular advantages as much as other things. Worth noting though that juggling isn't as competitive/high level as quite a lot of sports.
Also - https://www.forbes.com/sites/dandiamond/2013/06/27/nba-draft-is-being-7-feet-tall-the-fastest-way-to-get-rich-in-america/
Also, with regards to basketball, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shortest_players_in_National_Basketball_Association_history lists all players who have been 5ft 9 or less in the NBA. Given that 5ft 10 is apparently the US male average, the number of players who are below average height who have ever played in the NBA is less than two squads. I can't believe this doesn't show a huge genetic advantage, and even more so when you realise that all but one of those played the same position.
One of the things I like about juggling is, in fact, that this sort of factor is far less pronounced.
I suspect height is a big advantage in combat.
I feel like you're missing out on a couple of other explanations here. I am of the opinion that small differences when you're young make a much bigger difference as you grow up. Similar to Malcolm Gladwell's example in Outliers of hockey players being born in earlier months.
Those who are naturally taller are more likely to be able to play decently *without* any training (it's fairly obviously easier to shoot without practise if you're taller). Having a slight advantage, especially at a young age, makes people far more likely to consider it as a hobby or career. As with the hockey example, the small difference at the start is increased as they practise more/join a club/get more special training and are more motivated to continue. I'm not convinced that a shorter person (even significantly shorter) couldn't become equally useful in a team, sure they might need more training focused on accurate shooting but they would likely also have an easier time at other areas (weaving throughout other players, for example).
It's also almost certainly exacerbated by societal influences too, I've on multiple times heard tall friends asked if they play basketball and I suspect shorter people playing basketball would have definitely faced significantly more dissuasion to continue, coupled with the fact that many may feel intimidated being significantly shorter than everyone else on the court (though I don't have even anecdotal evidence for the last two, I'm fairly confident that they would have some influence).
In general my feeling is that in absence of a major physical disability, a few years' training can overcome pretty much every genetic difference (I remember a redit AMA by a circus performer saying something to this effect too, I think he said one year though). I also think height has less of a difference in combat than you think. I'm consistently able to beat those taller than me if I've had more experience. Even if we're about the same level, it's just a matter of you can't do the whole obvious throw-one-club-really-high-and-do-stuff-tactic and have to think/plan a bit more.
I'm not saying that height has no impact, I'm just saying that the vast majority of it is psychological.
Muggsy Bogues who used to play in the NBA was 5'5. Height does not have the advantage in basketball most people think it does. Danny de Vito could have played basketball
Training only goes so far I think. I read in an article a few months back that extreme intelligence and creativity is more about genetics.. according to the head of Mensa.
Well Mensa would say that. Intelligence is down to training as well in my opinion. You're only intelligent in the mental activities that you've trained. If some people appear to be intelligent at many things then it's only because they've learnt that intelligence is only down to training and so have not been put off learning new things (growth mindset vs fixed mindset).
I am all up for the growth mindset. But that does not include ignoring the influence of our genetics.
Why would the head Mensa say that? According to your theory, his believe would probably lead to less intelligence for him and his followers, rather than motivate people to train harder...
If cognitive disabilities are a thing (which I believe they are), why would cognitive abilities not be one?
Anyway, I realise we've had this discussion before at the edge, it seems our believes haven't changed since then ;)
It's in mensa's interest to maintain an air of exclusivity as their entire business model is built on persuading people that they are special and unique
Exactly what LP said regarding Mensa.
I'm willing to accept the possibility that some people may be genetically predisposed for higher intelligence to some small degree, but I would think it would only give them a small head start, which others could make up for by training. Of course it will be psychologically harder for them to catch up because they will probably believe they have a permanent disadvantage, which is why it's not often observed.
My personal experience is that I was pretty much remedial at almost all subjects at school until I was about 14. At that point I began to become interested in programming and building things at home. This lead to me improving greatly in maths and science at school and ultimately to me becoming an engineer. Funnily enough though, it had no effect on the other subjects such as foreign languages, which I never improved at (something I'm only now trying to compensate for).
