Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

Re^8: What is "aggressive" argument?

by BrowserUk (Pope)
on Nov 05, 2010 at 00:36 UTC ( #869604=note: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??


in reply to Re^7: What is "aggressive" argument?
in thread What is "aggressive" argument?

Dang, you need a geography lesson!!

Was that an American accusing a European of needing a geography lesson?

Poughkeepsie is in New York and Boca Raton is in Florida.

You didn't see the (deliberate, intended, flagged a mile away), irony? Definitely an American!

And yes, those two 'anti-american' put-downs will earn me downvotes. What of it.

And yet, every American comedian that visits or works here in the UK--recently including Rich Hall, Reginald D. Hunter, Ruby Wax, Joan Rivers, and many more going back as long as I can remember--makes jokes contrasting US 'v' UK, with the Americans (themselves) the butt of both those jokes.

Of course, when they do it , it is self deprecating. When I do it, it's stereotyping a whole nation.

But they also apply the American stereotyping of the Brits, to our faces. And we laugh all the louder because it's not personal.

And neither are my two jokes above. Nor's this:

Peoria, Illinois?

What? Like, is that: the sound of barfing?

By the standards of those-that-accuse, your "Dang, you need a geography lesson!!" would be deemed a personal attack at least as bad as most of "mine".

By their standards, even just telling someone they are wrong--even if they are--is a 'personal attack'.

Or I suppose you could just continue to complain about the situation.

If you read the OP of this thread as a "complaint", you totally missed the point.

But is that par for the course. (Again, not directed at you personally, but at the general reading of my intent.)

And finally, within a few minutes of each other you wrote:

These heated debates are part of the PM culture. To avoid reading them is missing out on part of the sub-culture here
and
Too much heated debate will hurt.

I agree with the first. It is a good part of the point I've been trying to make in this thread.

For the second--besides that it doesn't seem to do /. any harm; you've never heard of a site being PMed--there is a value judgement there.

You are making offering a judgement on behalf of every other monk as to what is "too much".

Just as my accusers believe they are making a value judgements on behalf of all monks. They're are not!

If we take 868831 as an example. It is by far the strongest thing I've ever said on PM. It currently stand at -11(+3,-14). At most, 17 people have been bothered enough by that direct, personal, unredeemed & unredeemable post to even vote on it. Of whom 14 felt strongly enough about it to downvote it. (*)

I'm guessing that about half of those are 'my sparring partners' & their supporters--7 to 9 seems to be about average for the downvotes I garner when I go up against one of my 'regulars'. The rest, people genuinely offended by that particular remark.

Bottom line: My accusers--those would be moral guardians of monkkind--are a tiny fraction of those here at PM.

And for the most part, the majority either reject, or simply can't be bothered with, their moral crusades.

In response to your "Your only practical recourse is to ratchet back on those personal attacks", I'd say I have one more option. And in keeping with one of the monk's quips, I intend to make a virtue of laziness, and do nothing.

(*)I'm guessing that three upvoters have been following the argument closely enough, and understand the subject matter enough. to get the point of the title brackets!


Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.


Comment on Re^8: What is "aggressive" argument?
Re^9: What is "aggressive" argument?
by IBlowGoatsSucker (Beadle) on Nov 05, 2010 at 13:13 UTC
    Fascinating! Any psychology undergrads out there? Your thesis on cognitive dissonance just wrote itself.

      Wha'dya think they'd make of your chosen pseudonym T. ?

      The need to simultaneously own up to the world that you're the one that blows the guy that sucks the goats; and hide.

      Maybe it explains your confliction.

      Must be worse since your bereavement


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
        Ha ha, you replied! I thought you were smarter. Lets see if it works again.

        TrollTroller Rex
Re^9: What is "aggressive" argument?
by tirwhan (Abbot) on Nov 05, 2010 at 15:37 UTC

    Ok, so I am reneging on my promise to be done with this discussion, since, against my better judgement, I followed a link out of the CB out of curiosity. And I find that you are now putting words into my mouth that are the exact opposite of what I've explicitly said ("Just as my accusers believe they are making a value judgements on behalf of all monks."), willfully misrepresenting other things I've said ("By their standards, even just telling someone they are wrong--even if they are--is a 'personal attack'.") and even accusing me of sock-puppetry. Ok, while typing this I realised that it's possible you were referring to the other T. you've been exchanging views with recently, and you oh-so-cleverly hide behind plurals instead of talking about individuals, but at this point I think I'll take a page out of your book and blindly attribute all this to malice directed at my person. Which leaves me only one thing to say:

    You, sir, are a lying, hypocritical cunt.

    Now I'm done.


    All dogma is stupid.
      you are now putting words into my mouth that are the exact opposite of what I've explicitly said ...
      1. As I said back up there, and you explicitly noted, you are not my only accuser--hence the plural.

        So, you adopting the mantle of the aggrieved at this point is, to use the colloquial, a bit previous.

      2. See? It is damn frustrating to have your words and intent wilfully misinterpreted isn't it?

        It tends to make you say things that you'd normally never say!

        Even if the misrepresentation is only perceived rather than actual, as in this case.

      ... willfully misrepresenting other things I've said ("By their standards, even just telling someone they are wrong--even if they are--is a 'personal attack'.")

