Running

Status
Not open for further replies.

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
google can find articles or even forums on the subject that has people educated on the subject giving advice too. Same thing really.

but you often have to wade through alot of "yahoo answers" and misinformation to find those forums, and then you find alot of information that sounds educated but is wrong or you see two people who seem education who are at a contradiction, and you're not sure which one to trust.

The point is that there's alot of bullshit on google, even in forums and articles. Yes, the same thing can be said about personal advice but usually it's less anonymous and if they are well educated on the subject, i will tend to trust them more(but even then you have to question everything)

Not saying i dont trust google, but discretion is important.You have to know how to find the right information.
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
but you often have to wade through alot of "yahoo answers" and misinformation to find those forums, and then you find alot of information that sounds educated but is wrong or you see two people who seem education who are at a contradiction, and you're not sure which one to trust.

The point is that there's alot of bullshit on google, even in forums and articles. Yes, the same thing can be said about personal advice but usually it's less anonymous and if they are well educated on the subject, i will tend to trust them more(but even then you have to question everything)

Not saying i dont trust google, but discretion is important.You have to know how to find the right information.

You don't have to wade through yahoo answers. I'm assuming Depaul was talking about soccer when he said game. I typed in "What foods to eat the night before a soccer game." and found these links:

http://successinsoccer.com/subscriber-benefits/nutrition-for-soccer

http://www.wcusc.org/docs/Travel/91G2/eating.htm

http://www.socceru.com/what_should_soccer_players_eat_nutrition.htm

http://www.soccertrainingsolutions....night-before-and-the-morning-of-the-big-game/

All those people seemingly had knowledge on the subject and all gave similar advice. They were all on the first page too. So it wasn't hard to find, and there were a few articles to choose from.

And if you really wanted "personal advice" because you didn't trust reading an article, you can always join a soccer forum and ask people there what they eat before games and see what works.

Listening to what someone says on this forum or another one [or even reading an article] is the same shit. Especially when it comes to the type of question Depaul asked. Personally, I would answer his question with "do whatever works for you." When I ran XC, I would eat a light meal 2 hours before the race or practice. If ate a big meal or anything inside 2 hours, I would cramp up like a mother fucker. But there were guys on my team that could eat a pretty big meal about 90 minutes before a race and they'd feel fine. They would actually feel worse if the DIDN'T eat that big meal.

But even if it was a question like "How do i train for this?" or "How can I build muscle mass faster?" I'm sure you can google it and find multiple answers that can all work and you can try something that seems to suit you. Even if it isn't "personal advice." Just because you are more familiar with someone doesn't make what they say correct or the right way to go about doing something.
 
Last edited:

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
You don't have to weed through yahoo answers. I'm assuming Depaul was talking about soccer when he said game. I typed in "What foods to eat the night before a soccer game." and found these links:

http://successinsoccer.com/subscriber-benefits/nutrition-for-soccer

http://www.wcusc.org/docs/Travel/91G2/eating.htm

http://www.socceru.com/what_should_soccer_players_eat_nutrition.htm

http://www.soccertrainingsolutions....night-before-and-the-morning-of-the-big-game/

i never said it was just yahoo answers...but places like that often show up at the top of google because of the way the search engine works and relates to other domains

honestly it depends on the subject, some subjects are easier to find information about,some aren't.

and no i did not say that all of google is BS, i think in alot of instances it can be very helpful, but you have to be cautious.

as for the articles, yes they look helpful and they probably have a lot of good information. That said, it's hard to exactly say how much of it is true. I can't argue that because i'm not a nutritionist or well-adversed on the subject. But there are slight nuances in the information from every article, so you take what you find, find the similarities and take it at face value. I've read numerous articles such as those that certainly look extensive and educated, only to have someone like my dad who is a professor at A&M shoot it down with his own facts.

Am I saying he's the standard for certain correctness? Certainly not. But what i am going to trust more, an article online from which i have limited knowledge of the background, or my father,who i know is well-adversed because of his defined background? And yea, some articles are a bit more defined with background sources and credibility, but for every article that has the background, there are 4 or 5 that dont have the background.


And if you really wanted "personal advice" because you didn't trust reading an article, you can always join a soccer forum and ask people there what they eat before games and see what works.

Right,but what i am trusting more? My friend who i know plays soccer and eats "so and so" on a regular basis and gets results, or what someone says on the internet, even in the forum. Am i saying what the people say in the soccer forum is wrong? No, what I am saying it's harder to trust information which is less tangibly substantiated

Every body is different, and what foods work best for performance probably depends on who you are? But what do i know haha


Listening to what someone says on this forum or another one [or even reading an article] is the same shit. Especially when it comes to the type of question Depaul asked. Personally, I would answer his question with "do whatever works for you." When I ran XC, I would eat a light meal 2 hours before the race or practice. If ate a big meal or anything inside 2 hours, I would cramp up like a mother fucker. But there were guys on my team that could eat a pretty big meal about 90 minutes before a race and they'd feel fine. They would actually feel worse if the DIDN'T eat that big meal.

the same as personal advice? If you know the person then yes.