Ah, I wanted to add:
Like you, I also base my believes on personal experience.
I was pretty much excellent at all subjects at school, until I was about 14. My parents are both intelligent people, though I don't believe they have trained me in any way. They were too busy managing their own lives at the time. School did not teach me either, school has always bored the shit out of me. People who did not perform well got extra attention and help. I received praise, but no extra stimulation.. I never had to learn, practise, do my homework, ended up being allowed to come less hours to school when I was around 10 and spent that extra time talking about video games and attending social training.
My primary school class consisted mostly of children of immigrants, and was located in a disadvantaged neighborhood. Also I was among the younger people in my class. All those 3 things should give me a statistically smaller chance to perform well...
Still my IQ tests scored very high!
So, my believe is that this is mostly genetics, since I can't imagine what advantage I have in stimuli and training over others...
At age 14 I dropped out of school, I believe mostly because the lack of stimuli terribly ruined my curiosity. :(
What do you think about on the other side of the distribution? That some people may be genetically predisposed for lower intelligence? I've met people that, no matter how hard they try (it seems) they struggle to learn certain things. I'd considered it largely a genetic difference.
Then, to me, it seems like intelligence would be about Gaussian. I have no reason to think that way (I know how IQ is defined, but am not completely convinced with it) but it seems that, without information telling me otherwise, it makes sense.
Unless they have some actual mental disability I think that it's mostly down to mindset. If people consider you to have lower intelligence then you'll believe that yourself and not make the effort to learn new things. People will also not challenge you as they would others.
They may think they're trying and spend a lot of time working on something, but will get nowhere without confidence that they will succeed. Many people can also get stuck in an ineffective training strategy and are unwilling to change.
Hmm, I don't think I see mental disability that discretely, more as a spectrum. Well, at least for some disabilities.
I had a particular person in mind with my last post. I don't think she has an inefficient training strategy, and, at least in the classroom, she was challenged about as much as a typical student. If it's not genetics, I imagine it must've been due to earlier childhood experiences.
I remember you saying this before - brains are the same and it just down to mindset, I'm still not sure I agree with that theory. Aren't there different kinds of intelligence? Surely it's not just about learning ability, (although I think genetics also has a part in this), it's also what people do with the things they've learned. The article was about child geniuses, head of Mensa said 40% nurture 60% nature.. or perhaps the other way round. This is what most people would say I think, myself included.
I guess someone with bad genetics could overcome anything with training, although I have some sort of problem called hypotonia and I barely have any muscle memory, which is the key to juggling, which cause me to get 5 balls for 100 catches almost 4 years after I started juggling
I also seem to see things in slow motion compared to other people and I am sure I am not a juggling super power. I suspect most edgers gather visual information at a faster rate than the general population and can see several "frames" of the incoming object in a situation where the non-juggler might not even see one. It comes with practice and it brings with it changes in the brain, an expanded visual cortex. Gatto had more practice than most and at an early age when the brain is more moldable.
It's possible that this could be trained, but how could you possibly know that you're seeing things in slow motion compared to others?
I guess I should restrict my claim to seeing objects moving in the air in my vicinity and some times noticing the experience is reminiscent of watching a slow motion video. I remember a time before I had this kind of experience and I see children that behave as if they are not seeing the details of the flight path that are obvious to me. Of course there is no way to know exactly what other people are experiencing.
The training idea comes from the first before and after MRI study showing changes in the brains of people who were trained (to juggle), compared to sex and age matched controls.
I'm no expert, but how we measure the passing of time may be directly related to the amount of activation in our brain. As someone improves at juggling they will be getting greater activation in their brain as they take note of things that they weren't previously aware of, which may give the impression that time is passing slower.
I've seen things in slow motion once - when I rolled my car. The cliche of everything going into slo-mo was absolutely true. It was a very interesting experience, but not sufficiently interesting to want to repeat ;)
I have had some slow motion experiences when I have been training a lot. It's something that can happen when you're in deep, not a super-human experience, but more of a meditative experience.
