Credibility Factors

[Admin]

I've been reading a number of topics on the board lately, and many have to do with the question of how to address credibility on the part of other participants.

That led me to look around for some information which might help us to understand a basic concept - and that is - what are the factors that lead to, or detract from, another member's credibility? I found some lists that did not quite 'fit' our community at RWD, so elected to start this topic and inquire from all of YOU as to what you think contributes to a 'credible' post.

Obviously, I want NO REFERENCE to any specific member or topic or post. I would really like to know what you consider to be the factors that create credibility.

For my part, I will list a few of mine:

* Experience - from the view that they can address BOTH what works, and what does not.
* Logic - I am particularly impressed with a logical and rational approach - even absent direct experience.
* Open Mind - someone who recognizes they do not know what they do not yet know - and is open to other's inputs.

I'll add some more later - but first I'd like to see what others think about this topic.

- Dan

[KenC]

I question the credibility of the post when:

The poster has absolutely no first hand experience in the subject.

The poster has failed (sometimes miserably) at the subject of the thread.

The poster has a history of taking the opposing side of a debate only to support the "weaker" side and not necessarily because they believe in it, but just to even out the debate.

I also think that it is the responsibility of the regular posters to point out the shortcomings in credibility of some of the posters here so that the newbies do not get bad or misleading information.  For example, if someone's methods has proven to only lead to failure, it should be pointed out because some of the newer members may take that advice and run with it.  They need to be informed that the advice is less than wise.
KenC

[William3rd]

Nice criteria KenC- I think I would add to credibility problems those who jump in out of nowhere to support what I would describe as idiocy and those who post facially innocuous posts hoping to stir controversy. And, I think as well those who engage in needless and pointless  name calling- I am not referring to the JB cluebat posts or Jack's posts. There are several recent examples of late.

I would add the informative value of the post and the ability to check the information from other sources to Dan's criteria.

[jb]

Ditto everything KenC and William said above, plus I alway question trollish behavior. 

[catzenmouse]

I'll add my agreement to what has been said and I'll add that like respect it has to be built from the ground up and earned.

Ken

[ScottinCrimea]

Agree with all of the above, plus I like to see consistency in their responses across different threads.

I can always tell when someone is losing a debate because they resort to either misrepresenting the statements of another, they change the topic of the discussion, or they personally attack the opposing parties.  These all lose credibilty with me.

[Admin]

What is interesting to me so far in the responses - is that the majority reference what causes people to LOSE credibility. This suggests there is some BASE LEVEL of credibility offered at the outset - and then the person loses credibility through the various characteristics mentioned.

So my question now is - Do we at RWD give NEW members some fundamental starting point of credibility which they then can lose - or build?

My sense is that we do not. We have known members who, through some way or other (question still open BTW), have built some credibility within the community. Almost ALL new members have a 'trial by fire' sort of indoctrination before we consider their inputs credible - to some level, at least.

Am I mistaken?

- Dan

[SANDRO43]

what you think contributes to a 'credible' post.

To sum it up in a single word, I'd say competence, which is a result of both experience AND intelligence.

Furthermore, in my personal experience, competent people never make a fuss over it, so their tones are seldom contentious and highly emotional .

[Leslie]

Well Dan,

I can't say I agree with this statement.

"Almost ALL new members have a 'trial by fire' sort of indoctrination before we consider their inputs credible - to some level, at least."

This board is VERY intolerant of people who spout rubbish.  You need to know what you are talking about before you post opinions.  However there are new members who come on here and build up a reputation and never get "ripped".

The people who get roasted here are the posers.  Never set foot in FSU and claim to know more than KENC and JB. 
IMHO thats a good thing...

[KenC]

What is interesting to me so far in the responses - is that the majority reference what causes people to LOSE credibility. This suggests there is some BASE LEVEL of credibility offered at the outset - and then the person loses credibility through the various characteristics mentioned.

So my question now is - Do we at RWD give NEW members some fundamental starting point of credibility which they then can lose - or build?

My sense is that we do not. We have known members who, through some way or other (question still open BTW), have built some credibility within the community. Almost ALL new members have a 'trial by fire' sort of indoctrination before we consider their inputs credible - to some level, at least.

