Interpersonal conflict in this subforum

[AeroMcAeroFace]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Not sure of the odds, but I'd say aerohead comes back and JulianEdgar doesn't.

They just could never agree, but like politicians on opposite sides, or people of different religions they both had evidence to support their viewpoint, but could never accept the other ones evidence, they both had a valid albeit contradictory viewpoint. Two people divided by common ground.

Julian being here made this forum more interesting but seemingly every thread became aerohead vs Julian.

[California98Civic]

Wow. I am glad it is temporary, and I hope it calms the waters for returns. The unreasonableness and the ad hominem tone and the endlessness of it had contributed significantly to my avoiding this forum in the last month or two. But I second everything said here about the knowledge they BOTH had. I didn't agree with either of them all the time. Nothing wrong with that. I learned from them both. Sign the peace accords and come on back, boys!

[MetroMPG]

Hope springs eternal... (not sarcasm)

FYI, for those who asked: it was 1 week.

[Cd]

I just recently started visiting the forum again.
Right off, I saw one or two posts, and could tell there was some bickering going on.
Julian wasn't even a member the last time I was here, so I knew I had a lot of catching up to do to see what all the fuss was about.

It seems that with aerodynamics, nothing is set in stone.
It seems you have to be open to new ideas, even if they go completely against what you have known to be true for decades.
For example, " The Template. "
Not only the EV-1, but now the Mercedes A Class sedans , as well as the Lucid air - (and others ) have superb .22 or under Cds, despite having a departure way before the ideal curve of the template.
( All feature quite a bit of tumblehome, so perhaps that is what is working to keep the flow attached. )

I'm glad to see new viewpoints on ideas that are set in stone, but I'm glad to see the bickering go.

[freebeard]

Real soon now... It will be economical to instantiate an adversarial generative AI in some cloud, and have it referee the record that exists here of their positions.

They'd likely both be bested.

[redpoint5]

I didn’t know that even aerodynamics could be a religious topic. I missed those threads because I assumed the topic was over my head.

That said, we don’t have to read every post or thread. To that end, you can hide individuals that don’t add value to your day. Never understood why a contentious thread or individuals would run people off when they have full control of their navigation.

[oil pan 4]

Aerodynamics for cars can usually fall into at least 1 or more categories:
Good, bad and ugly.
No need to argue so much about it.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Aerodynamics for cars can usually fall into at least 1 or more categories:
Good, bad and ugly.
No need to argue so much about it.

It’s all relatively easily testable. We’ve got ABA and the accelerator block method.

[kach22i]

I have not been in the forum much these past few 3-4 months but everytime I pop into visit the "clash" is unavoidable.

They both have much to offer, but I do wish there was a friendlier way to resolve differences.

[sgtlethargic]

I think the clash will continue if both come back as frequent posters, even with the threat of more bans.

Being banned makes some people mad, so they might not return or post as much.

In thinking about how it might be handled differently, I think about changes the forum could make. That led to the question: Should the forum change to accomodate them or vice versa?