Hey, I'm just wondering if anybody has a technique for staying focused while doing a long endurance run. I can't really go past a couple minutes for most patterns, because I lose focus which causes my pattern to get sloppier.
So for anyone who can juggle a pattern for a long time while staying focused, is there a certain strategy that you use, or is it just that I have a short attention span?
If attention is an issue, consider your diet. Eating lots sugar before juggling negatively effects my ability to focus past 40 catches. Proper nutrition is necessary for both the body and mind.
Loss of attention can be caused by anxiety and preoccupation. There is no easy fix to this, but doing some yoga sun salutations in you juggling warm-up may help.
The mind wanders because it longs to be somewhere else. Maybe you are juggling in the wrong spot? Try different juggling locations like a gym, pavilion, park, or foyer. In a good location you can feed off of the positive energy.
It is most likely that your technique is the problem, not your attention span. A lapse in attention usually causes a collision or a low throw, not a pattern that gets gradually sloppier. Check you alignment and symmetry.
I am working toward 1 minute with 7b and 5c, I'm currently at around 40 seconds with both.
I have the opposite problem. If I haven't had a snack for a few hours my mind starts to wonder where my next biscuit is coming from.
In my previous comment, I was referring to added sugar that could be found in candy or soda.
'Simple added sugars are digested and absorbed more quickly, resulting in a rapid rise in blood sugar levels. This gives you a rapid, immediate burst of energy. But, this energy is short lasting. High blood sugar levels trigger a rapid surge of the hormone insulin. Insulin causes a rapid drop in blood sugar.'
This is my preferred nutrition for juggling:
4 hrs before juggling - some complex carbs like bread, rice, or pasta
30 min before juggling - some simple sugars like dried fruit or applesauce
I always eat a protein packed cereal bar before my practises..........Chia seeds are also good......
ok, this has nothing to do with this thread. I'm just too lazy to start a new thread, so, is it just me, or is the commenting on the log section not working?
Do you mean long endurance runs as in 10 minute+ attempts of tricks or patterns that are (supposed to be) easy for you?
If so, try moving around, turning, sitting down for a while, changing the height and pace of the pattern, standing back up etc. until about 5 minutes has passed. Keeping yourself occupied like this is a great way to avoid thinking about how pointless long endurance runs of easy tricks are.
Also try setting a clear goal for yourself before you begin, listen to music while juggling to keep track of time, and constantly remind yourself of the goal. Try to imagine that reaching the goal is important and getting there will make you a better juggler.
Maybe e.g. count loud (starting whenever with whatever number), maybe emphasizing weakhand if is, or e.g. word every or every second throw, or e.g. do a melody loud .. as soon as slightest sloppy comes lulling you .. ? (But I'm also mostly below a minute with anything, I endure)
I'm wondering if the "inner game" approach would be of any use ie. distracting the conscious mind by reciting a poem/singing a song etc.
Anybody ever tried applying "inner game" concepts to juggling?
I do this using the T.V just try and focus my attention away from the balls, and change the pattern when my arms get tired or keep mixing it up depending how I feel. It really helped when I first learned mills mess.
Playing music helps. Or playing a film that you've seen before. You can visualize what's going on in your mind. You want your subconscious to take control by distracting your conscious.
Can you describe this in greater detail? When I juggle, I focus 100% of my attention on a single point (usually the crossing point in a cascade).
The only patterns I count catches with are 7b cascade and 5c cascade. I use a different color prop to count, so I am always looking through the crossing point.
My point being, if you are doing something else (eg counting catches - even if you are counting one ball) then you aren't 100% focussed on the crossing point
You have brain capacity available, which you're using to count catches. Try using that for something else, like listening to the radio or TV and forget the number of catches.
About a month ago I started training 7 balls using a set of blue, light blue, red, orange, yellow, pink, and green balls. I have noticed that it is quite different than using my previous set of one orange and 6 blue.
After two weeks of getting used to the new set, I was able to juggle them as well as the previous set. It still somehow feels different in a way that is difficult to describe.