But even if it was a question like "How do i train for this?" or "How can I build muscle mass the faster?" I'm sure you can google it and find multiple answers that can all work and you can try something that seems to suit you. Even if it isn't "personal advice." Just because you are more familiar with someone doesn't make what they say correct or the right way to go about doing something.

you can also find tons of answers that won work at all.....

it doesn't have to do with it being totally correct or not, because if you're looking for the information and getting the advice, you can't necessarily gauge what is totally right or wrong, otherwise you wouldn't be asking for the advice

What i'm saying is, it's about what do you trust MORE.

I think google is completely fine, but there's so much information on there quite a bit of it is bound to be false(and a bit of the time we don't know what is true and what isn't, because we aren't knowledgable on the subject) and is just more difficult to trust than tangible advice from people of which you usually have a better idea of background.

Google itself is relatively unfiltered information wise, you have to provide the filter

I will say that my first response on this topic was a generalization. Some topics are easier to find good information about than others, it also depends on how specific you are with your search.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BNB

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
i never said it was just yahoo answers...but places like that often show up at the top of google because of the way the search engine works and relates to other domains

honestly it depends on the subject, some subjects are easier to find information about,some aren't.

and no i did not say that all of google is BS, i think in alot of instances it can be very helpful, but you have to be cautious.

Agree

as for the articles, yes they look helpful and they probably have a lot of good information. That said, it's hard to exactly say how much of it is true. I can't argue that because i'm not a nutritionist or well-adversed on the subject. But there are slight nuances in the information from every article, so you take what you find, find the similarities and take it at face value. I've read numerous articles such as those that certainly look extensive and educated, only to have someone like my dad who is a professor at A&M shoot it down with his own facts.

Am I saying he's the standard for certain correctness? Certainly not. But what i am going to trust more, an article online from which i have limited knowledge of the background, or my father,who i know is well-adversed because of his defined background? And yea, some articles are a bit more defined with background sources and credibility, but for every article that has the background, there are 4 or 5 that dont have the background.

What's your dad a professor of?

And yeah, if you are turning to google or someone you know for advice, obviously you aren't an expert and can't question whether or not what you're reading or hearing is correct and good advice. That's why whenever I google something, I look through a ton of links and read what a lot of people say and even ask some people I know personally. If I'm hearing generally the same thing, then even some of the stuff I found using Google was correct.


But yeah. Of course if you personally know someone that is an expert in something, you'll go to them for advice/help. My neighbor is a great mechanic, so I'll go to him first if there is something wrong with my car. I won't need to google anything or ask anyone else because I have seen him first hand fix my car and also because I don't have the tools or skills/knowledge to fix my car.



Right,but what i am trusting more? My friend who i know plays soccer and eats "so and so" on a regular basis and gets results, or what someone says on the internet, even in the forum. Am i saying what the people say in the soccer forum is wrong? No, what I am saying it's harder to trust information which is less tangibly substantiated

When it comes to something like that, even what your friend is telling you might not work for you. Like my XC example. If I asked one of my teammates when and what would be okay to eat before a race and he told me I can eat w/e I want about 90 minutes before a race and I should be fine because HE does it and still performs well at the race, i would be fucked because that wouldn't work for me.

But if you visited a forum and saw a lot of people saying a lot of different things, you could just trying picking what would seem is best for you.

Every body is different, and what foods work best for performance probably depends on who you are? But what do i know haha

Agreed.


you can also find tons of answers that won work at all.....

it doesn't have to do with it being totally correct or not, because if you're looking for the information and getting the advice, you can't necessarily gauge what is totally right or wrong, otherwise you wouldn't be asking for the advice

Again, agreed. Which is why I said even personal advice sometimes won't even work because the thing they may suggest may not work for you at all. So it would be the same as googling something. The advice you may get from your friend or dad could be the same thing someone could tell you on a forum. But if that particular thing they're telling you to do isn't working, why does it matter where you got the info from? Same thing if it did work.

What i'm saying is, it's about what do you trust MORE.

I think google is completely fine, but there's so much information on there quite a bit of it is bound to be false(and a bit of the time we don't know what is true and what isn't, because we aren't knowledgable on the subject) and is just more difficult to trust than tangible advice from people of which you usually have a better idea of background.

Yes, trust plays a factor and people would generally turn to those they trust more. But a lot of articles that are written, some even by medical professionals, are written with the purpose of helping people. They just take their knowledge and experience and use it to try and help. I mean, I don't know why someone would write a long article just to screw people over haha. I'm not sying everything you find on Google is accurate, but a lot of the stuff you read on there would be similar to what someone you trust would say.