Am I mistaken?

- Dan

Dan,
I disagree.  I think that every new member is given a certain amount of credibility or respect until proven differently.  Recent examples could be Kuna, I/O, Rivardco and Dave.  I think that the amount of credibility or respect given to new members is directly proportionate to the amount of respect they give to RWD members too.  If a new member comes here and tells us, hey, I don't know everything, but I do know...... then that member is given immediate respect and the members here will jump through hoops to help.  Where I see problems is when a new or old member asks for advice and then criticizes the advice given or as has happened in the past, even argues that the advice is wrong.  I think it is all in the attitude of the new member.

Look at Syd's first post.  Both I/O and I jumped up and told him why we disagreed with what he posted.  Syd seem to be overwhelmed by the responses.  You and I (and another I forget who) made sure that Syd didn't get discouraged from future posting.  There have been some very sharp new members of late and I think that they are given their props.
KenC

[William3rd]

bonafides would be the word I am thinking of.

[BC]

I don't think we have trial by fire.. it really is not needed.  Most of the seasoned guys can get a pretty good picture from the very first post.

To me it's a sort of 'first impressions' type thing..  of course as discourse goes along any inconsistencies are bound to be questioned.

Those that are quite honest about their situation will have no problem at all, regardless of their initial questions..  along the lines of 'there are no stupid questions'.  Seen it many times.

As far as credibility or bonafides go, everyone starts at a neutral point relative to their particular situation and it either grows or dwindles from there.

For myself those that seem to loose the most credibility are folks that tout 'but... I am an exception!', even going so far as to lead others down hopeless paths - especially when they have little or nothing to show for their own efforts.

[ScottinCrimea]

I sure didn't feel that there was a trial by fire when I first came aboard, but then maybe I just wasn't catching the hints. Overall I felt that members looked over my intro and gave me credit based upon what they felt were areas that I had some knowledge in and gave me the benefit of the doubt n those areas where I was still feeling my way around.  I think, however, if I had jumped right in with strong opinions or advice in areas where I was clueless as some have done, I would have been slapped silly and right quick.  I prefer that only my wife does that. 

[tim 360]

I find all of the above posts excellent in addressing credibility.

Credibility?  Some people possess more than others and that is earned by the content, quality and experience inherent within their posts.  Now, you don't have to personally agree with the poster; opinions will vary in some areas.  But the quality of their thoughts may give one an interior debate within himself. 

I think most members here usually give the benefit of the doubt to most new posters coming here seeking advice or needing answers and I think that is reasonable.  The new poster is usually given a degree of respect at the outset and in short time, as a result of his/her posts their credibility either rises or falls. 

Many new people have never even known a Russian or Ukrainian and the sum of their knowledge is from tantalizing agency websites which...can be dubious and misleading.  Some don't want their delusions shattered.

The most credible posters here have all earned their credibility by the quality, content and sharing their experience with others who should benefit from the input.  One only has to read some posts to gauge credibility.  Some have more than others. cheerio, tim360

[Kuna]

I notice it's generally the experienced (or married) members here commenting...  May I pitch in an idea or two???

I think credibility depends on the topic under discussion.

Example:  jb has strong opinions on things that he KNOWS about but I notice he never gives specific advice on things he has less experience in (like travel to Ukraine or "agency dating").

Credibility probably just comes from giving sound advice on topics the poster is knowledgable in.  I'd find it more helpful to understand what a posters experience is.  

Examples:
- If I was traveling to to a certain city or region I would like to know who has experience in that region so I could communicate with them;
- If I was going through the migration process I'd want to know what a posters experience was;
- If I was looking for advice on a FSUW's views, opinions or character I would like to know what their experience the poster has with women (Married for how long, how many trips where they actually dated women, etc), and;
- If I wanted to understand the risks I would want to know who's been divorced or who's had failed engagements, etc.

In saying this, I'll also say that one of the great strengths of RWD is the diverse opinions given and the debates the ensue.  Sometimes people can become fixated on their own experiences and therefore assert there is only one way to do things.  The debate in here shows there are more than one way to find "success", but different approaches might be more appropriate for different individuals.