I still count catches, counting every time I throw the green ball with my right hand.
Do you think that juggling a set of balls that is a variety of colors takes more brain capacity than juggling a set of balls that is all the same color?
Have you ever tried juggling with several different color balls and calling out the color as they are thrown?
You can focus your attention on one thing, but when juggling you need to focus on many things at the same time. Only your subconscious muscle memory (not literally anything to do with the muscles) can achieve that. When learning a trick is can be useful to think about a single aspect of the trick and then move on to another aspect. But when you've already learnt all the aspects of the trick then you're ready for endurance and already have all the subconscious muscle memory to do the trick without thinking. Trying to think about it again will normally be much less effective than just letting your muscle memory get on with it based on all the training you've done. It's something that all successful sport players have learnt at some point. For example, when confronted with a high stress situation such as playing in a final, or getting close to breaking a juggling record, people will often start to over think, which gets in the way of all their muscle memory training. This is called choking. In order to avoid it you need to distract your conscious mind and also convince yourself that the situation is relaxing rather than stressful and be very confident (doublethink).
Blocking a user now hides log & record content. Go to a user's profile & click, "Block this user"
That is all.
I'm curious: was there a request for this feature? Something you thought would be useful now, or in the future?
There have been 3 requests for this feature, & I feel that given my general belief that people should moderate themselves I think it's important that I give people the tools to do so. The log & records sections have both grown in popularity, & are not far off being used as much as the forum so I thought it was time I extended the block function to cover them.
Oops, I misread: I thought this was the introduction of a blocking feature, not an extension. If I had a nickel for every feature I was unaware of...
(To be clear, I am aware that these features are documented, and my ignorance is due to me not reading them, not any fault of our God Emperor)
Interesting, made me check a bit of the edge I don't check very often... interesting change to the No.2 spot
Maybe this one?
Would only allowing records to be listed if there is video evidence be a good idea? Isn't that (kind of) what Guinness do - provide some kind of proof? The stuff that doesn't have video evidence could be listed separately in a 'Personal Best' chart. The records section seems (rightly) competitive!
No. I don't like that idea. The feature is for unofficial records like the original bogleg. Bogleg did have a voting system though. If you didn't believe someone's record you could vote it down.
Genuinely interested to know why you don't think it's a good idea? Is it because many jugglers might not have a camera there when they break records? Surely if someone is trying to break records it would be wise to film it. Or is it something else? Personally I find it difficult juggling in front of a camera - is that it? If it's unofficial then it's not really setting a record, it's just a claim.
I think we interpret the records section differently. For me they are personal records. I put them there to chart my progress for various tricks and to motivate myself. I'm not concerned about whether people believe them or not and I'm not really bothered when I see records of other people that I don't believe. They're only cheating themselves. For official numbers records we have JISCON. There's also already a way to link to videos from a record here if you feel the need to prove yourself.
Agree, most of my 'records' are personal bests, mostly unimpressive, and done to chart progress/motivate myself. I couldn't be bothered with videoing myself, and with maybe a couple of exceptions, the videos would be of basically no interest to anyone.
I think what you are suggesting is a good idea. Only allowing records with video evidence would make things more official and seem more legit..........However what Peterbone is saying sounds good as well....
perhaps it is time for a change;) what do you say Orin? Maybe it would help.......
As someone who uses the site primarily for tracking records, I wouldn't like for there to be a divide between the videoed and non-videoed records. For me this is a fun site where you can track your progress against yourself and others without any delusions that you're setting official world records or anything. I suspect I'd stop posting records if I had to post videos alongside them to validate them here.
That said, it is a quite a frustration/irritation for me when some of the records posted are so wildly out of line with all the available supporting evidence that they're almost impossible to believe. No prizes for guessing which records I'm referring to...
I know I could now block those records from view but that would probably annoy me more as I'd know they were still there.
Ultimately the simple solution to the problem is one that only you can provide Ethan - either post the video evidence you have of your most impressive records or remove all the records you've made up....