I will say that my first response on this topic was a generalization. Some topics are easier to find good information about than others, it also depends on how specific you are with your search.

agreed.


I think we're overall agreeing, but I think I'm just less skeptical about the things I read on Google [as long as i'm seeing consistency between different links] and more willing to use it if i'm trying to get answers on a certain subject.
 
Last edited:

RosettaStoned

New member
Joined:
Jan 4, 2012
Posts:
895
Liked Posts:
729
BNB, I read the first link you posted and it was a bunch of pseudoscience bullshit.

There is no trick to pre-workout nutrition anymore than there is a trick to any other kind of nutrition.


I said to eat how you eat, just don't eat anything that will make you shit your pants. Some people perform well fasted, others do not. Some people eat a huge meal a couple of hours before training/playing and do great others do not.

There is nothing special about playing a game. Your biology does not distinguish between games and training other than possible nerves/adrenaline which is something entirely different.

You don't need to change your diet for a game or competition you are competing in, since you have already been training and eating anyway.

Hopefully you don't eat like a Special person to begin with, since you made some sort of team I assume you're doing fine. Just eat, concentrate on not getting your ass kicked in whatever kind of event it is, and don't sweat the small shit.
 

RosettaStoned

New member
Joined:
Jan 4, 2012
Posts:
895
Liked Posts:
729
Also about 99.999% of shit found on google regarding nutrition is complete and utter bullshit. No other field has more scamming half science shitty info than fitness and nutrition.
 

RosettaStoned

New member
Joined:
Jan 4, 2012
Posts:
895
Liked Posts:
729
A little more specific would've been nice I guess :shrug: but thanks anyway

BNB, I read the first link you posted and it was a bunch of pseudoscience bullshit.

There is no trick to pre-workout nutrition anymore than there is a trick to any other kind of nutrition.


I said to eat how you eat, just don't eat anything that will make you shit your pants. Some people perform well fasted, others do not. Some people eat a huge meal a couple of hours before training/playing and do great others do not.

There is nothing special about playing a game. Your biology does not distinguish between games and training other than possible nerves/adrenaline which is something entirely different.

You don't need to change your diet for a game or competition you are competing in, since you have already been training and eating anyway.

Hopefully you don't eat like a Special person to begin with, since you made some sort of team I assume you're doing fine. Just eat, concentrate on not getting your ass kicked in whatever kind of event it is, and don't sweat the small shit.


Better?
 

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
What's your dad a professor of?

exercise physiology,coincidentally

And yeah, if you are turning to google or someone you know for advice, obviously you aren't an expert and can't question whether or not what you're reading or hearing is correct and good advice. That's why whenever I google something, I look through a ton of links and read what a lot of people say and even ask some people I know personally. If I'm hearing generally the same thing, then even some of the stuff I found using Google was correct.

ya, that's a good idea...sometimes i get lazy and i google something and it's it like a trivia fact, then it's probably correct..but something more extensive requires more extensive research because it's prone to more ambiguity regarding some of the answers

But yeah. Of course if you personally know someone that is an expert in something, you'll go to them for advice/help. My neighbor is a great mechanic, so I'll go to him first if there is something wrong with my car. I won't need to google anything or ask anyone else because I have seen him first hand fix my car and also because I don't have the tools or skills/knowledge to fix my car.
this is exactly what i have been arguing this entire time...






When it comes to something like that, even what your friend is telling you might not work for you. Like my XC example. If I asked one of my teammates when and what would be okay to eat before a race and he told me I can eat w/e I want about 90 minutes before a race and I should be fine because HE does it and still performs well at the race, i would be fucked because that wouldn't work for me.

oh for sure, but i would trust my friend more than i would someone on the internet...even if it might not work

But if you visited a forum and saw a lot of people saying a lot of different things, you could just trying picking what would seem is best for you.
considering the context, i would agree with this




Again, agreed. Which is why I said even personal advice sometimes won't even work because the thing they may suggest may not work for you at all. So it would be the same as googling something. The advice you may get from your friend or dad could be the same thing someone could tell you on a forum. But if that particular thing they're telling you to do isn't working, why does it matter where you got the info from? Same thing if it did work.

sometimes the advice wont work, even if the person is educated. I definitely don't disagree with that. But i think you're looking too much in hindsight and at the results. I'm just talking about being exposed to the information before the fact, and having to decide what course of action to take and who to trust. If i'm looking at the credibility of internet information and educated,tangible information from a personal advisor who you KNOW is credible, then I am trusting that more.

