What's the difference between this group and a real wind energy group?
Well, in this group, I appear to be the only one with a wind energy
background. In the real groups, I'm in the majority - everyone there
knows about wind energy or at least wants to learn, and when the
newbies come in sounding like one more Dave Santos or Theo Schmidt, a
hundred active participants, out of thousands of lurkers, can all help
to set the person straight. Hopefully in a gentle way, but they tend to
start squirming and calling names pretty quick, in most cases.
As a group, we've already got the various types of humorous new wind
turbines numbered, like in that old joke about jokes getting a number.
Newbies don't know the jokes by number so we can have our fun without
insulting the newbies, like mental health people classify delusions.
Drag devices such as Dave S. proposes are a #56, for example.
Why the numbering system? Well, we figured out after a few years that
our real role is NOT wind energy experts giving advice to newbies. No,
our real role is as mental health professionals. Yes you heard that
We've found that, if you take a hundred newbies proclaiming the
superiority of their drag-based idea, oscillating idea, flapping idea,
concentrator idea, etc., asking for opinions, analysis, evaluation,
suggestions for improvement, etc., ninety-nine of that hundred will
react with hostility to any such requested expert analysis.
The only opinion they were prepared for was "That is a great
breakthrough - where can I buy one?". Anything else, and they get
really mad. They immediately start calling names, trying to turn their
whole original technical question into a personality issue.
They have to bring the Wright Brothers into it, for example. They
almost HAVE to cite the fact that the Wright Brothers were ridiculed by
"experts" as proof that their Professor Crackpot design MUST be valid.
See, if one inventor ever overcame any doubt, that must apply to the
newbie too. Why? It feels good to the newbie!
The newbie has painted themselves, psychologically, into a small,
well-understood corner. In this corner, they have side-stepped the need
to get up to speed in an art, and are instead an innovator in this art,
due to their superior "insight"... In this fantasy world, nobody else,
in 3000 years, has attained their understanding that in its simplest
sense, wind can "push" on a surface.
Nobody has figured out how to get energy from the wind at all - it's
all just a huge new mystery, and anyone's opinion is just as valid as
the next. There are no existing wind turbines - you can't look out the
window and see working windfarms in this extreme fantasy world.
There's no weight limit, no limit to complexity, no limit to cost, no
need for reliability, no advantage to hard blades using lift - nothing
that has been learned applies in this new fantasy world!
So when someone immersed in this fantasy world steps into the real world of wind energy, we already know exactly what to expect.
We expect to be called every name in the book, especially names like
"hostile" "intolerant" "closed-minded" - I can't even think of all the
names , but you get the idea. The idea is that the newbies idea CANNOT
be truly scrutinized. The ONLY answer to the fact that the experts are
pointing out detractive aspects to the design is that the experts are
mean, not nice, lacking understanding, are closed-minded, cannot
recognize an improvement, etc.
It is only this position that can maintain the delusional newbie's
fantasy that they are a genius because they have a breakthrough! The
experts MUST be wrong, and darn it, there's no time to argue theory,
this is an emergency and there's only time to briefly suggest that the
discrepancy is based on the poor attitude of all the experts!
You see this emerge in the form of endless accusations such as "you
have a chip on your shoulder". See really, there's no "chip" - I just
checked. In reality, that is a dodge. The fact is, there is no chip,
just another example of the same old idiot design being suggested for
the thousandth time - maybe this time they want to take it to the air
but its the same old nonsense.
So we already know, the newbie can only see this as a "chip" on a
"shoulder", so we just stop making ourselves a target for every newbie
to call us the same names for the thousandth time.
Some of them come in with a new "breakthrough" every few months, each
time declaring the new dumb idea as the next paradigm-shattering
improvement in the art. Others start with one already-disproven or at
least inadvisable idea, and it never changes. Most arrive and disappear
within a year, while others "drag" it out for a new years. In the end
they all go away eventually, even if it takes a decade.
Anyway, we've recently decided it's not worth our time to tell these
people what's wrong with their designs anymore. Too many years of the
same pattern, always being called "the bad guy" after taking our time
to try and offer constructive critique, when ASKED to do so.
Now we know. We know we're just dealing with "one more nutcase". We now
understand that we're NOT being asked to critique a design or idea.
We're being asked to stroke the ego of someone who may be in a fragile
mental state, and our best move really is to congratulate them on their
new idea, and just wish them good luck.
It's not the new idea that's in question, it's just the fargile mental
state that we have to be careful not to shatter. We've decided that the
"technical discussion" is just a dodge - a backdrop - the issue at hand
is not a new design, it's how to keep someone from losing it, having a
bad day, and blaming us. That's all really - the machine doesn't
matter, since we've seen it so many times, it's more important to just
be nice. The real issue is keeping the people from getting upset, and
that is all we can really do. So we've decided to keep things like
reality out of the discussion.
If we feel the need to critique their idea, we just mention the number
of the well-worn joke that their "new" idea falls into, and never tell
the newbie what the number even refers to. That way we avoid being in
the movie "Groundhog Day" where we have the same stupid argument with
the "same" (or similar) person every day for the rest of our lives.
I think this is a good idea since with some people, facts don't matter,
and name-calling is all they've got, and all they will never have, and
jumping in to enjoy more of that punishment is not productive.
The concepts of "no good deed goes unpunished", "you can't explain to
an idiot that they're an idiot", "you've got to choose your battles",
"go along to get along", "if you can't say something nice..." etc. all
come to bear.
It is kind of amusing and also kind of weird, in this group, every such
newbie name-calling desperate denial seems to have the name "Doug" in
it, as though if only they could get "Doug" to shut up with his
unwanted facts and industry experience, the dubious ideas would
suddenly start working and the newbies would have a power-purchase
agreement fall into their laps.
In the real wind energy groups, everyone is a "Doug" or at least most
people really run windmills and understand how they work, or actually
want to learn, so there's not one person citing knowledge against a
field of newbies, but instead, usually one newbie, against a field of
Now please bear in mind, my opinion has little or nothing to do with
dictating how well your idea will work. I just give my opinion based on
some limited experience in the art. Fixating on me and my attitudes
will never get your machine in the air and selling power.
So anyway, we've decided in the real world of wind energy on the web,
that we're not truly dealing with a technical question at all. Nope,
99% of the time, we're dealing with a mental health case - a break with
reality, and just informing the "patient" that they are delusional will
NOT cure them. If it were that easy, the whole mental health profession
would have a lot fewer job openings.
Nope, even years of "therapy" might be insufficient to "cure" the
delusions of someone sufficiently intent on promoting their
breakthrough. Since we've had this recent breakthrough (for us) in how
best to handle the endless newbies, and it probably behooves me (give
me hooves baby!) to carry this policy to this group. Just say
"Congratulations and good luck!"
And it makes sense: if you worked in a mental hospital and noticed
after a few years, patient after patient with the same unproductive
delusions, and notice it's usually impossible to "talk them down" or to
factually dispute their delusions, and that debating what they say fact
by fact will invariably involve an assault on the personality of the
therapist, throwing the whole process into reverse, you'd at some point
adopt a policy that adressed the state of the patient rather than argue
with the specifics of their delusions, point-by-point.
So to one and all, "Congratulations on your idea and Good Luck!"
I'll save numbering anything since nobody here knows the numbers.
Have a day!