Just my thoughts...

Kuna

[Admin]

bonafides would be the word I am thinking of.

OK - well now I will share with you just how shallow I really am

Reading that ("bonafides"), reminded me of a piece in one of my favorite movies. Did any of you see Heath Ledger in "A Knight's Tale" ? Long before he became known as the Galuboy Cowboy.

In that movie (A Knight's Tale - NOT Brokeback Mountain), there is a requirement for 'knights' to possess and display "Patents of Nobility."

So is that what we are asking? For PoN (so to speak)?

- Dan

[Admin]

I notice it's generally the experienced (or married) members here commenting...  May I pitch in an idea or two???

Absolutely !

I was hoping to elicit responses from many of the newer folks to RWD - and also the younger - and across a broad spectrum.

It will be useful to have the opportunity to hear from the members who are going through the adjustment to RWD in real-time.

You see - that is one of the problems. We *need* that feedback - and it is the most difficult to acquire because so many people feel intimidated by participation - even in the most friendly sites.

I hope to hear from MANY of our members - new and established - young and old - single and married - men and women - the entire range.

- Dan

[William3rd]

Sirrrr ULLLLRRRRIIICCCHHHH of Gelderland!!!!!!

I think I was referring more toward experience in the area in which one is posting or reasoned opinions.

There is one member I see-not on this board BTW- who has an opinion for everything, gives dangerous advice, and the opinions change 180 degrees based on time of day or perhaps the cycle of the moon.

For those who wish patents of nobility, then perhaps we can dig up Geoffrey Chaucer to write up a few.

[Daveman]

In that movie (A Knight's Tale - NOT Brokeback Mountain), there is a requirement for 'knights' to possess and display "Patents of Nobility."

So is that what we are asking? For PoN (so to speak)?

- Dan

Great movie.  But, you have to remember that William, or 'Ulrich', was a fraud who falsified his Documents.  Couldn't beat Geof Chaucer as a 'secretary' though. 

PoN - those who have been there, done that, and lived to tell about it.

Sound relationship advice, or to avoid relationship pitfalls? It's the married OR divorced guys, and anyone in a long term relationship.
Advice about living in the FSU? those who are living there
Travel advice? anyone who has been to where you're going
Advice about meeting many women on a single trip? the Agency guys, and those who have done it.
An FSUW perspective? Of course, any of the ladies.

Most everyone is credible in at least one area, some in many areas (also as mentioned before).

Pretty much agreed with the others about this.  I also don't see the trial of fire thing really.  I've only been here a month and have received nothing but sound advice and honest answers.  I've learned a helluva lot.  I had some experiences before, but the 'elders' have definitely shed new light on my experience. 

But it took a while to start to see who is or isn't credible because I had to read quite a bit before I had even a slight idea of who's who and what's what.

[catzenmouse]

In that movie (A Knight's Tale - NOT Brokeback Mountain), there is a requirement for 'knights' to possess and display "Patents of Nobility."

So is that what we are asking? For PoN (so to speak)?

- Dan

I have Photoshop, Illustrator, and Publisher. You just tell me what you want to see and I will be most happy to "cook" one up! 

Any one else need something? My rates are reasonable and I do work on the barter system as well....

Back on topic now:

 I believe that we do give new posters the basic respect they deserve and will, mostly, be fairly patient while they find their "legs" here. Some find those legs faster and move on to being respectable much quicker than others do. Momus is one who went very quickly from being new here to having a high respectable rate to his thoughts and actions. Others have come here and gone straight to negative numbers with only a few posts.

 Even when someone clearly does not have a clue about FSUW, the FWU, or what they are trying to do if they are respectful in how they post they will be gently, again mostly, be steered back on track. If someone wants to earn the ire of members here just come in with nothing to offer and tell us all how much more you know than we do. I'm not saying that because I know everything or even think I know everything because I surely don't. In many ways I'm still new at this. And with how I did a lot of things early on I could have just as easily ended up a horror story. Believe me I KNOW how lucky I was and am!

Ken

[timothe]

I tend to pay most attention to those who share their personal experiences.  I'm not much into "theory" about the process and I have little to no tolerance for those who come across as disingenuous.  I can even understand the "know it alls" to some extent because at least I know where they are coming from.   