Yes, trust plays a factor and people would generally turn to those they trust more. But a lot of articles that are written, some even by medical professionals, are written with the purpose of helping people. They just take their knowledge and experience and use it to try and help. I mean, I don't know why someone would write a long article just to screw people over haha. I'm not sying everything you find on Google is accurate, but a lot of the stuff you read on there would be similar to what someone you trust would say.

Well, just because the article is meant to help people doesn't mean it's necessarily accurate though. I know there are probably some people who make articles a bit grandiose and extensive to get hits, but even if the person that is making the article is trying to give you reasonable advice, it doesn't mean they will know the subject. It's a bit more dubious when there is little to no background info on the person that is making the article.

I wouldn't say that what you would see on the internet is what you would hear from someone you trust. It depends. I will say that I know the person is well adversed(whether by experience or by knowledge through study and career) in the field of question, I will trust that more than articles you can find on google, especially if it is relatively anonymous information. If the personal advice is tantamount to the information found on the google articles, then ya that might be a good thing.







I think we're overall agreeing, but I think I'm just less skeptical about the things I read on Google [as long as i'm seeing consistency between different links] and more willing to use it if i'm trying to get answers on a certain subject.
you might be, but that surely does not mean i am not willing to use google. For me, it depends on the depth and complexity of the subject as to whether or not i am dubious of google results. But even with simple things, people still post wrong things.

I use google quite a bit. I've just learned there's a lot of BS on it because it's a search engine that relays you to incredible amounts of information. I mean, you really can't differentiate whether the information is extensively cited, is substantiated, and is just false. You have to differentiate that information yourself.

bottom line is,without the benefit of hindsight, i'm usually trusting a well-educated personal opinion above an internet one,or ones. Less ambigiuty and less anonymity with the information
 
Last edited:

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
BNB, I read the first link you posted and it was a bunch of pseudoscience bullshit.

There is no trick to pre-workout nutrition anymore than there is a trick to any other kind of nutrition.


I said to eat how you eat, just don't eat anything that will make you shit your pants. Some people perform well fasted, others do not. Some people eat a huge meal a couple of hours before training/playing and do great others do not.

There is nothing special about playing a game. Your biology does not distinguish between games and training other than possible nerves/adrenaline which is something entirely different.

You don't need to change your diet for a game or competition you are competing in, since you have already been training and eating anyway.

Hopefully you don't eat like a Special person to begin with, since you made some sort of team I assume you're doing fine. Just eat, concentrate on not getting your ass kicked in whatever kind of event it is, and don't sweat the small shit.

Overall, I agree. I didn't read through the first and 3rd link. i was just using the links as examples for finding information you are looking for.

The second link though said some stuff i would usually tell people who are gonna run or do something that involves a lot of running... which is to avoid big meals or heavy foods before you're about to run/play soccer/etc. because it takes longer to digest and you'd be more likely to cramp up.

In terms of what DePaul was asking which was what to eat the night before... yeah. It doesn't really matter. The obvious things are to stay hydrated and get enough rest so you have more energy, but i don't see the difference between eating a lot of carbs the night before or if you had something else. Which is why I said my advice for him would be "do what's best for you." since everyone's different.

Personally, the whole "eat a bunch of carbs" thing never made a difference for me. But if i did eat foods with lots of dairy or foods that took a long time to digest, I had issues with it. So i just avoided those before races, basketball games, practices, etc. But some people tolerate it better and it doesn't effect their performance.
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
exercise physiology,coincidentally

Weird. I just saw an exercise physiologist at the Mayo Clinic.

sometimes the advice wont work, even if the person is educated. I definitely don't disagree with that. But i think you're looking too much in hindsight and at the results. I'm just talking about being exposed to the information before the fact, and having to decide what course of action to take and who to trust. If i'm looking at the credibility of internet information and educated,tangible information from a personal advisor who you KNOW is credible, then I am trusting that more.

That's perfectly understandable and makes the most sense. I mean, you don't know if anyone on the internet is legit. But if you didn't know anyone personally, I'm just saying that googling something isn't bad. Like you said in your other post, It depends on what you're looking for though.



Well, just because the article is meant to help people doesn't mean it's necessarily accurate though. I know there are probably some people who make articles a bit grandiose and extensive to get hits, but even if the person that is making the article is trying to give you reasonable advice, it doesn't mean they will know the subject. It's a bit more dubious when there is little to no background info on the person that is making the article.

Doesn't necessarily make it accurate, you're right. But a lot of people writing things on the internet are the friends people go to when they need advice on that topic. Let's use your dad as an example. You'd take his advice on certain issues because you trust him and you'd know he knows what he's talking about, right? If he went online and made a website so he can share his knowledge with people or even a blog, his advice could be very helpful to people seeking it, right? If it was just a free website or blog, he'd probably just do it as a hobby and to help people. I'm just saying that a lot of people won't write an article unless they know enough about the subject. It would be completely pointless. I wouldn't write an article on weight lifting because i don't know too much about it. just basic knowledge. So i wouldn't be able to help anyone and my article would probably sound like bullshit.

