Argument is war; thus forum becomes battle ground.

[coberst]

Turtle

 

I have been posting on Internet discussion forums for 4 years and during this time I have posted on more than 50 boards, I think. My conclusion is that forums with very large memberships are forums with a very young membership. The younger the membership the more the forum takes on a combative nature. You can see that tendency in the type of avatars used. Many take on the icons that we see in video games, i.e. highly violent. It is my impression that many young people are drawn to these forums because they take on the character of a verbal video game; violence in word rather than deed.

 

This board is on the mature end of the spectrum and I assume the membership is much older than most of the other forums.

 

Interaction on the younger forums is more in the form of 'drive by shoutings'. Seldom do the responders read beyond the title of the OP.

[Kriminal99]

Turtle

 

I have been posting on Internet discussion forums for 4 years and during this time I have posted on more than 50 boards, I think. My conclusion is that forums with very large memberships are forums with a very young membership. The younger the membership the more the forum takes on a combative nature. You can see that tendency in the type of avatars used. Many take on the icons that we see in video games, i.e. highly violent. It is my impression that many young people are drawn to these forums because they take on the character of a verbal video game; violence in word rather than deed.

 

This board is on the mature end of the spectrum and I assume the membership is much older than most of the other forums.

 

Interaction on the younger forums is more in the form of 'drive by shoutings'. Seldom do the responders read beyond the title of the OP.

 

*cough cough* Sciforums.com...

 

By the way have you been on scienceforums.net? Oooooh my god those guys are so stupid. They don't even understand what facts or proof mean nor have any clue what is valuable about the scientific method.

 

I am usually on this forum because the competition is pathetic... Someone really needs to clean up the internet or force private forums to label themselves as being restricted to only people who believe in X.

 

Anyways about what Turtle quoted I think that bit was pretty well worded. I don't think it is because of the scientific method.

 

I think it is just unavoidable human nature that people like to be right about things. Making a good point is like scoring a point in basketball or baseball. The only thing that can be done about it is to make a spirit of sportsmanship and have well trained and competent referees that call foul when someone uses a debate fallacy. The net result would be a better understanding on all sides.

[Turtle]

Turtle

 

Interaction on the younger forums is more in the form of 'drive by shoutings'.

 

Nice turn of phrase Coberst.

 

Anyways about what Turtle quoted I think that bit was pretty well worded. I don't think it is because of the scientific method.

 

Thanks; I am amenable to emendation. Try this: The scientific method is a recipe for common sense.

[paigetheoracle]

Arguments exist when people with differing opinions debate a particular subject.

 

Wars exist when those very same people are armed.

 

So, Adolf Hitler and Winston Churchill simply had a bit of an argument. Their debating tactics differed slightly from ours, though.

 

I fail to see the big revelation here.

 

And, to say that most of the replies to your posts are agressive and in opposition to yours, is simply a sampling error. There are literally millions of people on planet Earth who'll agree with your standpoints. They simply don't bother to reply, though. The majority of replies you get to your posts will be from those people in disagreement with you, because they disagree with you.

 

I'm late to the argument but I'd agree and also say Coberst that replies will be negative for the reason stated here - if you agree, there's no contest (nothing to argue about or prove)but if you don't then, you'll do your best to beat somebody down so they shut up and you win the argument: Most of my threads don't get a reply for this reason, unless I slip into an area where I am a novice and then I get slaughtered like anybody else in the same situation.

[Symbology]

Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm - but the harm does not interest them. Or, they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.

- T.S. Elliot

nuff said :shrug:

[Symbology]

How can we have great makeup sex if you won't argue with me?

- Wade Bradford

:shrug:

[Symbology]

I see both sides to the following quote, and think it is something to ponder. Everything has limits. Everyone has thresholds. These forums help define where everyone draws their own line. Having respect for oneself and for others I think may be the universal truth.

 

How to Handle a Liberal College student who likes to protest war…

 

Peace Rally 101

 

What to do if you happen upon a peace rally by stupid Naive Hemp-shirt-wearing college idiots, to teach them why Force is sometimes needed:

 

1) Approach dumb rich ignorant student talking about "Peace" and saying there should be, "no retaliation".

 

2) engage in brief conversation, ask if military force is appropriate.

 

3) When he says "No," ask, "Why not?"

 

4) Wait until he says something to the effect of, "Because that would just

cause more innocent deaths, which would be awful and we should not cause more violence."

 

5) When he's in mid sentence, punch him in the face as hard as you can.

 

6) When he gets back up to punch you, point out that it would be a mistake

and contrary to his values to strike you, because that would, "be awful and he should not cause more violence."

 

7) Wait until he agrees that he has pledged not to commit additional violence.

 

8) Punch him in the face again, harder this time.

 

Repeat steps 5 through 8 until they understand that sometimes it is necessary to fight back.

 

The author has good intentions but fails to respect his opponent. He likely is going to have some karma coming his way in a few moments. :shrug: As he is laying flat of his back there watching the birds circle around his head he can rest easy that he probably did get his point across. And now the college student will fight with more intensity against those who he thinks are oppressing his country (It's ill informed leaders).

 

Be careful what you wish for... you might get it

[Symbology]

I'd like to help you out....

Which way did you come in?

:shrug:

[paigetheoracle]

Of course this is a battlefield - that is why they call it a 'forum' - you're either against'em or for'em!

[Kriminal99]

nuff said :hihi:

 

Regarding your T.S. Elliot quote.

 

There are different levels this quote can be understood on, and on the final level it is incorrect.

 

Level 1 - For example held by a man who lives in the country where his neighbors live a mile away:

 

Who cares about any of that stuff? Just live and let live, love and be happy. (His beliefs seem accurate due to the lack of disputes when your closest neighbor lives a mile away)

 

Level 2 - Held by a person who lives in a large city, or the leader of a nation:

 

The real world has real problems that have to be dealt with. No one exists in a vacuum, so your understanding of my ideas and my understanding of yours controls how well I am able to do what I want.

 

Level 3 - Held by a philosopher who witnesses wars between the aforementioned leaders.

 

The quote is both true and false. The people who deal with real world problems feel empowered once obtaining positions of power and then refuse to listen to opposing points of view or arguments. Despite the need to deal with the problems, the people dealing with them are harming others because of an inability to understand opposing points of view and an unwillingness to try to.

 

Level 4 -

 

There is a system which people can force each other to adhere to that will allow people to deal with real world problems but not allow a person to believe themselves justified in doing things that contradict other people's point of view and therefore create conflict.