For the most part, I think the people here are pretty good about posting based on experience.  And I'm grateful to the married guys that stick around because I can't see myself being available to contribute to a site like this once my ladyfriend gets here.

I've found some of these "age" threads kinda monotonous, though.  I don't know why they keep going...everyone knows who is going to take what side and beat it to death.  I wish there was more "discovery" in these threads but I suppose that's not possible now that the pursuit has some history and most of the important information can be found in the stickied posts and articles.   

[I/O]

Dan: I beg to differ regarding the "Indoctrination by fire" thing.  Almost without exception I have noticed, and I received the same courtesy in the beginning, new members are given every opportunity to "State their case".  It is only when they get waaaaaaaaay off track or come up with something completely ridiculous that they are kicked into line. 

So.......the base point you are looking for, seems to me, the normal justice system, that is innocent until proven guilty.  I think this board is excellent for giving freshmen "The benefit of the doubt" at the outset. 

I try (maybe not always successfully) to look at both sides because usually there is benefit in so doing.  I suspect there would be times when that would be perceived to be switching positions.  It is not. 

It seems that freshmen are given due credibility until proven otherwise and of course they have the opportunity to build on that base level.  The long time members, generally speaking have done just that. Built on the base level. 

Credibility will ultimately be tested by "Provety". 

It is a tad off topic, but I do think some general advice should be posted for freshmen and perhaps even be sent directly to all members, that being, state your case on subjects you have first hand knowledge of and ask questions in other areas, general opinions should be underlined as just that, general opinion. Within that criteria, all members, new and old, have the opportunity to fully participate in all areas without giving crazy advice to anyone. (I see this as first and foremost an information board and only secondly a discussion board)

There also should always be some allowance for humour and lightheartedness, but it SHOULD be delivered within the posters realm of expertise and then will be duly seen as it is.

FWIW

I/O

[Chelchov]

Being a freshman in the whole FSU dating scene...   

I don't really have much to say, but I agree with most of posts in this thread about credibility.  I'd rather to listen to someone who actually has real experiences in something that I would like to do.  I rather not to listen to someone who just posts his observations and theories about FSU girls such as recent posts by Richardo.  I prefer to listen to someone who has been there, done that and say the way it is over there and what's like to be married to a RW such as KenC, jb, Ken (cat and mouse) and others.   

I know that I have credibility in some areas and not in other areas.  I prefer to just post my thought in response to some posts and some areas that I know most such as living here in the USA and learning the Russian language as 2nd or 3rd language.  I am not going to post that I don't know about.  That includes my thoughts about Russia/FSU until I actually step my foot on their soil.  Sometimes, I post what I think or my perceptions about love/FSU to let anyone scruntize my thoughts and I'll correct my old thoughts. 

I just read topic that are interesting to me.  If it's not interesting, I prefer to pass on them and move on to other posts that are more intriguing.   

[catzenmouse]

That includes my thoughts about Russia/FSU until I actually step my foot on their soil.  Sometimes, I post what I think or my perceptions about love/FSU to let anyone scruntize my thoughts and I'll correct my old thoughts.

That, IMO, is exactly the way to learn and understand. We all have preconceived notions about what is what. If you throw some thoughts out and listen to what people who have some experience related to those thoughts you will have a much better understanding about how to go forward. This board has a VERY valuable resource available. Guys like JB, KenC, Leslie, Capt B, and our very own Dan have "been there, done that, got the shirt AND the girl" and have the wonderful courtesy to stay around to tell others about that experience. To get that kind of info on your own you would spend thousands, even tens of thousands, and go through a world of hurt before you would be able to get that knowledge.

This ain't easy, and regardless of what some will tell you, it ain't for everybody!

Ken

[William3rd]

I've found some of these "age" threads kinda monotonous, though.  I don't know why they keep going...everyone knows who is going to take what side and beat it to death.  I wish there was more "discovery" in these threads but I suppose that's not possible now that the pursuit has some history and most of the important information can be found in the stickied posts and articles.   

Its called senility, youngster. Us old timers cant remember what we had fer dinner, much less what we posted an hour ago.