My moustache froze this morning.
My moustache froze this morning.
The weather people said we had a "snow bomb" the other day. What was weird is that according to Google that was the first time that phrase had ever been used in that context. I thought it sounded like a delicious dessert.
It's perfectly possible to argue over a particular point, whether or not consensus is reached, without being a dick about it. But now it seems that any sort of heated debate isn't allowed. Honestly, a forum where everybody agrees and strokes each other like favoured pets would be pretty damn boring.
I don't think that's what anyone wants really, but if you take a scan through the thread there are a few points that you could probably chalk up as unnecessary. Looking at Gundato and Faldreath's posts, they're arguing quite intently sure, but they're being absolutely reasonable about it. Strongly disagreeing is one thing, but I think a hostility spilling over from a previous run in with each other is another and not beneficial to anyone, because you end up with it happening over and over again where one poster will decide to disagree and go for another simply because of their history rather than the point they're making.
Serves you right for having facial hair.
Yes, debate and discussion is good, but it does seem to degenerate into name calling sometimes, which sometimes interferes with actual the cogent points/ being made (often by both sides). It's kind of like a bunch of clever snowflakes, all different, bunch together to form a sort of hatred snowball which escalates until it crashes at the bottom of a hill, at which point it collapses and you have to squint to pick apart the useful bits still scattered around.
I don't think anyone wants meaningless consensus, and that frankly seems impossible anyway, and on the other side of the scale not every criticism of an opinion needs to be sugar dusted with a 'but I love you /hug' but some thought to tone could be taken into account. There is a middle ground to play in.
Are people that afraid to actually continue the discussion about if "heated conversation" = instaban with all of the weather comments?
However, I have to add onto that: start a new thread about the discussion topic and prove jim you can have a proper discussion without blowing up. Otherwise the reminder of being excellent serves no purpose.
But what specifically was the problem in the thread?
I ask because Jim's final post was this:
I posted in that thread. Deano posted in that thread. So did Drake and Nalano. I don't think the majority of the people in that thread were involved in "non-excellent behaviour" by reading over it again, so are we part of the "anyone" mentioned in the post? At what point did the thread cross the line?Originally Posted by Rossignol
I love that people try to regulate chat between almost completely anonymous people sitting at keyboards and so utterly immune to the effect of their actions...
It's like nailing jelly to a wall with cats on elastic - only the physics is even more against you :)
There's a lot of things not taught in schools which should be - cooking and balancing your finances are probably the most notable but I think some time spent on Logical Fallacies would be time better spent than on - say - algebra or trigonometry or Kings and Queens or the port of Rotterdam...
For now - this will have to do
We could play fallacy bingo here - most threads (and almost every news posts's comments) would get you a line in the first page :)
Creator of Steam Greenlight LITE
That being said, everyone should take a step back before they rage against a member, no matter how annoying their point of view is. It is, after all, like you said, just a human tapping on a keyboard, somewhere usually outside of 1km away from you, oblivious to your real world location.