I'm not saying every article you find would be 100% accurate, some might be complete bullshit. But that's why I said earlier that I read through a bunch of links if I'm looking for something. [If I didn't know any experts in person]

you might be, but that surely does not mean i am not willing to use google. For me, it depends on the depth and complexity of the subject as to whether or not i am dubious of google results. But even with simple things, people still post wrong things.

Well I don't think it's a good idea to google something that's very complex haha. If something is too complex, I'd just take the issue to an expert right away and just pay for their services, whatever it may be. If it's something simple that I can either do physically, or just general advice on something, information you can find on google isn't a bad option if you don't have a go-to expert. Even simple things could be said wrong by some, but if you find 9 links saying 1 thing on a subject and 1 link saying something different, i think everyone would be smart enough to know whose advice not to follow. As an example, let's just use training dogs. Most people wouldn't wanna pay someone to tell them how to train their dog. And if you don't know many or any people with dogs, you can't necessarily ask them how to train a dog. So it wouldn't be unreasonable to google "How can I train my dog to stop fucking shitting in my house!!" in other words of course... And I'm sure you'd find a bunch of good advice on how to train your dog to shit outside... but if you see someone say "If you're dog shits in the house, just smack him across the face with a newspaper, and put him outside." That's obviously bad advice.. But if everything else you read was reasonable, you take that advice.



bottom line is,without the benefit of hindsight, i'm usually trusting a well-educated personal opinion above an internet one,or ones. Less ambigiuty and less anonymity with the information

If the opinion/advice is free and/or easy to obtain from an expert you know personally.. then yeah, that makes perfect sense. If not, i don't see the harm in using google as long as you're smart enough.
 

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
That's perfectly understandable and makes the most sense. I mean, you don't know if anyone on the internet is legit. But if you didn't know anyone personally, I'm just saying that googling something isn't bad. Like you said in your other post, It depends on what you're looking for though.

i dont think i've said at all that the googling something is bad...it's not at all

for certain topics though, it's important to use discretion because there's no real information filter, that's pretty much it...







Doesn't necessarily make it accurate, you're right. But a lot of people writing things on the internet are the friends people go to when they need advice on that topic. Let's use your dad as an example. You'd take his advice on certain issues because you trust him and you'd know he knows what he's talking about, right? If he went online and made a website so he can share his knowledge with people or even a blog, his advice could be very helpful to people seeking it, right?

i see where you're going with this, but if my dad made an article online or a website and kept it,from a source perspective,relatively anonymous...then i would trust that less than his personal opinion because i dont have the background that substantiates the opinion

that said, depending on what he would say in the article, i would probably trust it more than most of the works on the internet, mostly because my dad writes grants for a living, so his articles would be ridiculously extensive. He's helping to write a book right now.

he could be wrong too i suppose:shrug:



If it was just a free website or blog, he'd probably just do it as a hobby and to help people. I'm just saying that a lot of people won't write an article unless they know enough about the subject. It would be completely pointless. I wouldn't write an article on weight lifting because i don't know too much about it. just basic knowledge. So i wouldn't be able to help anyone and my article would probably sound like bullshit.

define "enough"...i see plenty of awful sports articles out there that are at the top of google searches because they get hits or are domain affiliated...i don't see how that would be any different for quite a few of the articles on other subjects that are unfiltered by google:shrug:

the thing is, it's hard to sound like bullshit if you're searching for the information and you dont know it. It's like a commercial you see on TV that brings up alot of good points and statistics, but half of them might be bullshit. I mean, it's bullshit,but how can you tell by just watching the commercial(other than the obvious notion that most advertisement commercials are accepted as grandiose BS)

I know a commercial has a different intention than most articles(though some writers want hits because they get paid off them or they are just trying to impose their point in a persuading fashion) but the point is that in both cases, sometimes bullshit sounds good without the knowledge to distinguish between BS and what is supported.

I'm not saying every article you find would be 100% accurate, some might be complete bullshit. But that's why I said earlier that I read through a bunch of links if I'm looking for something. [If I didn't know any experts in person]

oh yeah. I completely agree, depending on what you're looking for.

