Asking for unnecessary specifics and details is usually a sign not that the person wants to be helpful but that they disagree and are looking for ammunition to argue and feel superior. Ultimately the exchange becomes a waste of everyone’s time, as the person inevitably becomes rude, condescending and argumentative. Basically, some people online think they’re smarter than everyone else, or at least want to project that. They believe they have the only valid argument and they’re going to prove it to the world and probably think that they’ve won because they had the last word when in reality everyone left because they realized the person was not arguing in good faith. I’m not claiming you’re that type of person, but I suspect that’s why nobody is giving you specifics.
I don’t see how it’s unnecessary to get more details about why something wasn’t working for them.
I also hate that everything online is considered an argument these days. No one just has conversations. Lemmy and reddit don’t help in that regard with up and downvotes encouraging group think.
Anyway, this is a huge tangent and not on topic, my bad.
I agree with you that online conversations are rare these days. Just my personal opinion but social media isn’t usually great for conversations. It’s better for shallow comments, drive-by’s, and echo chambers. Social media also tends to steer toward blind comments, so there is a lot of repetition. Forums seem to be better for conversations because there’s often a emphasis on reading the entire thread before commenting, there is more moderation, and also because they tend to accrue replies more slowly. However if a thread becomes too long then forums break down too, so nothing is perfect.
Asking for unnecessary specifics and details is usually a sign not that the person wants to be helpful but that they disagree and are looking for ammunition to argue and feel superior. Ultimately the exchange becomes a waste of everyone’s time, as the person inevitably becomes rude, condescending and argumentative. Basically, some people online think they’re smarter than everyone else, or at least want to project that. They believe they have the only valid argument and they’re going to prove it to the world and probably think that they’ve won because they had the last word when in reality everyone left because they realized the person was not arguing in good faith. I’m not claiming you’re that type of person, but I suspect that’s why nobody is giving you specifics.
Wouldn’t have mentioned anything but you did ask.
I don’t see how it’s unnecessary to get more details about why something wasn’t working for them.
I also hate that everything online is considered an argument these days. No one just has conversations. Lemmy and reddit don’t help in that regard with up and downvotes encouraging group think.
Anyway, this is a huge tangent and not on topic, my bad.
I agree with you that online conversations are rare these days. Just my personal opinion but social media isn’t usually great for conversations. It’s better for shallow comments, drive-by’s, and echo chambers. Social media also tends to steer toward blind comments, so there is a lot of repetition. Forums seem to be better for conversations because there’s often a emphasis on reading the entire thread before commenting, there is more moderation, and also because they tend to accrue replies more slowly. However if a thread becomes too long then forums break down too, so nothing is perfect.