So what your saying is only "I" have to post videos of my god damn records and nobody else has to?? Is that what your saying??? Personally I think that's BS......
If you don't think I'm legit, then bring it up with Orin.........Bring it up to my freaking face and stop beating around the bush...........Just say it, "Ethan, your a fake"...........Which I am not, but just say it like it is!!
All you grumpy old jugglers who sit around and hate on me are what brings this site down. I view this site as a SUPPORTIVE juggling community. Not a eat you alive and spit you out community!!
Let me tell you. I work hard. All day I basically do nothing but juggle. I WORK! I have wasted friendships, I have wasted opportunities, all because I work hard to be THE best......And now you're telling me that I am a fake????
good day to you sir.
Yep, some true comedy gold in here!
I completely agree with PipJim's take on the records section. Requiring video evidence is too much to ask & will kill people's involvement pretty quick. Watching countless hours of mind numbing endurance runs to verify a record is certainly not my idea of fun. I certainly have no interest or intention to put myself through that kind of torture, & I wouldn't expect anyone else to either. There is a reason why JISCON limit their tracking to base patterns.
Ethan, I don't think that it is your records that are causing friction, but the way you treat other people. You regularly offer video evidence on request. There have been multiple requests that I know you've seen because you keep searching the forum for your name. Have you provided any of these videos? Your method of posting records that are only high enough to get the top spot but not necessarily your true record is thoroughly unsporting. You talk about the community being supportive, but you seem to treat everyone as an opponent to be ground into dust. Then recently there was the way you treated those girls who stopped to watch you. In response I think people are attacking your records because that is what you appear to hold most dear. I believe you are an amazing juggler but if you can't connect with people every minute of all that hard work you've put in will be wasted.
So I think everyone should have a nice cup of tea & a sit down.
Mïark's 100 catches of 3 teapots. That's got to be made up, right?
I will try my hardest to be a better person...........It just annoys me that people seem to be hating on me constantly, they seem to always think I lie .........Any way.........
A cup of tea would be nice..........And yeah.......Who even has 3 teapots??? Oh yeah, I forgot, the British;) strange people the Brits;)
Who even has 3 teapots???
Our juggling club has 15 teapots in all different shapes and sizes (and materials) so you can choose the most appropriate one for the pot of tea you are making.
And yes, my record was achieved using different sized teapots.
Is it weird that when I drink tea I heat it up to 120 F then put 3 things of sugar in it? That's only with English breakfast tea though.........ahhhhh......English breakfast tea........I'm half English, so every other year or so, I go to England. And the last time I was in London, I discovered the beauty of English breakfast tea. mmmmmmmm.....The taste.........I can almost smell it..........The hotel I was staying at had like 30 tea bags on the dresser.......I had probably at least 4 cups a day.........ahhhhh........those were good days........
120 F ‽‽ I wouldn't make coffee in water that cold!
You need about 200 F for making tea (slightly lower temperature for delicate teas).
Next time you are in England, come to a juggling convention and we can enjoy a cup of tea that isn't stone cold.
there's been some friendly requests on your claims on rather outstanding skills .. in only very few among these requests, I read unbelief was prior, which maybe was or maybe could be read as offensive regarding also how much work lies in achieving such outstanding tricks .. .. . . .. .
.. .. " A tree that falls, makes more riot, than a wood that grows."
(or: One plane that crashes will make it to the news around the globe, while hundreds of thousands of succeeded landings won't)
.. will say: one single ``attack´´ not explicitly disagreed to by the rest of the community doesn't mean, "everyone" is against you! I think - or I hope and believe - most are with you in essence, cherishing a great young juggler among them here, like I do.
° "read as being offensive regarding how much work .. [a.s.o.]" .. then being confronted with disbelief °
"Mïark's 100 catches of 3 teapots. That's got to be made up, right?"
I was wondering about that a couple of days ago. Are the teapots spun and then caught with the handle or thrown like a ball with the base of the teapot?
