Is it nessesary to be mean?

[nik]

I have recently been browsing off topic a little bit, and I have noticed one major problem. People are turning into complete jerks. Flame wars are started for no reason, and frankly, itÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s pointless.

 

 

 

I just want to know why cant we all just get along? I mean, sure I'm not saying that if someone is wrong, or in your opinion wrong, not to correct them, or disagree. The varying of peoples opinions is what makes places like this great; the pointless flaming and getting all emotional about subjects is stupid, and the rot of places like this.

 

 

 

What concerns me is that I browse and see people saying why donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t you just leave the post, the forum, the world, etc. Instead of being negative and putting people down, why donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t we, AS a WHOLE, try to keep a positive attitude. If someone is misinformed, then inform them, and cite a reference and maybe say a friendly word or two like ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬Åhey, its not big deal, simple mistakeÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬ÃâÃ

[Flame_guy3]

Yes it is necessary to be mean. It's the circle of life. The Forums are the Plant, the topic-starters are the prey, and the flamers are the predator... ask B 50 2 on flaming he'll tell you all about it he's an expert predator 8-)

[stan18]

it's because people feel high and mighty when they do it; chances are, they would never have the balls to do it to a stranger in real life

 

 

 

theres no chance of retribution on the internet, and no one knows who you are. perfect place to show inner character, no?

[Poopingman]

I thank you for bringing to light sjiskebab5's uncalled attack against me for defending the Import/Tuner thread. Thankfully it didn't hijack the thread, people just went on...If an argument erupts, if outsiders generally ignore it and keep posting, it never poses as much of a problem compared to when everyone feels the need to jump in and add their 2 cents.

[bacab]

Well, it's just that on the internet you're completely anonymous. Nobody knows who you are.

 

 

 

So people can say crap and have it not affect their real lives at all. (If they have real lives. . . .)

 

 

 

And some people are just angry people. Grrr. So they vent by dumping all this rage on the internet. They can't vent in real life for whatever reason so they just blast it across the net.

 

 

 

Some day all the angry energy is going to make the internet esplode. Kaphlooey.

[nik]

Yes it is necessary to be mean. It's the circle of life. The Forums are the Plant, the topic-starters are the prey, and the flamers are the predator... ask B 50 2 on flaming he'll tell you all about it he's an expert predator 8-)

 

 

 

Its a online forum.. Why does there HAVE to be people that are mean? Why is it NESSESARY to be mean? Your explaination doesnt cut it for me, saying that its part of life is like saying that a when a 747 jet crashes and kills all the people in the plane, it isnt horrible because its bound to happen sometime, It still is horrible, its still bad. Flaming is still unessesary and stupid.

 

 

 

Just an opinion.

[Flame_guy3]

Yes it is necessary to be mean. It's the circle of life. The Forums are the Plant, the topic-starters are the prey, and the flamers are the predator... ask B 50 2 on flaming he'll tell you all about it he's an expert predator 8-)

 

 

 

Its a online forum.. Why does there HAVE to be people that are mean? Why is it NESSESARY to be mean? Your explaination doesnt cut it for me, saying that its part of life is like saying that a when a 747 jet crashes and kills all the people in the plane, it isnt horrible because its bound to happen sometime, It still is horrible, its still bad. Flaming is still unessesary and stupid.

 

 

 

Just an opinion.

Flamers feed off opinions, they just have to make something clever against it and then it provokes a war of opinions and insults. Keep your opinions to yourself and get on with life while flowing with the crowd... thats how to get through life.

[nik]

Yes it is necessary to be mean. It's the circle of life. The Forums are the Plant, the topic-starters are the prey, and the flamers are the predator... ask B 50 2 on flaming he'll tell you all about it he's an expert predator 8-)

 

 

 

Its a online forum.. Why does there HAVE to be people that are mean? Why is it NESSESARY to be mean? Your explaination doesnt cut it for me, saying that its part of life is like saying that a when a 747 jet crashes and kills all the people in the plane, it isnt horrible because its bound to happen sometime, It still is horrible, its still bad. Flaming is still unessesary and stupid.

 

 

 

Just an opinion.

