- Joined
- Aug 26, 2010
Not having read the posts awhile, I was surprised to learn that Mathman the sick poppy got cornered, battered and made apologize twice for saying "Chan fan paranoia". As sleek and dulcet as his words normally are, I expect him to make a little booboo sometimes, and this time he did and apologized for it. Big deal! Why so unforgiving to make him apologize twice?
SkateFiguring mentioned that Mathman's zealous praise was uncharacteristic of Chan fans on this board. It hit me that the so-called "fan" is a social construct. Enjoying and admiring Chan's skating is not enough. You have to say or behave in a certain way to be accepted as a "fan". If you praise Chan more than SkateFiguring does, you are not a Chan fan on this board, period!!!
With his penchant of taking a diplomatic and neutral stand, Mathman seldom praised Chan openly, but given his lengthy years of watching figure skating, I certainly assumed he was not blind to Chan’s talent and certainly was not surprised that he would give a high estimation of Chan’s scoring. He made a wrong choice of words and, in order to explain himself, he revealed his prediction of Chan’s scrores, which in normal situation he would have kept to himself. It was obvious to me that Mathman was sincere about what he said. Why can’t some self-styled Chan fans see it as well? Will they consider the possibility that they are too emotionally involved and therefore, for lack of a better word, biased in interpretation?
SkateFiguring mentioned that Mathman's zealous praise was uncharacteristic of Chan fans on this board. It hit me that the so-called "fan" is a social construct. Enjoying and admiring Chan's skating is not enough. You have to say or behave in a certain way to be accepted as a "fan". If you praise Chan more than SkateFiguring does, you are not a Chan fan on this board, period!!!
With his penchant of taking a diplomatic and neutral stand, Mathman seldom praised Chan openly, but given his lengthy years of watching figure skating, I certainly assumed he was not blind to Chan’s talent and certainly was not surprised that he would give a high estimation of Chan’s scoring. He made a wrong choice of words and, in order to explain himself, he revealed his prediction of Chan’s scrores, which in normal situation he would have kept to himself. It was obvious to me that Mathman was sincere about what he said. Why can’t some self-styled Chan fans see it as well? Will they consider the possibility that they are too emotionally involved and therefore, for lack of a better word, biased in interpretation?