As this site becomes more popular and the posting volume increases, it is worth mentioning that quality in posting does not necessarily follow quantity.

It is difficult to start out with a new interest (like making espresso in your home), to come to a site such as this, and then to have to try to decide whether or not what you are reading is actually correct. This is not a new problem, and of course, there are many reasons for incorrect information being written and repeated in online venues. Sometimes it seems obvious that something *must* be true, is assumed to be true, is then repeated so many times that it seems like it is true, but then it turns out it is false. Other times a false way of trying to look at something objectively ends up yielding (surprise!) false results. And some times, people simply don't know what they are talking about, plain and simple.

Unless you have personally interacted with individuals posting here (or on any other site) you cannot simply assume that they really know anything much about what they are writing, and you can't assume that they really have any taste in coffee. This even applies to people who post a lot, which would include myself. I've read a few posts lately that seem to imply that some people view me as being some sort of expert, and I'd caution you that I've written my share of stuff that later proved to be flat wrong since I got into this little world of online coffee. So has most everyone else who has been in this little hobby for a while.

There are threads that get written about particular pieces of equipment, for example, that will have one or two or maybe three people going back and forth about this piece of gear with no one else participating. According to these one or two or three people, the thing is just phenomenal, god's gift to whatever, but curiously, no one else chimes in or participates in the thread. An astute reader might consider the possibility that others, likely other people even more knowledgeable, have avoided participating in the thread because they don't want to be confrontational, to be slinging mud, implying or stating that these one or two or three posters don't have a clue. So, the thread comes off giving the impression that the piece of gear is phenomenal, when in fact it might be a terrible POS.

Of course, it depends on who these people are. If it is Dan Kehn and Dave Stephens and Jeff Sawdy debating the merits of a particular espresso machine or grinder or whatever, I'd give that a lot of credence. If it is 3 people you have no way of evaluating, I'd be cautious.

I probably should not have posted this, but for some reason I thought I should, so I did it.

ken

Ken,

Well said, though I read it in my shorts. One of the most surprising pieces of trivia I learned from watching way too many episodes of The Actor's Studio is that actors get into character, mentally, by wearing that character's cloths. From Robert Deniro to Phillip Seymour Hoffman, they all placed large weight on how the garment we wear affects our state of mind. Which brings me to my point here, perhaps we should all get into a tux before posting. I aim to try it next time, and I do have a monocle to match.

Hi Ken,

I really appreciate that you have said this. I am an espresso newbie, and have only been reading the forums for less than a year. I have finally begun to notice the difference between statements that are opinion, statements that are fact, and statements that are just posters blowing hot air around. I have said on the CG forum, that there needs to be a section written especially for newbies, which spells out "Coffee Myths" and "Issues under Debate", so we don't get thrown off when we read these things, and think that they are facts, or that the debate has been decided one way or another.

There is so much overwhelming information for us to dig through, and so little guidance as to which information is accurate. Many times people will just point to a thread and tell a newbie to read it, not realizing that we have no way of knowing what to read and what to ignore in the thread. We don't have enough background information - as many of those in the forum do - to be able to read between the lines. Many of the threads can be so esoteric that they go completely over our heads, and - as I found - some of the things that people write are completely ridiculous, or even worse, have ulterior motives - especially when newbies are concerned. Ultimately, we wind up learning through experience, or by training with professional baristas (as I did), that much of what we have read isn't true, or is blatant manipulation - so the "wisdom" of the collective coffee community finally comes into question, as it should.

I appreciate - and have noticed - your efforts to make things easier for those of us who are just beginning, so that we don't get discouraged along the way and just give up, which happens all too often. Thank you very much for all of your help. I just hope that the rest of the real "experts" on the forum will take notice of this thread and join in your efforts to make it easier for newbies to learn how to differentiate fact from myth, and to continue to shield them from some of the sharks that lurk in the forums.

It is easy to get lost in all the information here and it can be difficult to decide what is right and what is wrong; what is good advice and what is bad. As moderators, we work hard to try and make information here easier to find; we move and rename topics; we try to ask guiding questions, etc. The hope is that members new and old alike will be able to find useful information, conversations and be more inclined to participate.

