Aiming threads have recently attracted hundreds of posts and certainly thousands in the past.
The interest is obviously valid because there are few, if any issues in the study of the game that are more important.
But when ONE thread draws hundreds of posts and thousands of views AND so much bitterness and condescension then hopefully this post regarding which I expect few replies...and ask for none...will be helpful in REDUCING both the number of the posts and the emotional content of them.
Aiming, by definition, requires vision and vision, like all senses, is imperfect.
If a person is astigmatic and doesn't know it, then he will swear that the picture on the wall isn't level and could pass a lie detector test to that effect.
But a person standing next to him who does not have an astigmatism will swear with equal fervor that the picture IS level and HE could pass a lie detector test.
That is one reason (not astigmatism but human perception in general) that "eye witnesses" are WELL KNOWN to provide among the least reliable testimony.
All aiming systems require vision and somes require the use of CB/OB parts that are offset from the center of the CB/OB AND from the middle of the shooters eye position.
In such instances "A" may actually see one image and "B" another and they will both swear to what they see...and they both will be telling the TRUTH.
My point is this. With respect to vision we all have our own realities. Some people will have identical realities and others will have different realities.
So, when people post here about how they go about the aiming process, with rare exceptions...there are pathological liars in the world and there are those who will sell a faulty product knowingly... but by and large, most of the posts here about aiming methodology come from people who are taking their time, for no economic reward, to share THEIR REALITIES with the community and there is MUCH to be praised about that and NOTHING to be dealt with in a belligerent, condescending or arrogant fashion.
The posters sees through his own eyes and no one elses and when the astigmatic guy is told that the picture is NOT crooked and that, by the way, you are an idiot for thinking it is...then nothing productive has been accomplished.
So, I am just offering the suggestion that on visual perception issues especially, some slack be cut to the proponents of a given method that might work quite well for HIM/HER and not to suggest that the method is worthless, or a waste of time or the meanderings of an utter fool.
Pointing out differences of opinion and in some cases facts...or at least things believed to be facts can HELP the person who might not have tested the theory as comprehensively as possible.
For if you conclude that the poster is well intentioned and merely trying to help by making a contribution...even if the views expressed are wrong, the posters motives should be respected and responded to in kind.
Clearly, doing so would cut down the number of posts by half if not substantially more and reduce the snotty exchanges that many...including me...find themselves drawn into from time to time.
Conversely, lunging in with "you have no clue" and doing so, for example, under the transparent guise of protecting the innocent and helpless among us, will only lead to a predictable and unfortunate result.
That's all. Thanks for reading this...both of you.
(I-:
The interest is obviously valid because there are few, if any issues in the study of the game that are more important.
But when ONE thread draws hundreds of posts and thousands of views AND so much bitterness and condescension then hopefully this post regarding which I expect few replies...and ask for none...will be helpful in REDUCING both the number of the posts and the emotional content of them.
Aiming, by definition, requires vision and vision, like all senses, is imperfect.
If a person is astigmatic and doesn't know it, then he will swear that the picture on the wall isn't level and could pass a lie detector test to that effect.
But a person standing next to him who does not have an astigmatism will swear with equal fervor that the picture IS level and HE could pass a lie detector test.
That is one reason (not astigmatism but human perception in general) that "eye witnesses" are WELL KNOWN to provide among the least reliable testimony.
All aiming systems require vision and somes require the use of CB/OB parts that are offset from the center of the CB/OB AND from the middle of the shooters eye position.
In such instances "A" may actually see one image and "B" another and they will both swear to what they see...and they both will be telling the TRUTH.
My point is this. With respect to vision we all have our own realities. Some people will have identical realities and others will have different realities.
So, when people post here about how they go about the aiming process, with rare exceptions...there are pathological liars in the world and there are those who will sell a faulty product knowingly... but by and large, most of the posts here about aiming methodology come from people who are taking their time, for no economic reward, to share THEIR REALITIES with the community and there is MUCH to be praised about that and NOTHING to be dealt with in a belligerent, condescending or arrogant fashion.
The posters sees through his own eyes and no one elses and when the astigmatic guy is told that the picture is NOT crooked and that, by the way, you are an idiot for thinking it is...then nothing productive has been accomplished.
So, I am just offering the suggestion that on visual perception issues especially, some slack be cut to the proponents of a given method that might work quite well for HIM/HER and not to suggest that the method is worthless, or a waste of time or the meanderings of an utter fool.
Pointing out differences of opinion and in some cases facts...or at least things believed to be facts can HELP the person who might not have tested the theory as comprehensively as possible.
For if you conclude that the poster is well intentioned and merely trying to help by making a contribution...even if the views expressed are wrong, the posters motives should be respected and responded to in kind.
Clearly, doing so would cut down the number of posts by half if not substantially more and reduce the snotty exchanges that many...including me...find themselves drawn into from time to time.
Conversely, lunging in with "you have no clue" and doing so, for example, under the transparent guise of protecting the innocent and helpless among us, will only lead to a predictable and unfortunate result.
That's all. Thanks for reading this...both of you.
(I-:
