Posted March 10, 2016
low rated
Gnostic
New User
Registered: Jun 2013
From Other
Shadowstalker16
Jaded optimist
Registered: Apr 2014
From India
Posted March 10, 2016
Re: "I think there needs to be agreement between the people engaging to drop a point when its dead"
I think it takes only one to stop an argument - no mutual agreement required usually. Stepping aways does not mean you lost the argument, and there's nothing more comic than somone screaming at the air when their adversary is long gone to do something else. Basically sometimes moving on is the way to "win". This is I think the truth behind the expression Only way to win is not to play.
Then on the forum specifics, that's definitively getting into object level discussion. I have some thoughts on that but will keep them to myself for now.
Another point, on your conclusion about no one being obligated to be nice, and everyone having a breaking point. I think the best way to address that is for your friends to be such that they pull you back, rather than egg you on. Obviously when you go over the line the ones that made you go over the line (intentionaly or not) are the least likely to be able to deescalate you. What can be tragic though, is when people have blind loyalty, and will support their family and friends regardless of actions. My buddy threw the first punch, but instead of holding him and gettign him out of the brawl, I'll jump right in and punch his victim's buddy. Yay to me, I'm such a good friend. Or maybe I'm just reinforcing destructive behaviors and the right thing to do would be more counterintuitive? But I know it's hard to be a true friend, when the person you are helping does not see it as being helpful, rather the opposite. Tragic really.
I have a nice anecdote about a baby bird and a cowturd making that same point. Not sure you'll want to hear such folksy wisdom though. :D
Final comment. More a question really. What you said about net debates being low risk and low reward surprised me a bit. I hope you can ellaborate, because I actually see the net as high reward. Maybe it's because I am old enough to remember the days before you had the world at your fingertips, but I always felt this shit can be magic. I mean, here I am talking to someone from India, after having had a chat with someone from the Netherlands, all people with wonderfully different approaches to life, from whom I can learn something and if not change my mind, at least get to know them / the world's variety better? That's without considering how easy it is to find people with similar interests as me - in GOG for example I know I can discuss old games and DRM free philosophies whenever I want. I think those are all valuable things, and I get them at a very low cost. You see what I mean?
That is the thing though. On the internet, everyone is alone, and treated as individual. There are very rarely friends and most people make it a point to stay out of a fight if they can, friend or not. Yeah, attempts at helping are very likely to fail because you make at least someone angry in the end. Try to intervene too many times and you will be seen as someone trying to ego-boost or gain moral superiority. You can do it via PMing your friend, and that can help I guess, but IMO it won't do good 100% of the time because someone who is already angry may get angrier when more people talk to them. Sometimes, some alone times may fix it.
I'm all for folk wisdom, and anyone reading can probably do with some humor as well :D
Yes it certainly has high potential to be rewarding, but I feel most discussions, especially more combative / argumentative ones give at most the satisfaction (?) of shutting up the person you don't agree with for sometime. In my experience, most people just go about usual business of posting opinions and fighting on the internet. It certainly is a good experience to talk to people with other views, but very few people are as enthusiastic about it as the person interested in conversation is likely to be.
Brasas
Abrasive Charpit
Registered: Dec 2010
From Poland
Posted March 10, 2016
Regarding the appearance of ego-boosting and moral superiority, I'll quote from a favorite author (paraphrasing somewhat):
“Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The problem comes when the two misalign. The most common is for one's reputation to be on the ground, while knowing you've done nothing to deserve it. The opposite however less common, is worse. There is no more hollow feeling than to stand with your honor shattered at your feet while soaring public reputation wraps you in rewards. That's soul-destroying. The other way around is merely very, very irritating. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will."
That's what I try to do, despite insecurities which I think are normal to all humans. Posting this quote is a perfect example, as I do it partially defensively because I'm sure some (many? most?) around here think I'm often moralizing to feel superior, and that's indeed very, very irritating.
Now the anecdote. :)
So there's a baby bird on its nest on a tree by a country road. Unfortunately it falls from the nest while rolling around and it's mummy is away foraging. Of course it can't fly back up. A farmer is passing by with his oxen, and sees the birdie flailing in distress. Seeing it is cold but the nest is too high, he picks the birdie and gently places it inside a warm cow turd his oxen just dropped. Then he goes along leaving the birdie for his mum to pick up when she returns. As the birdie starts feeling warmer, it starts feeling better and starts to chirp a bit. A tomcat passing nearby hears the noise and comes to investigate. Finding an easy, if slightly dirty snack, it picks up the birdie and eats it.
