Ill-Informed Discussions.

[cowdery]

I have no interest in pointing fingers at anyone but I have been shocked at how ill-informed some of the discussions are on this board. I don't blame the people who I know know better for not jumping in because we all get tired of debunking the same myths and misconceptions, and correcting the same factual mistakes. I suggest that many participants here would be well served by reading and watching, and certainly writing and recording, fewer blogs and podcasts, and perhaps even making fewer posts here, that all seem to recycle the same ignorance. Instead read a book, or WHISKY Magazine, or Malt Advocate, or The Bourbon Country Reader. I hate to say it, but the web alone will not make you a knowledgable whiskey enthusiast (assuming you want to be). Either the answers aren't there or it's just a bitch to find them amidst all the crap. Too much talking, not enough learning. And don't play ball on my lawn.

[dmarkle]

So one of my favorite pages on the inter-tubes is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

I laughed out loud when I saw that Wikipedia actually had it. Perhaps it's high time to come up with a SB.com Grand List of Common Bourbon Misconceptions.

[Josh]

I'll be the first to admit I've been guilty of what Chuck is talking about on multiple occasions, as recently as yesterday.

There's a learning curve for everybody. The key, I think, is knowing what you do and don't know and being humble enough to admit when you're wrong.

[T Comp]

A sticky perhaps? I will add that the search function works back to 1999.

[p_elliott]

I too think I have my facts in a row only to find out later that I might have been off a LITTLE. But I am not one afraid to ask stupid questions the only question is is Chuck getting tired of answering them? :skep:

[sku]

This post reminds me, I found an old half-drunk bottle of Hiram Walker's Blended Whiskey in my grandpappy's attic which I would like to sell, hopefully for thousands of dollars. Is it still good? What is it worth?

I assume it is from Kentucky since all Bourbon must be made in Kentucky and/or Kentucky is the only state can have its name on the label. It also states that it is "sour mash" which means that lemons were added as part of the Lincoln County Process.

If you have a bid on this priceless Bourbon, please let me know.

[squire]

Our of my price range sku but I sure would like to sample it. I mean, older is better, right?

[flintlock]

Some general thoughts:

I'm new to bourbon, and new to this site. I knew, coming in, that I would ask a lot of beginner questions, but using the search function I tried to keep them to a minimum. I try to keep my eyes open and my posts to a minimum unless I have something useful to say or can't find the answer. A lot of the information is very hard to search for because everyone uses a different abbreviation, and names are seldom spelled out. Elmer T. Lee could be ETL or ETLee or E.T. Lee or ETL15 or ETL 15. Now multiply this times at least 100 bourbons. That's one issue.

All sites have to deal with people who only want information on what their "thing" (motorcycle, wristwatch, Hummel figurine...you name it) is worth. It's part of being a public internet site.

If SB wants to keep the noise to bandwidth ratio as good as possible it either needs to do a better job of education (FAQ's, photos of dusties with historical information, etc.) or it needs make the walls a little higher. I think the best way to do this is with a minimum post count to post in certain forums (collector's corner would be a good place to wall off, for instance). I've seen this work very well on several other forums that have a tremendous potential for bad behavior, namely Toyota Land Cruisers and men's style and fashion. Both of the major websites that deal with these topics have sections of the site that are off limits to the "just joined" crowd. Set the bar at whatever minimum the owner and mods think is appropriate. 10, 50, 100...whatever.

What Chuck says is true, but even among enthusiasts there are all levels of expertise, and there are always going to be repetitive simple questions. Maybe a better bourbon history section would be good. Also, you might consider kicking a member off if they don't post (X) number of times a year. Lurkers who only want to poach dusties would have to rejoin frequently. Many "members" here joined in 2003 and posted once. They're either lurking or they've moved on - either way they need to be prodded by making them go through the rejoin process. It takes about 30 seconds.

And last: The general air of respect that reigns here (and if you don't think SB is gentlemanly and respectful, I kindly direct your attention to the other 99.9% of internet forums...) makes it harder for the more outspoken members to "enforce" good behavior. On other forums there is always a group of funny, brutal, wise cracking old timers who enjoy busting on new people who don't use the search function for basic questions, or who try to sell something they found in the attic, or point you incessantly to their blog, or link you to their ebay auction. It can make the atmosphere somewhat ruder and more "wild west", (it also provides most of the humor...) but it is effective at keeping people between the ditches so to speak.

For what it's worth...

[barturtle]

If SB wants to keep the noise to bandwidth ratio as good as possible

It should be noted that the complaint is not from SB, and even though the poster happens to be SB's most prolific, it still isn't "his lawn"

[nivto]

Those are all good points, flintlock, but it seems like the main gripe here has more to do with people entering into discussions ignorant of the facts and offering up inaccurate information about the topic at hand.

[bvscfanatic]

It should be noted that the complaint is not from SB, and even though the poster happens to be SB's most prolific, it still isn't "his lawn"

Thank you, Tim. Pretty much my thoughts too.

[cowdery]

The 'my lawn' comment was intended as an acknowledgment that I sound like a grumpy old man. I didn't think it might be taken as proprietary.

Apropos of which, we all make mistakes. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about people to whom I want to say, "just because you don't know something, that doesn't make it a secret."