Well I don't think it's a good idea to google something that's very complex haha.If something is too complex, I'd just take the issue to an expert right away and just pay for their services, whatever it may be. If it's something simple that I can either do physically, or just general advice on something, information you can find on google isn't a bad option if you don't have a go-to expert.

ya, i have my limitations on searching for complex things, mostly because the more complex the subject(as said), the more BS you get.

but even then, i am kind of tempted to google it sometimes, but my searches are more extensive

i think in that case, it might be better to read books,watch documentaries,etc.

and yea i agree if you dont have anyone that can give you good personal advice, googling is not a bad thing by any means

Even simple things could be said wrong by some, but if you find 9 links saying 1 thing on a subject and 1 link saying something different, i think everyone would be smart enough to know whose advice not to follow. As an example, let's just use training dogs. Most people wouldn't wanna pay someone to tell them how to train their dog. And if you don't know many or any people with dogs, you can't necessarily ask them how to train a dog. So it wouldn't be unreasonable to google "How can I train my dog to stop fucking shitting in my house!!" in other words of course... And I'm sure you'd find a bunch of good advice on how to train your dog to shit outside... but if you see someone say "If you're dog shits in the house, just smack him across the face with a newspaper, and put him outside." That's obviously bad advice.. But if everything else you read was reasonable, you take that advice.

i wish all google advice was that simple to discern. I mean, some of it is common sense if it's a simple issue.

I will say that I use google when I do research papers but I really look at the comments and feedback and the source of the site from where i'm getting my info from to make a good discernment of whether or not i should use certain information from the source.

It helps to find a reliable and consistent site if you're constantly looking up related info...makes google searching a bit easier if you have a relative idea that the site is reliable

if you see a place where people input freely(meaning like alot of bloggers that are in college and stuff and often sound like they might not know the info) then that might be a red flag

so,ya, i use google..but there's still a lot of BS, depending on the subject

as with anything, take it with a grain of salt




If the opinion/advice is free and/or easy to obtain from an expert you know personally.. then yeah, that makes perfect sense. If not, i don't see the harm in using google as long as you're smart enough.

Don't know that i would consider it advice if someone is making you pay for it lol :dunno:

and ya i agree, if you can't find good personal advice, google isn't the worst way to go

the bolded becomes a complication for many, including myself at some points:lol:
 

whitesoxman77

Jr. White Sox GM
Donator
Joined:
Jun 5, 2012
Posts:
2,236
Liked Posts:
668
Location:
UofM-Twin Cities Campus
Can you guys post shorter shit? I'm not reading all of this :lol:
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
i see where you're going with this, but if my dad made an article online or a website and kept it,from a source perspective,relatively anonymous...then i would trust that less than his personal opinion because i dont have the background that substantiates the opinion

that said, depending on what he would say in the article, i would probably trust it more than most of the works on the internet, mostly because my dad writes grants for a living, so his articles would be ridiculously extensive. He's helping to write a book right now.

he could be wrong too i suppose:shrug:

If you look long/hard enough, you can find almost anything that would explain something extensively by people that aren't really anonymous either. There's a lot of people that put their names/credentials on their websites/articles they write. It isn't googling, but Youtube can be helpful too since a lot of professionals have links to their youtube videos to show you what they're talking about.





define "enough"...i see plenty of awful sports articles out there that are at the top of google searches because they get hits or are domain affiliated...i don't see how that would be any different for quite a few of the articles on other subjects that are unfiltered by google:shrug:

the thing is, it's hard to sound like bullshit if you're searching for the information and you dont know it. It's like a commercial you see on TV that brings up alot of good points and statistics, but half of them might be bullshit. I mean, it's bullshit,but how can you tell by just watching the commercial(other than the obvious notion that most advertisement commercials are accepted as grandiose BS)

I know a commercial has a different intention than most articles(though some writers want hits because they get paid off them or they are just trying to impose their point in a persuading fashion) but the point is that in both cases, sometimes bullshit sounds good without the knowledge to distinguish between BS and what is supported.

Writing sports articles is different though. People write sports articles to entertain.. When I google something, it's usually articles that inform or teach. Now, if you googled rules of basketball and read articles that someone wrote explaining the rules of basketball, that would be different. Most people just write sports articles like previews of games and which player is better, overrated, etc.

And commercials are advertisements. They're trying to sell you on a product, or bring up statistics [that may be false] to try and scare you into buying their product. Like Lysol commercials. There's Fuckin germs everywhere! Even the kinds that will give you a terrible flu! It is probably on your counter! Buy this product and get rid of it now!

If you read an article on the internet and it ends with "If you want to know more, you can buy this guide for" or "To achieve what I just explained, you can order our own" then yeah, what you just read is probably horse shit and they're just very convincing and trying to make some cash.

When I talk about googling things for information/advice, I mean stuff like this:

http://home.howstuffworks.com/how-to-install-drywall.htm

http://www.realtor.com/home-finance...-a-house-or-rent-an-apartment.aspx?source=web

and sticking to the "running" theme

http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/getting-back-in-shape-again

Just shit like that. It's just informing or advising you.



I will say that I use google when I do research papers but I really look at the comments and feedback and the source of the site from where i'm getting my info from to make a good discernment of whether or not i should use certain information from the source.