Flamers feed off opinions, they just have to make something clever against it and then it provokes a war of opinions and insults. Keep your opinions to yourself and get on with life while flowing with the crowd... thats how to get through life.

 

 

 

To quote myself....

 

 

 

The varying of peoples opinions is what makes places like this great; the pointless flaming and getting all emotional about subjects is stupid, and the rot of places like this.

 

 

 

Basically you just said that we shouldnt discuss our opinions on a discussion forum. What is the point of the forum then? Why are we here? Also why does one feel that they have to flame someones opinion, its an opinion, not right or wrong.

 

 

 

Also, can you reply to my whole post, not the last line of it? Thank you.

[Flame_guy3]

Yes it is necessary to be mean. It's the circle of life. The Forums are the Plant, the topic-starters are the prey, and the flamers are the predator... ask B 50 2 on flaming he'll tell you all about it he's an expert predator 8-)

 

 

 

Its a online forum.. Why does there HAVE to be people that are mean? Why is it NESSESARY to be mean? Your explaination doesnt cut it for me, saying that its part of life is like saying that a when a 747 jet crashes and kills all the people in the plane, it isnt horrible because its bound to happen sometime, It still is horrible, its still bad. Flaming is still unessesary and stupid.

 

 

 

Just an opinion.

Flamers feed off opinions, they just have to make something clever against it and then it provokes a war of opinions and insults. Keep your opinions to yourself and get on with life while flowing with the crowd... thats how to get through life.

 

 

 

To quote myself....

 

 

 

The varying of peoples opinions is what makes places like this great; the pointless flaming and getting all emotional about subjects is stupid, and the rot of places like this.

 

 

 

Basically you just said that we shouldnt discuss our opinions on a discussion forum. What is the point of the forum then? Why are we here? Also why does one feel that they have to flame someones opinion, its an opinion, not right or wrong.

 

 

 

Also, can you reply to my whole post, not the last line of it? Thank you.

Meh, share your opinions but think carefully about WHICH opinions to share even on discussion boards there are people that wont respect your opinion.

[logic-is-overrated]

I find flame wars to be rather interesting.

[Flame_guy3]

I find flame wars to be rather interesting.

Same. :lol:

[nik]

I find flame wars to be rather interesting.

 

 

 

Can't open debate with both sides being respectful be just as interesting?

[Guest GhostRanger]

I thank you for bringing to light sjiskebab5's uncalled attack against me for defending the Import/Tuner thread. Thankfully it didn't hijack the thread, people just went on...If an argument erupts, if outsiders generally ignore it and keep posting, it never poses as much of a problem compared to when everyone feels the need to jump in and add their 2 cents.

 

 

 

In case everyone forgot, Poopingman is here to remind us all that he is always being unfairly picked on! Thank you Poopingman for this educational experience!

 

 

 

And to answer the poster's question: Sometimes it is, sometimes it's not. It depends on the situation and the type of meaness (i.e. - name calling, sarcasm, different variations of ridicule/mocking).

 

 

 

1) Name-calling: Only necessary when someone is so completely crazy that the poster feels it is necessary to get the post locked. Calling someone a name over and over after a long flame war/debate will close the discussion most likely (WARNING: Could cause you to get banned. I in no way encourage name-calling).

 

 

 

2) Sarcasm: A very effective type of meanness. Sarcasm can be a very strong way to cause the poster you're responding to to either reexamine his life/beliefs/ability to type. Sarcasm can be aimed against the person (in that case - it is most similar to "name calling") or it can be aimed at the idea. When sarcasm is aimed at the idea, it is a very effective method of debate.

 

 

 

3) Ridicule and various forms of mockery - This is very similar to name-calling except without the name calling. For instance, if you don't want to appear to be calling someone a name (snice that is very often looked down upon) you could say "I've never heard such a dumb idea. I bet your parents didn't love you." This method of meanness has similar effects as name-calling, and the same warning should be applied.

 

 

 

All in all, meanness is something we want to avoid. Occasionally, the situation might warrant a little bit of meanness, but it is usually looked down upon by the community and could lead bannedness. The question isn't whether or not it's necessary, but whether or not it's useful. Few things are necessary. Meanness, is a method of communication during a debate or argument. More likely than not, you will find, other methods are more beneficial than meanness - but none of them are necessary.