Hey! My teapot juggling record is genuine! I even had witnesses (almost - well the other members of the juggling club did wonder why I was making quite so much noise in the kitchen when I was supposed to be making tea).
The tea pots were spun and most of the catches were by the handle, I used stainless steel teapots which had hinged lids that kept noisily flapping open and shut.
Even if someone does manage to get 101 catches I have held this record for over 2 years - so there!!
Serious question: What has stopped you from posting videos? This isn't the first time people have given you a hard time about your posted records, and some of them even say "Video upon request". There are some I'd really like to see (in particular, I think the 5b cascade under the legs would look amazing).
He has a video on his youtube channel. I suspect that is one of the main factors in peoples doubts of his records.
I don't know anything about you, Ethan, nor about the records section, or the specific records in question. But as a member of the (mostly defunct) JISCON, I can suggest that we had a loophole for someone who couldn't provide evidence of their claim. If you could even post a video that is close-ish, that would show that you likely have the capability in question, then that might help your image here.
Yeah, .. You can't entirely record your practise, then pick out the records when they happen .. and confirming a record with then camera running is another thing.
Well when you posted that 9 ball reverse cascade record that you claimed to have a video of, the 9 ball reverse cascade WORLD record says you claimed to have 25 catches. Why didn't you show them the video?
I'm guessing that he's planning a montage video of all his hard tricks. He's deliberately encouraging doubters now so that he can feel even better when he releases the video.
"For me this is a fun site where you can track your progress against yourself and others without any delusions that you're setting official world records or anything".
I can see what you mean there. I suppose it's just the word 'Records' that makes me think it should be an official thing. 'Progress' then seems a more suitable word.
Agree with PipJim.
I would never want to be forced to upload video evidence, as my records will primarily be for my personal tracking. However, I do like having an _honest_ comparison of other people and hate the fact that the records are so easily exploitable.
I think the voting thing Peter mentioned could be a nice feature. It would at least be interesting.
Or, there could be non-official claim tracking (basically the current without the leaderboards) as well as public official records -- a top-10 true records leader board (for the different tricks) that require video evidence.
The current solution of blocking a user may be useful, but it is irrelevant to the false claims problem, which I do think needs to be addressed.
Why would anybody even want to make false record claims? If you were a spammer then why would you randomly target a juggling site? It seems strange. If I were a fake, then I must be the best fake and lier in the world.....I must be an insane master of psychology and human mind manipulation.............It is completely stupid to think that people would go threw the longish sign up process just to mess with a juggling site.........And then they would have to make a fake personal website and a fake youtube channel and call themselves "Ethan"..............That would be REALLY difficult......And kind of insane.........
But I do think that anybody who BEATS a record should have to post a video.
I doubt anyone would specifically seek to troll a juggling site, but its entirely plausible that people would not be fully honest especially if they wanted to top out the record boards. People have done crazier things to top a leaderboard. That's why I agree with you that their should be a true records (not claims) boards with X (X=5? 10?) number of spots that require video evidence to hold.
FWIW, I never claimed you were a fake (and I certainly do believe you are Ethan). I do, however, find it hard to believe that all your records are genuine. It would be easy to silence the doubters; all you would have to do is post the video of some of your records that have "video[s] if wanted". It does seem they are wanted by several people and I would certainly enjoy watching the impressive feats myself.
Grammar is sometime vital: There's a world of difference between
"and I certainly do believe you are, Ethan" and
"and I certainly do believe you are 'Ethan' ".
I'm pretty sure you mean the latter, sheneron.
I have no interest or POV on the records/verrification issue.
Stay nice, everyone. :-)
Firstly I am sorry for being a grumpy old juggler and massive cynic.
Secondly I don't think anyone doubts you are a juggler. You clearly are and a half decent one at that.
The reason for my doubt is that your progress is the most exceptional I've ever seen in my 10 years of juggling. To go from some 20 odd catches of 7 to 60 catches of 8 in the space of a week is borderline unbelievable given everything I've seen previously.
As I mentioned some time back I would actually love if someone were making that kind of progress and it would put you up there among a list of jugglers capable of going on to push the boundaries of what's been achieved in juggling.