It helps to find a reliable and consistent site if you're constantly looking up related info...makes google searching a bit easier if you have a relative idea that the site is reliable

if you see a place where people input freely(meaning like alot of bloggers that are in college and stuff and often sound like they might not know the info) then that might be a red flag

so,ya, i use google..but there's still a lot of BS, depending on the subject

Yeah, for research papers you have to do different types of searches... and the information you're usually looking for won't really be the types of articles I was talking about. And yeah, it's a good idea to find sites that you know are reliable. I have a lot of go-to sites... including porn :shifty: hahahaha



Don't know that i would consider it advice if someone is making you pay for it lol :dunno
should have said "help" hahaha mah bad.
 

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
I never intended on writing a lot... I didn't know I could have such a long conversation on information you get from google hahahahaha.

well it certainly is a good convo:lol:
 
  • Like
Reactions: BNB

CODE_BLUE56

Ded
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Apr 18, 2010
Posts:
19,727
Liked Posts:
4,700
Location:
Texas
If you look long/hard enough, you can find almost anything that would explain something extensively by people that aren't really anonymous either. There's a lot of people that put their names/credentials on their websites/articles they write..
the bolded is the key, to find the substantial information, you have to really look and wade through everything. I see alot of articles that are either do not have a name, have a name with no credentials, or a name with questionable credentials.

if you look for edu sites and that sort of thing, you usually can find articles and sites that are more extensively labeled


It isn't googling, but Youtube can be helpful too since a lot of professionals have links to their youtube videos to show you what they're talking about.
One reason probably is because it's easier to explain things visually(i think i'm more of a visual person tbh)...but i think another is that with google's plethora of unfiltered information, it's tougher to find the information that might be worthwhile and credible

youtube,while technically a search engine, would probably make looking for a certain professional video a bit easier because it probably has less results to wade through






Writing sports articles is different though. People write sports articles to entertain..
I think that's a bit of a generalization. Some do, some want to get hits, some are getting paid to write the stuff, and some are trying to make a persuasive argument, and some are trying to do a combination of those.

No,not all sports articles are in the same mold as some of the others that we've been talking about, but i think some of them are.

Take a hypothetical article about why you shouldn't draft defense/special teams in your fantasy draft,for example.I mean, that's still advice, is it not? What if you want some advice as to whether or not the Bulls trading for so and so is a good idea? I mean, they'll give you their opinion usually based on some sort of facts. I mean, advice is a bit subjective, even with perhaps more objective fields and subjects. Yes, so sometimes nuances in advice on certain subjects is ok, but there's a difference between certain subjectivity and being factually contradicted and factually inaccurate.

So,essentially, a bit of sports writing is persuasion and advice. I dont think people would give their input into sports articles without some frame of knowledge on the subject either,especially because quite a few of them are basically persuasion articles. That said, people who write these articles might be missing facts, misinterpreting facts,missing the point,etc. I see this in sports articles that are people are getting paid to write, and I dont think the intention for entertainment would justify a paid article having numerous faults. I just dont see how this habit of faults in sports articles doesn't translate other articles.

When I google something, it's usually articles that inform or teach. Now, if you googled rules of basketball and read articles that someone wrote explaining the rules of basketball, that would be different. Most people just write sports articles like previews of games and which player is better, overrated, etc.

i mean that's kind of your agenda, but if we're talking about simply advice, then there's going to be some subjectivity to it.

i see plenty of informational or teaching articles that circle facts around a universal opinion, such as "why sugar is bad for you" and so on, which is very much the same idea as some of these sports articles

And commercials are advertisements. They're trying to sell you on a product, or bring up statistics [that may be false] to try and scare you into buying their product. Like Lysol commercials. There's Fuckin germs everywhere! Even the kinds that will give you a terrible flu! It is probably on your counter! Buy this product and get rid of it now!

If you read an article on the internet and it ends with "If you want to know more, you can buy this guide for" or "To achieve what I just explained, you can order our own" then yeah, what you just read is probably horse shit and they're just very convincing and trying to make some cash.


:smh: cmon mannn..did you read the last paragraph of that section?

I know a commercial has a different intention than most articles(though some writers want hits because they get paid off them or they are just trying to impose their point in a persuading fashion) but the point is that in both cases, sometimes bullshit sounds good without the knowledge to distinguish between BS and what is supported.


some writers are trying to make cash btw, they get paid to write or get paid by the number of hits their article gets

When I talk about googling things for information/advice, I mean stuff like this:

http://home.howstuffworks.com/how-to-install-drywall.htm

http://www.realtor.com/home-finance...-a-house-or-rent-an-apartment.aspx?source=web

and sticking to the "running" theme

http://www.webmd.com/fitness-exercise/features/getting-back-in-shape-again

Just shit like that. It's just informing or advising you.

yea, i mean it's in a little different mold than sports articles, but there's a bit of opinion and subjectivity that comes with the advice. You're not going to get just straight information from advice articles,usually.

i like the howstuffworks site...that has some good tidbits imo




Yeah, for research papers you have to do different types of searches... and the information you're usually looking for won't really be the types of articles I was talking about. And yeah, it's a good idea to find sites that you know are reliable. I have a lot of go-to sites... including porn :shifty: hahahaha

i definitely think you find yourself using informational/advice articles in research papers because there might be certain facts that might be relevant to your research in the paper. I know i've used a few advice articles in research papers,after some research of course.
 