[nik]

But Ghostranger, even in your post there, you make a point to ridicule poopman because of what? His post that was on topic and self centered? Whatever, why does it matter to you if he thinks hes getting picked on? What is the point of picking on him MORE? Was there any reason for that? Do you feel better now that you have done that? If so great, I dont care. I just want to know why it has to be done.

 

 

 

I agree with you completly, there is SOME use, but simply just attacking people for no reason; for example you ridiculing poopman, seems pointless and silly. Why must it be done? I'm my eyes, it doesnt have to be done. If someone makes a completly pointless post, that is on topic let it slide. Simple as that. I apprecate your input and well example, imnot trying to single you out, it just was, I guess a good example.

 

 

 

(I double posted and jsut edited this post instead of posting again.)

[LinovUSA]

It is actualy a bit interesting reading it, because it makes you laugh about how people can be over an arguement on the internet. :mrgreen:

[katha610]

uiui, i think that this is a great forum.

 

sure there are post that are mean, but consider the age of some forum users. who knows if youve been better at that age. and its a forum, come on , every one says what s/he wants to, some say what they would be afraid to in real life.

 

did you get attacked here?

[Viktorkrum77]

Yes, just don't be obnouxiosly mean.

[caligula101]

People are mean, people on the internet are much more mean. Why? Because there are no reprucussion's if you are cruel to someone. Obviously you can't be that cruel as you may get banned. We can speak our mind and not get our noses broken. I mean who actually speaks there mind in real life? No better question who behaves exactly the same as they do here as they do in real life? Nobody!

[nik]

 

did you get attacked here?

 

 

 

No just a general observation. I could care less if I had been.

 

 

 

No better question who behaves exactly the same as they do here as they do in real life? Nobody!

 

 

 

Alot of people, I do for one. Sure it gives you a mask to hide behind, but what about the people that dont care for a mask in real life?

[Flame_guy3]

Ive just realised... he's ridiculing everyone on the forums... burn him!!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

[Viktorkrum77]

Ive just realised... he's ridiculing everyone on the forums... burn him!!! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

 

 

Nah, the iron madden tends to work better.

[logic-is-overrated]

I find flame wars to be rather interesting.

 

 

 

Can't open debate with both sides being respectful be just as interesting?

In my opinion, no. I'm not saying every single post has to be an obnoxiously mean personal attack on another poster but I believe this forum has just the right amount of flaming and rudeness to give it character.

 

 

 

I think the abundance of pointless unfunny spam that occasionally crops up is more of a problem than flaming.

[jak722]

Sophism (gr. sophistes meaning "wise-ist," or one who 'does' wisdom, i.e. who makes a business out of wisdom; cf. sophÃÆÃâÃâós, "wise man", cf. also wizard) was originally a term for the techniques taught by a highly respected group of philosophy and rhetoric teachers in ancient Greece.

 

 

 

Today, a sophism generally refers to a particularly confusing, illogical and/or insincere argument used by someone to make a point, or, perhaps, not to make a point.

 

 

 

Sophistry refers to the practice of using such arguments, and is used as derogative for rhetoric that is designed to appeal to the listener on grounds other than the strict logical cogency of the statements being made.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In traditional logical argument, a set of premises are connected together according to the rules of logic and lead therefore to some conclusion. We can also argue this backward in order to explain ideas. For example, you think of something based on a series of conclusions. A conclusion is a premise, i.e. a statement, based on an inference, that is, a piece of information. If the inference is a fact, then the conclusion has a factual base.

 

 

 

When someone criticizes the argument (the something thought of), they do so by pointing out either falsehoods among the premises or logical fallacies, flaws in the logical scaffolding.

 

 

 

These criticisms may be subject to counter-criticisms, which in turn may be subject to counter-counter-criticisms, etc.

 

 

 

Generally, some judge or audience eventually either concurs with or rejects the position of one side and thus a consensus opinion of the truth is arrived at.