Morals of the story:
- Not everyone putting you in shit is trying to harm you.
- Not everyone getting you out of shit is trying to help you.
- And most important, when you're in the shit, don't make a peep.
As you can see, the first two are relevant to what we were talking about re friends and shitty situations. The last one I guess says something about the fatalism and black humor that my folk strangely enjoys. ;)
“Reputation is what other people know about you. Honor is what you know about yourself. The problem comes when the two misalign. The most common is for one's reputation to be on the ground, while knowing you've done nothing to deserve it. The opposite however less common, is worse. There is no more hollow feeling than to stand with your honor shattered at your feet while soaring public reputation wraps you in rewards. That's soul-destroying. The other way around is merely very, very irritating. Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will."
That's what I try to do, despite insecurities which I think are normal to all humans. Posting this quote is a perfect example, as I do it partially defensively because I'm sure some (many? most?) around here think I'm often moralizing to feel superior, and that's indeed very, very irritating.
Now the anecdote. :)
So there's a baby bird on its nest on a tree by a country road. Unfortunately it falls from the nest while rolling around and it's mummy is away foraging. Of course it can't fly back up. A farmer is passing by with his oxen, and sees the birdie flailing in distress. Seeing it is cold but the nest is too high, he picks the birdie and gently places it inside a warm cow turd his oxen just dropped. Then he goes along leaving the birdie for his mum to pick up when she returns. As the birdie starts feeling warmer, it starts feeling better and starts to chirp a bit. A tomcat passing nearby hears the noise and comes to investigate. Finding an easy, if slightly dirty snack, it picks up the birdie and eats it.
Morals of the story:
- Not everyone putting you in shit is trying to harm you.
- Not everyone getting you out of shit is trying to help you.
- And most important, when you're in the shit, don't make a peep.
As you can see, the first two are relevant to what we were talking about re friends and shitty situations. The last one I guess says something about the fatalism and black humor that my folk strangely enjoys. ;)
dtgreene
vaccines work she/her
Registered: Jan 2010
From United States
Posted March 10, 2016
low rated
Also, PetrusOctavianus's comment was clearly out of line, so why was it "high rated"?
dtgreene
vaccines work she/her
Registered: Jan 2010
From United States
Posted March 10, 2016
low rated
I want a community where people do not make personal attacks on other users, and where those who do so are punished for doing so, not rewarded.
Emob78
jack and coke plz
Registered: Dec 2012
From United States
Posted March 10, 2016
Where else have we seen this play out before?
dewtech
Jaded grognard
Registered: Aug 2011
From Estonia
Posted March 10, 2016
Also, PetrusOctavianus's comment was clearly out of line, so why was it "high rated"?
I was there at the beginning of Steam Forums. And believe me, it didn't start out as the cess-pool it eventually became. Almost no forum ever does start off bad.
Hell, even 4chan was originally made to discuss anime (or so the rumor goes)
Every forum rots over time, as some people lose the will to post there every day and start maybe lurking or rarely posting in some topics thay like. People start circlejerking, as there will be a group of users who frequent the forums, there are going to be inside jokes and so on. Trolls start to appear, new posters post dumb shit which either gets trolled, downvoted or by some people/groups endorsed and helped.
Post edited March 10, 2016 by dewtech
Fenixp
nnpab
Registered: Sep 2008
From Czech Republic
Posted March 10, 2016
high rated
The main issue is that a lot of your posts push an agenda. Whether that agenda is a part of who you are or whether you're trying to use every opportunity to "make the world a better place" in how you perceive a "better place" should look like is irrelevant, I think we can agree that there's a spin on many topics that you weave into your posts in order to put your world view out there. Now, these boards are relatively unmoderated, and that's not going to change. With all of this in mind, you basically have three options:
1) Grow a thicker skin. If you want to be heard, if you want to continue pushing your agenda, you can - no one will restrict your freedom of speech, no one will moderate your posts. You can say whatever you want, whenever you want, regardless of how is what you are saying received. You don't get that kind of freedom on most boards, but you have to deal with the backlash.
2) Change your behavior. The entire rest of the boards won't change to accommodate you, you need to change to be accommodated. Like any community, this one also has unwritten rules and inner workings you either keep your eye on and adapt to or you won't be accepted. You need to find balance between pushing opinions that are dear to you while at the same time pushing them only so often and only in such a way that the community won't get annoyed.