      Re-read this thread. Did not at least one person in it suggest that "Telling someone they are wrong" is a personal attack?

      ... even accusing me of sock-puppetry. Ok, while typing this I realised that it's possible you were referring to the other T

      Possible? Even likely? Even absolutely, unmistakably, (oh! And correctly!), not accusing you of that.

      You've just confirmed everything I've been saying.


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
Re^9: What is "aggressive" argument?
by Argel (Prior) on Nov 05, 2010 at 21:52 UTC
    And there it is, the message that veers off the path of discourse and heads down the path of insults and flame wars. I didn't actually except to see it happen in this thread, but no matter.

    Regarding geography, no I did not notice any hint of irony. That's the problem with writing -- intent is often not clear when it comes to irony and sarcasm. I saw the literal version of what was written -- e.g. that you do not know that much about the Mid-west, and responded in kind.

    Regarding Peoria, Illinois, IBM has a campus there, and since it's in the Mid-west, I thought you might be confusing Boca Raton and Poughkeepsie for it. I'm not sure how anyone goes from "Peoria, Illinois" to the sound of barfing, but it is a good example of how you tend to derail threads.

    Anyway, sadly, given the direction this thread is headed in, there's little point in continuing it. :-(

    Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks

      I'm not sure how anyone goes from "Peoria, Illinois" to the sound of barfing,

      Ill-y noise. (Indicating that I don't know what "Illinois" is, never mind "Peoria".)(It's called humour!)

      no I did not notice any hint of irony.

      The clues were: a) the direct/indirect people were in the exact opposite to my previous suggestion; b) "Or maybe that's just the way I remember it.".

      Not to mention my explicitly stating that a) I didn't know where the Mid-West was; b) and that, my impressions of the "New Yorker" came from cheesy film stereotypes.

      I was quite clearly making the point that the exact locations mentioned were immaterial to the discussion of cultural differences. And that any deep examination of the accuracy or otherwise of the location references was equally irrelevant.

      and heads down the path of insults and flame wars.

      There are no "insults", nor anything that should lead to "flame wars" in that post. None intended, nor implied. None at all. Really, zip, nada, zilch.

      The entire post is about showing exactly how discourse can be misinterpreted. How offence can be taken, or not, at the whim of the reader, regardless of the writers intent.

      Remember: "But they also apply the American stereotyping of the Brits, to our faces. And we laugh all the louder because it's not personal."

      Please--suspend your disbelief for just 2 minutes--go back read the whole post again in the light that I was not attempting to insult you. That I was simply trying to make my case through that discourse. To show you how easy it is to misinterpret.

      More successfully than I anticipated it seems :(


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
        Illinois (where the "s" is silent, so the "nois" part rhymes with "boy") is a Midwestern state. It's a tall, fairly narrow state, with Chicago up at the top and then a whole lot of rural land in the rest of the state. There's a small grouping of cities in between Chicago and St. Louis, which is where Peoria is located. I used to hear lots of IBM related stories from a now retired co-worker who worked at that campus (among several places IBM sent him).

        Anyway, for better or worse, your reputation for heated debates precedes you , which in turn affects how others interpret what you write in said debates. So while you may not have any ill intent, if a message can be read multiple ways, the more aggressive interpretation will often prevail, especially the further along in a debate.

        Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks

Re^9: What is "aggressive" argument? (errors)
by tye (Cardinal) on Nov 07, 2010 at 07:23 UTC

    Let's do the link less coyly, Re^3: Is Using Threads Slower Than Not Using Threads? (Deliberate errors). Your "Deliberate errors" accusation is factual incorrect.

    But I won't migrate that argument to a different thread nor will I respond to such a childish remark in that thread. (Your conclusions regarding that node are entertaining as an example of stretching conjecture to extremes.)

    I'm not sure where you dreamed up a "moral crusade", but I am not having one. I tried to have a technical conversation, you chose to do something else, I've tried a few times to explain. I don't even see much having to do with morals there.

    From elsewhere in this thread:

    Please--suspend your disbelief for just 2 minutes--go back read the whole post again in the light that I was not attempting to insult you.

    Ah, that'd be a nice exercise. You should try it.

    Based on the ramping up of the paranoid remarks, I doubt you can pull it off at this point, though. Frankly, that makes me sad. It seems you may think that I (and others) are "out to get you" (even on a crusade against you). I am not. I say that sincerely, though I doubt you will be capable of believing it any time soon.

    - tye        

      I know you can read:

      BUGS AND LIMITATIONS When share is used on arrays, hashes, array refs or hash refs, any data they contain will be lost.

      Like I said, "Deliberate errors". And that is just typical of your tactics.

      And don't put words in my mouth. No conspiracy, just bedazzled courtiers.

      I no. I won't be responding further.


      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

        Obviously, I didn't read that section of the documentation. (If you want to argue that point further, then respond in the appropriate thread less childishly.)

        I never said "conspiracy" and I never said that the people you see as out to get you were conspiring. Seeing a disorganized mob as bent on a crusade against you is still paranoid (as are other theories you coyly propose of late).

        I won't be responding further.

        Yes, responding to an honest attempt at communication without contorting it into an attack might require an open mind. And it saddens me that such is beyond you at this point.

        - tye        

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://869604]
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others chilling in the Monastery: (11)
As of 2014-09-30 20:52 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (384 votes), past polls