Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "inativo" —a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Reative o tópico publicando uma resposta.
1katieinseattle
One of my guilty pleasures is reading a good, detailed, vicious fisking of a terrible book. (I may or may not enjoy this more than I actually enjoy reading good books...) I've found some good ones of Left Behind and The Da Vinci Code. Anyone know of other good ones?
4Sandydog1
I had to look that one up too, Katie. I thought Seattle was in some other country with a different language.
This old curmudgeon New Englander doesn't spend enough time on the ol' screen.
Except for LT....
This old curmudgeon New Englander doesn't spend enough time on the ol' screen.
Except for LT....
6Morphidae
Per wiki:
The term fisking, or to fisk, is blogosphere slang describing a point-by-point criticism that highlights perceived errors, or disputes the analysis in a statement, article, or essay. Eric S. Raymond, in the Jargon File, defined the term as:
A point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or (especially) news story. A really stylish fisking is witty, logical, sarcastic and ruthlessly factual; flaming or handwaving is considered poor form. Named after Robert Fisk, a British journalist who was a frequent (and deserving) early target of such treatment.
The British newspaper The Observer defined fisking as "...the practice of savaging an argument and scattering the tattered remnants to the four corners of the internet (named after Robert Fisk of the Independent, whose columns are considered soft targets)"
The technique has its critics. Andrew Orlowski in The Register commented that "Many of today's debaters prefer 'Fisking'—line-by-line rebuttals where facts are dropped like radar chaff—to rational debate or building a coherent argument." Software engineering writer Joel Spolsky has commented that it is the same as the "line-by-line nitpick" reply style common on Usenet and not a new phenomenon, also writing "It's fun for the nitpicker but never worth reading."
As for Robert Fisk himself, in a 2005 interview he stated that he was unaware of the term. "I have to be honest: I don't use the Internet. I've never seen a blog in my life. I don't even use email, I don't waste my time with this. I am not interested. I couldn't care less. I think the Internet has become a hate machine for a lot of people and I want nothing to do with it."
The term fisking, or to fisk, is blogosphere slang describing a point-by-point criticism that highlights perceived errors, or disputes the analysis in a statement, article, or essay. Eric S. Raymond, in the Jargon File, defined the term as:
A point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or (especially) news story. A really stylish fisking is witty, logical, sarcastic and ruthlessly factual; flaming or handwaving is considered poor form. Named after Robert Fisk, a British journalist who was a frequent (and deserving) early target of such treatment.
The British newspaper The Observer defined fisking as "...the practice of savaging an argument and scattering the tattered remnants to the four corners of the internet (named after Robert Fisk of the Independent, whose columns are considered soft targets)"
The technique has its critics. Andrew Orlowski in The Register commented that "Many of today's debaters prefer 'Fisking'—line-by-line rebuttals where facts are dropped like radar chaff—to rational debate or building a coherent argument." Software engineering writer Joel Spolsky has commented that it is the same as the "line-by-line nitpick" reply style common on Usenet and not a new phenomenon, also writing "It's fun for the nitpicker but never worth reading."
As for Robert Fisk himself, in a 2005 interview he stated that he was unaware of the term. "I have to be honest: I don't use the Internet. I've never seen a blog in my life. I don't even use email, I don't waste my time with this. I am not interested. I couldn't care less. I think the Internet has become a hate machine for a lot of people and I want nothing to do with it."