3) Find a different community. If you want to push your views in the same way you do now and want to be accepted at the same time, perhaps this is quite simply not a community for you. There are communities which share your views a lot more than this one. There are also very sheltered and moderated communities which will punish any attack on your person harshly. Perhaps if you get negative reception and are not willing to adapt, you'd be happier elsewhere.
Now I don't want you to interpret 3) as me trying to push you out, I'd be quite unhappy to see you go. While I don't agree with everything you post and some of your posts annoy me, you still bring a very interesting spin into many discussions and I especially love the stuff you post on game specific boards.
Post edited March 10, 2016 by Fenixp
dtgreene
vaccines work she/her
Registered: Jan 2010
From United States
Klumpen0815
+91
Registered: Dec 2012
From Germany
Posted March 10, 2016
high rated
"Goodwill" is the key and sorely lacking in many people everywhere.
Many users simply don't even mean well, the rest is not a real problem even if conflicts arise.
dtgreene: I consider this suggestion to be highly offensive. When there is a bullying problem, it is the bullies, not the victim, who should be asked to change. I know what you mean and generally agree that people should be a bit more polite now and then, but never forget that crybullies use this argument to harass and forcefully shut up others by constantly claiming to be a victim even if the contrary opinion they deem to be offensive was stated in a polite way.
To answer the question what kind of community I want:
I just want everybody to be free to express any opinion as long as they do it with good intentions, backed up by arguments rather than ideology and formulated in a nice way. Listening to other perspectives and thinking about them rather than dismissing them immediately would be cool too. I want conflicts to arise and be settled as civilised as possible.
Unfortunately, there are always trolls that want exactly the opposite.
Many users simply don't even mean well, the rest is not a real problem even if conflicts arise.
To answer the question what kind of community I want:
I just want everybody to be free to express any opinion as long as they do it with good intentions, backed up by arguments rather than ideology and formulated in a nice way. Listening to other perspectives and thinking about them rather than dismissing them immediately would be cool too. I want conflicts to arise and be settled as civilised as possible.
Unfortunately, there are always trolls that want exactly the opposite.
Post edited March 10, 2016 by Klumpen0815
Dessimu
Irish ☕ good
Registered: Aug 2014
From Denmark
Posted March 10, 2016
high rated
I would like to wear slippers in this Community, but we have no floor to walk on.
This is not intended to make a conflict, but the moment I read what you've said, I remembered reading somewhere that "What is it about victims that makes exactly those people into victims?", thus sort of meaning that both bullies and bullied people have to change their behavior, each in certain way. To achieve harmony among themselves. Do you think the psychologist who said so, was right?
This is not intended to make a conflict, but the moment I read what you've said, I remembered reading somewhere that "What is it about victims that makes exactly those people into victims?", thus sort of meaning that both bullies and bullied people have to change their behavior, each in certain way. To achieve harmony among themselves. Do you think the psychologist who said so, was right?
Post edited March 10, 2016 by Dessimu
Fenixp
nnpab
Registered: Sep 2008
From Czech Republic
Posted March 10, 2016
high rated
Since you don't have to be here, if you voluntarily keep posting here, voluntarily keep playing the victim card and voluntarily keep getting attacked, I'm going to assume you have already grown a thick skin and just use this approach as a persuasion scheme. It probably won't work, but feel free to.
Brasas
Abrasive Charpit
Registered: Dec 2010
From Poland
Posted March 10, 2016
low rated
Kind of a fight or run decision. There is no universally correct choice.
I at least have asked the "bullies" to change. Did you notice that?
Although I would point out mobbing is slightly more nuanced than strict bullying. Malice is not necessary to hurt someone. Ergo, not everyone putting you in the shit means harm.
I have a question. When you ask about downvotes and upvotes do you actually expect answers? The voting is anonymous... the folks doing it very likely are the least likely to comment why they did it.
Klumpen0815
+91
Registered: Dec 2012
From Germany
Posted March 10, 2016
Post edited March 10, 2016 by Klumpen0815
Brasas
Abrasive Charpit
Registered: Dec 2010
From Poland
Posted March 10, 2016
I won't get any friends for pointing this out, but I speak from personal life experiences when I say that a near obssessive identification with some sense of justice marries quite well with aspie style lack of interpersonal skills. A marriage of convenience that I suspect is part of character psychology of several folks in GOG. It is what it is... nothing necessarily wrong about it, and in fact these kinds of individuals can often be reasoned with much easier than more nerotypical ones which are more pathological about their ideologies - by which I mean more emotionaly engaged (pathos vs logos).