Now that said, it think that is healthy to think that everything you read here is total malarkey. Of course I don't believe that to be true. But as a new or old enthusiast, one should always question what they read and try to determine for themselves what is good or bad information. Try new things, try recommended things, heck, try things that are not recommended. Experiment for yourself and grow your experience and knowledge. When you think you have it figured out, you might discover that you had it all wrong. Or maybe not. Taste is such a subjective thing. What I may think is awesome, you may think is worse than dirty dishwater.

Making espresso isn't as hard as one might think from reading these forums. Keep that in mind all the time, it's a simple process. Grind, dose, pull, taste... that's it. Everything else is purely optional. I often like to keep in the back of my mind the thought of an Italian barista that is pulling single shot after single shot of espresso with a seemingly minimum of fuss.

I bet if you asked a goodly number of crusty old Italians that have been in the espresso biz what they thought of the discussions here, they'd probably say we are all nuts... or maybe not.

As an old broad in jammies who has made more than a few errors in judgment about posting here and there, I am SO glad you decided to post this particular post, Ken.

I am trying hard to learn to hold my tongue which seems to have a mind of its own. And I'm learning to read more critically....Thanks in great measure to your particularly measured way of proffering information.

Thanks and Happy New Year

Susan

Ken Fox wrote:It is difficult to start out with a new interest (like making espresso in your home), to come to a site such as this, and then to have to try to decide whether or not what you are reading is actually correct.

It is the responsibility of the poster that has the high-post count to qualify his posts. I use a few tricks to keep me humble here, and at a few of the other sites I tend to hang out on.
1. Facts are facts. There are facts based on references, and those references should be cited if the facts are going to be used in a discussion that brings them into question. "Wiki reports that water boils at 212F at sea level."
2. Facts are experiences. There are those results of empirical and anecdotal evidence. "When I did that, My Silvia did this", and (Dan Kehn has tested three of those, and he reports that they..."
3. Opinions aren't facts. Opinions are based on experiences and anecdotes. Opinions are those things that you hold to be true, but really have no facts to support that opinion, other than your personal experiences and those of others. Reporting an experience is a fact, you had that experience. Reporting that that experience is the result of a + b is an opinion, regardless of how many times it has occurred to you and your friends. Just because every time you do a + b you get c isn't anything more than an indication that these two things cause a third. It's a good one, mind you, but not always true! "Every Tuesday, my shots are 7.5 Bar instead of the 8.5 Bar I usually get. Tuesdays cost me 1 Bar of pressure." Could be that Tuesday, at eight AM is the time that the maid does your neighbors laundry every week, dropping the pressure to your pump a bit...
4. Opinions are variable. The story of the Elephant described by six blind men comes to mind. They're all right. I teach swordsmanship, and I tell my students that my instructions are one of the tools that they get, and the instructions of others are just more tools. The simple fact that some of us will absolutely contradict one another doesn't mean that one of us has to be wrong. Some of the tools I teach won't work well in every situation, and some of the tools I teach are a preference of mine and work for me. They may not work for everyone, with different kit, and different situations.

If I can manage to post with all of that in my head, anyone that goes awry with my advice only has themselves to blame!

Ken Fox wrote:It is difficult to start out with a new interest (like making espresso in your home), to come to a site such as this, and then to have to try to decide whether or not what you are reading is actually correct. This is not a new problem, and of course, there are many reasons for incorrect information being written and repeated in online venues.

Sigh... you are right. What can we do to reduce "disinformation"?

HB wrote:Sigh... you are right. What can we do to reduce "disinformation"?

Hi Dan,

I think, aside from keeping in mind as we write that we can always be wrong about something, that there's not too much. As Ken implied, critical reading is almost always more important, because by definition we can't be aware of our unconscious assumptions. It is important to try to sort out, when we post, what comes from our personal experience and what that might mean, and it's important not to simply parrot others' opinions, particularly without attribution to avoid what has been called a misinformation cascade (on CarTalk, so it's attributed!). One of the things that's been driven in for me in what is now a longish career in engineering is how hard it is to know what you know, i.e. what an experiment is telling you. That's why replication in science is so important.

Best,
David

Yes there may be alot of "disinformation" that pops up during discussions on this site but I find more often than not that we generally work our way to a good answer in the end. Maybe Surowiecki got it right - The Wisdom of Crowds.

Cheers

Ian

"As I grow older, I pay less attention to what men say. I just watch what they do." -- Andrew Carnegie