There seems to be a common process when changes are proposed or go ahead. Firstly, the masses tend to be resistant to change (whether for good or bad or in between) and mass OTT over-reactions break out. Then we get the proponents latching onto the few people who support the changes, while dismissing everyone else with comments like "get used to it, it's the future". And then, in the long run, everybody does "get used to it"- regardless of whether the change is for better, worse or in between.

As with many such issues, we tend to end up with opposing positions at the two extremes. One is that change is usually good, people only resist it because they're naturally resistant to change. The other is the general resistance to change of any kind, amounting to "change is usually bad". And what we get precious little of is objective analysis of the pros and cons of the change, to determine whether it is or isn't a good thing.

This scenario arose with the BBC weather graphics change in 2005, which ties in with my previous blog entry. But the current examples I'm primarily thinking of are the Facebook layout changes and the F1 points/wins change, both brought in without warning and at short notice. Personally, I don't agree with either of the changes, and on N-W, there has been a pretty good discussion on the latter. But a glance at the comments on messageboards like the BBC and Facebook reveals a bucketload of OTT nonsense, giving reasons for rejecting the changes that just smack of aimless whinging. The proponents will look at those and think, "oh, just resistance to change as usual"- and miss the good reasons for rejecting said changes.

Maybe society could do with some education from a young age on how to carry out logical deductive reasoning in order to reach well-rounded opinions, and on how to have an open mind. The seemingly inept decision-making that prevails among politicians is echoed all too strongly in many "discussions" on topics on internet messageboards among the general public... it suffices to say that if I ever think Net-Weather has its problems with discussion quality, they pale by comparison with many other internet forums/messageboards.