I will defend someone who says something I don’t agree with, if they’re being respectful and willing to admit they are wrong or open to changing their mind.
I won’t defend someone saying something I think is right or I totally agree with, if they’re being a jackass about it.
I’ve seen threads where both things happen consecutively, and they both get downvoted anyway 😅.
I don’t care if someone is rude. I care if they’re willing to discuss in good faith.
Someone being nice to me on here but seems to be manipulative is far worse in my view than someone who is aggressive and nasty but intellectually honest.
I can understand that, but to me they are at least loosely linked. Poor tone clouds a good argument and often is an indicator of a discussion in bad faith.
I will admit I have seen a handful of counter-examples over 3 years on Lemmy, where one or two commentors came out of the gate with an angry and accusatory stance, but both were able to reconcile with each other in later replies with cooler heads. I have more often seen much longer threads where flamebait begets a flamewar without going anywhere useful.
I’ve been in both. I tend to be pretty impatient and want to get to the crux of a core philosophical disagreement rather than waste time on reading people post 101 stuff at me though.
passive aggressive comments, aka snarky comments, know it all, or’holier than thou" ones will recieve a block, dont have time to get angry or argue with someone.
Maybe you can just agree to disagree expecting people to just admit their wrong and agree with you is… going to cause you a lot of trouble in life. Especially if it’s about opinions, opinions aren’t actually objective. Unless the person is way out in left field just agree to disagree, even then you’re probably better off just walking away from the conversation
Yeah absolutely there’s a lot of topics and subjective stuff where agreement to disagree can happen. Being capable of admitting wrong is different than readily admitting wrong at the first disagreement and I do not expect that, but there’s a stubborn kind of tone that I can tell someone will not consider any contrary evidence, which lessens the need to continue the conversation.
I will defend someone who says something I don’t agree with, if they’re being respectful and willing to admit they are wrong or open to changing their mind.
I won’t defend someone saying something I think is right or I totally agree with, if they’re being a jackass about it.
I’ve seen threads where both things happen consecutively, and they both get downvoted anyway 😅.
I don’t care if someone is rude. I care if they’re willing to discuss in good faith.
Someone being nice to me on here but seems to be manipulative is far worse in my view than someone who is aggressive and nasty but intellectually honest.
I can understand that, but to me they are at least loosely linked. Poor tone clouds a good argument and often is an indicator of a discussion in bad faith.
I will admit I have seen a handful of counter-examples over 3 years on Lemmy, where one or two commentors came out of the gate with an angry and accusatory stance, but both were able to reconcile with each other in later replies with cooler heads. I have more often seen much longer threads where flamebait begets a flamewar without going anywhere useful.
I’ve been in both. I tend to be pretty impatient and want to get to the crux of a core philosophical disagreement rather than waste time on reading people post 101 stuff at me though.
Ditto!
passive aggressive comments, aka snarky comments, know it all, or’holier than thou" ones will recieve a block, dont have time to get angry or argue with someone.
Maybe you can just agree to disagree expecting people to just admit their wrong and agree with you is… going to cause you a lot of trouble in life. Especially if it’s about opinions, opinions aren’t actually objective. Unless the person is way out in left field just agree to disagree, even then you’re probably better off just walking away from the conversation
Yeah absolutely there’s a lot of topics and subjective stuff where agreement to disagree can happen. Being capable of admitting wrong is different than readily admitting wrong at the first disagreement and I do not expect that, but there’s a stubborn kind of tone that I can tell someone will not consider any contrary evidence, which lessens the need to continue the conversation.