My interest in juggling at the very top level is purely academic. I love to see people coming through and pushing things forward. I just want to physically see it at that level rather then trust in the word of the Internet (who might be motivated say by being able to claim multiple world records on their website in order to generate custom)
If I doubt you incorrectly I can only apologise. My mind is just conditioned to question the improbable, and your records are improbable whether they're entirely genuine or not
I'll furnish you with drink and cake by way of an apology when I make it to America and the ija if it turns out you are simply a very talented young juggler and I'm just a grumpy old sod.
Just excuse an old man the right to ask for (existing) evidence when you claim something extraordinary.
If someone has 20 catches of 7 balls listed, it doesn't mean they haven't done more. I think it's possible that Ethan may only be updating records if he can get the top spot. His primary purpose seems to be a competitive one rather than charting his own progress, and I think that's fine. People can interpret the records feature however they wish. I do have some doubts about Ethan's records as well, but I don't believe he would completely make them up. For example, he has 8 catches of cc88441, which I assume he did by doing one cycle, doing another high throw and then collecting. I wouldn't count that as 8 catches, but there aren't any rules to say that you shouldn't. Likewise there aren't any rules to say that you shouldn't juggle playing cards by screwing them up into balls (not that he would do that either - I'm just making a point).
Yes fair point re. the records listed not necessarily reflecting what you're capable of or your genuine best. However, some of Ethan's records are wildly out of kilter with all the other evidence currently made available - eg. his Youtube channel videos, his failure post videos he claims to have despite repeated requests and volunteering to post them, his other records listed here, the speed with which he's able to beat every record that's improved upon by another user, the celebrations of a 3 ball "world record" but no acknowledgement of a 9 ball one despite it being pointed out to him twice and claiming to have it on video, his claim that as well as juggling full time he's also a runner of exceptional pedigree and, more generally, just my existing experience of seeing what other jugglers can do.
I'm not saying these things are impossible, but they do seem unlikely. Much as I don't like to doubt people, I've seen enough made up stuff on the internet to make me doubt most things that seem improbable until I see evidence to the contary. I don't like to be such a cynic, but I just can't help it.
"I'll take all of that as a complement......."
You're right Ethan, you should take what I say as a complement. Assuming they're true, I find some of your feats pretty impressive. The prime reason for my doubts are the exceptional nature of your postings and I think you should be proud of what you've achieved (assuming you've achieved it of course ;) ).
The fact I find it hard to believe you is based on my other experiences, upbringing and the way I think. The fault is mine (and probably society's more generally). It's not because I'm hating on you, nor a reflection on you personally, it's only really an indication of how impressive your posted records are. I wouldn't even think of doubting your records if they were boringly average.
I think it's highly unlikely that he would be making anything up.. unless of course he's an insane master of psychology and human mind manipulation.
Maybe he likes to be disbelieved because it makes his achievements feel all the more difficult. I'm just saying that he could well have done all that he's said he's done. There's also the possibility that he hasn't. I did find it strange that he beat one of my records less than 5 minutes after I beat his and the fact that it was the middle of the night in the US, where I believe he lives. However, he could have beaten it previously and was waiting for me to beat his previous record before putting his new record.
Hell yeah!!! All of you haters just make me better;)
And It was like 5:00 in the morning when I beat your record.........yeah yeah......I wake up too early.....today was probably the latest I have ever woken up since I joined this site! You here that Orin?!? Your site is causing me to be sleep deprived!!! I just sit in bed at night and think about what I would do if Ilia Poliakov beats one of my "Records"...........
I'd been assuming that something like this is going on:
Juggler A - I can do 10 catches of $trick - that's the record
Juggler B - I've got 80 catches of $trick in practice, but I'm not going to put that in as my record, I'll put it in as 15 catches
Juggler C - I've just got 16 catches
Juggler B - I'll put mine in as 20 catches as soon as I've seen the record, knowing that's still well under my personal best - but it's enough to claim the record.