I value this site because it tells me what people are interested in at any given moment but I also value it for the people who are obsessive about some of the categories of knowledge I'm not so obsessive about.

Since everyone on Straightbourbon.com is a volunteer, making the site more of an encyclopedia is unlikely.

Yes, this is one of the friendliest and most generous places on the web.

Mainly I'm suggesting that if one hasn't read any books about American whiskey, and doesn't get any of the major publications (I would add Paul Pacult's Spirits Journal to the ones already mentioned), then there is a very good chance one doesn't know as much as one thinks one does, and probably should comment less frequently. This problem has increased with the rise of American whiskey conversation in social media generally, most of which is ingnorant and of little value.

I'd like to think I have enough credibilty here to point this out in a polite way in the hope that perhaps people who come here having acquired most of their information from social media will realize there are other, much more credible sources of information, and thereby learn to recognize the difference.

And, yes, this is just the personal opinion of a contributor, who is in fact a grumpy old man. Straightbourbon.com is not my site. I'm not even a moderator, just a contributor, and that's the way I want it.

[flintlock]

It should be noted that the complaint is not from SB,

You're correct - I misspoke. Sorry.

[darkluna]

I read it on the inter-web so it must be true. The only subscription I have is to Modern Jackass.

My favorite line from that show: "I always throught quesadilla meant "What's the dealio?" in Spanish"

[doubleblank]

I get all my alcohol related poop from Modern Drunkard magazine and website. I make my beer buying decisions based on comments in the "Best Cheap Beer" forum topic.

Randy

[barturtle]

While I appreciate the value of well informed discussion, I'd be hesitant to create a manifesto in favor of them. Much like the former battle cry of "use the search function" (which I'm guilty of too), they tend to inhibit newcomers from joining the conversation.

Sometimes ill-informed questions or statements can lead to a very informative discussions that can lead to new ways of thinking about the subject matter.

Statements such these against ill-informed discussions, especially when put out there by long-time members, mods, "post-count gurus", and published authors, can carry much more weight than they are worthy of, to sometimes timid newcomers to the board.

And I'm just a cranky old barturtle.

[CorvallisCracker]

So one of my favorite pages on the inter-tubes is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_misconceptions

I laughed out loud when I saw that Wikipedia actually had it. Perhaps it's high time to come up with a SB.com Grand List of Common Bourbon Misconceptions.

Good list, although they missed the one about Irish whiskey NOT being made from potatoes. A surprising number of people believe that. I've also found that at least half the people I've met think all vodka is made from potatoes.

[MarkEdwards]

I value this site because it tells me what people are interested in at any given moment but I also value it for the people who are obsessive about some of the categories of knowledge I'm not so obsessive about.

Since everyone on Straightbourbon.com is a volunteer, making the site more of an encyclopedia is unlikely.

Ooh, there's a thought - is it time yet for a 'WhiskiPedia'? Maybe even a 'WhiskiLeaks' site for all the secrets and rumors?

I see a great need (grin).

[sku]

Ooh, there's a thought - is it time yet for a 'WhiskiPedia'? Maybe even a 'WhiskiLeaks' site for all the secrets and rumors?

I see a great need (grin).

There actually was a Whiskypedia site put together a few years ago by Ian Buxton, but it didn't go anywhere (had a nice logo though).

[B.B. Babington]

...The key...is knowing what you do and don't know and being humble enough to admit when you're wrong.

There's two points that's hard for a lot of people. First, one has to know a good bit before they realize they don't know it all. Second, so many people hate being wrong, I, however, am used to it.

I've seen the same scenario in a zillion forums. Since this is an open forum, there's going to be lots of folks that sip a little whiskey at a party last night and drop by to learn more, and they can't help but brag about that super fine bottle they had that cost a whopping $15.

Some forums handle it differently. Several forums I visit are totally closed to new members. One forum I used to use cost $1000/year to be a member. Some forums have a lengthy Q&A process before accepting new members. There's different ways to handle it to make it exclusive. But is exclusive a good idea? Lots of the folks that drop in for a quick note may have found something really interesting to tell.

[pepcycle]

Time for a hopeless kibitzer to get involved.

1. Timothy: Your're not old

2. Chuck: You don't even have a lawn (literally)

3. I've never let the facts or truth interfere with a good thread

4. No one has to read or respond to a thread. Ignoring dumb threads is a sure way to curtail dumbidity

5. Conscience Dreaming is the monetary solution to grammar control of literacy

[callmeox]

I'll be the first to admit I've been guilty of what Chuck is talking about on multiple occasions, as recently as yesterday.

There's a learning curve for everybody. The key, I think, is knowing what you do and don't know and being humble enough to admit when you're wrong.

I agree wholeheartedly that Josh is a veritable cornucopia of misinformation.

With that said, if you didn't understand Chuck's lawn remark you need to get out on the internet more. :grin:

[kickert]

There actually was a Whiskypedia site put together a few years ago by Ian Buxton, but it didn't go anywhere (had a nice logo though).

I knew that was around, but did a search for it and couldn't find anything... I guess it went under.

[squire]

I figured this thread would grow legs.

[cowdery]

To be accurate, I have a 1/84 share of a very nice lawn.