 

 

 

The essential claim of sophistry is that the actual logical validity of an argument is irrelevant (if not non-existent); it is only the ruling of the audience which ultimately determines whether a conclusion is considered "true" or not. By appealing to the prejudices and emotions of the judges, one can garner favorable treatment for one's side of the argument and cause a factually false position to be ruled true.

 

 

 

The philosophical Sophist goes one step beyond that and claims that since it was traditionally accepted that the position ruled valid by the judges was literally true, any position ruled true by the judges must be considered literally true, even if it was arrived at by naked pandering to the judges' prejudices ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Ã

[Centuramage]

I'd like to approach the topic from two different angles, and I'm afraid I'll end up meshing both together in a real mess...but here it goes anyway:

 

 

 

As has already been suggested, I feel that specific to this forum, rudeness can be given a laundry list of excuses. Insecurity can be pretty high up on the list. I'd say a fair amount of our number are progressing through various states of puberty and are probably feeling fairly lost and confused. These folk seek a vent; TIF users provide an easy target because of the anonymity of the online world. Much like an aggressive driver waving an obscene gesture at a passing vehicle, these posters feel their shroud gives them a level of security against the repercussions of their actions that other potential venting sources cannot afford them. With little thought as to the reflection on their character, these posters viciously pounce on their peers with all the verocity of coiled tiger, leaping from the camouflage of the savannah plain to devour his prey. Rather than think responses through, the posters choose to simply concede to their instinctual response, often in a crude way. Unfortunately, these actions tarnish our community and provide a poor reflection laden with immaturity for a new user to view.

 

 

 

HOWEVER,

 

 

 

as applied to real life scenarios, I do feel that strong, perhaps hurtful criticism is a very necessary and key factor in our society. I'm not very up to date on the policies and governing bodies of the rest of the world, hell, half the time I'm not so sure as to what direction my own country is heading in, but free speech and free thought are ideas that I'd like to adhere to. Here's why:

 

 

 

As human societies have developed and progressed, so has our understanding of knowledge. That is to say that our collective body of knowledge is dynamic. We've updated, revised, and amended the things we know to be fact as time has progressed. What is the best system for forwarding knowledge in a way that's effective and useful to a progressive society? By defining knowledge such that it is testable (scientific method) and that the result isn't specific to the person who tests it. That is, it must work and work for everyone. (No one person claims superior access to knowledge) Furthermore, no one should get the final say. Knowledge should always be open to criticism and questioning in order to have a perpetually legitimate way of deciding who is right. Unfortunately, this method does tend to hurt people's feelings by flatly rejecting their ideas...however, to avoid this consequence by inhibiting free speech to save the feelings of the general public would be to destroy the best system human beings have for creating knowledge. Jonathan Rauch writes in Kindly Inquisitors the following,

Creating knowledge is painful, for the same reason that it can be exhilarating. Knowledge does not come free to any of us; we have to suffer for it.

And that, unfortunately for the feelings of those ridiculed, is why I feel that blunt criticism is a necessary tool of a functional society.

[Guest GhostRanger]

But Ghostranger, even in your post there, you make a point to ridicule poopman because of what? His post that was on topic and self centered? Whatever, why does it matter to you if he thinks hes getting picked on? What is the point of picking on him MORE? Was there any reason for that? Do you feel better now that you have done that? If so great, I dont care. I just want to know why it has to be done.

 

 

 

I agree with you completly, there is SOME use, but simply just attacking people for no reason; for example you ridiculing poopman, seems pointless and silly. Why must it be done? I'm my eyes, it doesnt have to be done. If someone makes a completly pointless post, that is on topic let it slide. Simple as that. I apprecate your input and well example, imnot trying to single you out, it just was, I guess a good example.

 

 

 

(I double posted and jsut edited this post instead of posting again.)

 

 

 

Actually, I do feel better. To answer your question about why: because I don't like him and I don't like what he says or how he acts and I think he should quit acting that way. I'm tired of it and several people have made posts about that exact same type of behavior of "poor me" that he does all the time. When I get tired of ridiculous behavior that keeps recurring, I smart off.

 

 

 

Now here's my question for you: do you consider it mean because of the point in my post, or how I said it? Is merely attacking someone's position mean or was it the snide way I said it that was mean?