BNB

Moderator
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Jun 9, 2011
Posts:
14,808
Liked Posts:
7,642
Location:
Chicago
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  2. Oakland Raiders
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
the bolded is the key, to find the substantial information, you have to really look and wade through everything. I see alot of articles that are either do not have a name, have a name with no credentials, or a name with questionable credentials.

if you look for edu sites and that sort of thing, you usually can find articles and sites that are more extensively labeled

:yep:



One reason probably is because it's easier to explain things visually(i think i'm more of a visual person tbh)...but i think another is that with google's plethora of unfiltered information, it's tougher to find the information that might be worthwhile and credible

youtube,while technically a search engine, would probably make looking for a certain professional video a bit easier because it probably has less results to wade through

:yep: Especially now days. I think a lot more people are visual learners.




I think that's a bit of a generalization. Some do, some want to get hits, some are getting paid to write the stuff, and some are trying to make a persuasive argument, and some are trying to do a combination of those.

No,not all sports articles are in the same mold as some of the others that we've been talking about, but i think some of them are.

Take a hypothetical article about why you shouldn't draft defense/special teams in your fantasy draft,for example.I mean, that's still advice, is it not? What if you want some advice as to whether or not the Bulls trading for so and so is a good idea? I mean, they'll give you their opinion usually based on some sort of facts. I mean, advice is a bit subjective, even with perhaps more objective fields and subjects. Yes, so sometimes nuances in advice on certain subjects is ok, but there's a difference between certain subjectivity and being factually contradicted and factually inaccurate.

So,essentially, a bit of sports writing is persuasion and advice. I dont think people would give their input into sports articles without some frame of knowledge on the subject either,especially because quite a few of them are basically persuasion articles. That said, people who write these articles might be missing facts, misinterpreting facts,missing the point,etc. I see this in sports articles that are people are getting paid to write, and I dont think the intention for entertainment would justify a paid article having numerous faults. I just dont see how this habit of faults in sports articles doesn't translate other articles.

Well the examples you gave right there was kind of what I was talking about when I was saying some sports articles are similar. If you wrote an article like about your predictions for the season, and a lot of other types of sports articles you'd find on ESPN.com, those are just for entertainment purposes. But like I said, if you're writing a sports article that's actually explaining something [like rules] or like the example you gave about fantasy football, then yeah, it would be pretty much the same thing.

[This part below I wrote in response to another quote that I deleted, so it may repeat something I just said above]

Idk... a lot of sport articles I see are either predictions, rankings, recaps, speculation, ranting, praising, etc. None of those types of articles are giving you advice on anything and they aren't informing you of anything either.. It's just kinda the writer talking about something to do with a particular sport and giving his opinion on it.

A lot of Larry Coon's articles are informative. Fantasy sport writers are giving you advice. If you're looking for an article to explain something to you like positions, rules, etc. that would be informative too. Everything else though just seems like entertainment to me. If you're reading sports articles, chances are you know enough about the sport. You're not reading it to learn anything or to be advised on anything. You're reading just to read it. the writer isn't sitting there writing stuff like "Last year, Tom Brady [the Quarterback f the New England PAtriots. A quarterback is the player that throws the ball] threw X amount of interceptions [an interception is when you throw the ball and the other team catches it]." If you're reading it, you're just expected to know that stuff. Some writers may write a persuasive type of article and use examples to try and get you on their side, but that isn't really giving you advice or anything. It's not like you're sitting there googling "Should I think Dwight Howard is a prima donna?" then find an article telling you why you should think he is. You just find an article on a sports web site with a guy talking about why he thinks DH is a prima donna.


:smh: cmon mannn..did you read the last paragraph of that section?

I might have missed it.. When I quote and start replying, it's easy to miss something or a little paragraph in this little box :lol:



i definitely think you find yourself using informational/advice articles in research papers because there might be certain facts that might be relevant to your research in the paper. I know i've used a few advice articles in research papers,after some research of course.

Well, yeah.. technically some of the info you get on a research paper comes from articles. I usually use websites that just give information on the topic I'm researching. I don't think I really ever use "advice articles" though. Like my last research paper was on Stem cells. I found articles where people said why they were against the use of them and why they were for them, but it really wasn't advice. It was just their opinion for why they don't like it, which was mainly moral reasons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top