That's the only legit way I can picture someone being able to trounce someone's record super fast.
 I say that as though I'm even a tiny bit interested in the records section ;)
In which case - I'm genuinely interested to know - what's in it for you?
Why not just put your true records out there? You'll still claim the top spot for all of them and you'll take away all the negativity generated by the churn.
Fair enough. It seems a strange and unsporting way to post records, but to each their own.
I'm afraid I can only continue to disbelieve some of your claims though until you provide the evidence you've offered up many times.
I think the problem with providing evidence is that if there is evidence of 80 catches but the record claimed is 25 catches - no video of that 25 catch run exists because it wasn't a 25 catch run, it was an 80 catch run.
So he can't provide the evidence without also revealing his true record - and then what would happen? Someone might beat that and he wouldn't be able to better it.
Why not just cut the clip after 25 catches?
People will see/suspect that it's been going on after that, but they wouldn't be able to guess for how long ...
Then you would have to go through all the trouble to cut the video in a video editor and then download the thing back onto Youtube.......Or onto JTV......I still haven't quite mastered putting stuff onto JTV, it doesn't appear that it shows how long you have until it's done uploading. And then I get impatient and exit off of JTV and start shouting at my computer........fun times;)
Then why would you put "video if wanted" on many of your records? Clearly you don't have most of the videos or are not willing to share them. You should stop posting that comment as it is very misleading.
It's common for world record holders to do just as much necessary to grant the record .. Isinbayeva jumping pole over 5.03 (or whatever was necessary), Gatto asking the kids into the camera doing his 7b endurance record: "How much to go?" .. it's their capital (/asset / resource) and - I find - legitimate to `use´ it as benefit out their hard work.
That does sound like it would be an extremely frustrating experience for juggler C.
As I have previously said to small children, "this game is only a fun game if everyone who's playing thinks it's fun!" - I meant it about tickle fights, but it applies to playing games in the records section also. Eventually that kid who WILL NOT STOP tickling people ends up with no friends.
There are plenty of other fun things to do after all.
This thread reminds me of the story of Richard Simpson in the climbing community.
In short a lot of his claims came into question and he was dropped by his sponsors, despite the fact that everyone knew he was a very strong climber. People asked for video evidence, which wasn't provided.
There seems to be a very easy compromise: give the option to provide a link to video evidence for your record, as well as the option to display only records with provided video evidence.
As a frequent editor of the Juggle Wiki on the topic of world records, and this is the option that helps us the most. The Juggle Wiki tracks (mostly endurance) records in many categories, and we do require publicly available video evidence (or validation by a reputable body, such as Guinness, JISCON, etc.). But we also list "claims" which are normally gleaned from forum posts and databases such as the one here at The Juggling Edge.
If the database here were stripped down to just records with video evidence, we would have more trouble finding such claims. But having a significant number of jugglers (optionally) posting links to video evidence would also help, especially when we decide to start tracking records for a trick and need to find the video out there of the best run.
I encourage all jugglers to browse through the existing Juggle Wiki records, find some that you can beat, and video yourself beating them! I've sponsored a few "Juggling World Record Challenges" at IJA/WJF a few years back. If there's enough interest I'd be willing to do another and put up some prize money to encourage record-breaking.
"I encourage all jugglers to browse through the existing Juggle Wiki records, find some that you can beat, and video yourself beating them! I've sponsored a few "Juggling World Record Challenges" at IJA/WJF a few years back. If there's enough interest I'd be willing to do another and put up some prize money to encourage record-breaking."
I loved that at the IJA in 2013, it was lots of fun to try things I wouldn't have otherwise worked on.
I didn't realize it at the time, but my latest 4 clubs with balance record seems to be a world record, according to the juggle wiki.
Ethan, could u send a link to the vid for your bounce juggling records and the 23 reverse records that u so claim to have?
If I were you I would have asked by commenting on his log entry for the date corresponding to his record.
View older threads
Subscribe to this forum via RSS
1 article per branch
1 article per post
Green Eggs reports