Serious and intense arguments on the internet

donfers

you know, when people multi-quote and answer every single assertion and look up google for some madcap academic that backs up their views

i used to do that a bit well minus the googling and multiquoting, i just kind of ranted really but then i realised what's the point, people have different views and i have no idea of the personal or societal circumstances that led to the other to form the views they have, and they are likely as stubborn or dogmatic as me so why sit there bashing away at a long wordy response, you ain't going to convince anybody, i mean if it's a thanks contest then it will depend on what forum the debate takes place in but even that means sfa so why do we bother, real-life passionate debates are just about worth it if only because at least you may know the other person and see them and have a bit of a laugh but i have come to the conclusion that serious and intense arguments on the internet are just not worth the effort, idealogues and zealots will always exist and the perception of what is a zealot or idealogue will tend to be frustratingly subjective or the sheep-minded fashion of the day

so why do we have these lengthy arguments? pointless

(i reserve the right to respond in depth to those who disagree with my hypothesis)

Saila

for the lulz

Downlinz

donfers wrote: »

idealogues and zealots will always exist

Wrong, humanity and thus these sub-groups will not always exist.

http://www.infowars.com/discover-your-humanity-and-live-forever/

Due to dwindling resources, a psychological degeneration and nihilism it will be the cause of a culture where feelings of destruction and regression take over the psyche.

Therefore everything you said is worthless.

5uspect

http://xkcd.com/386/

J. Marston

That's what I think happens in those Dole/Church and atheists/Politics/Racism threads in After Hours. Once it gets to page 7, 8, 9 and on, I think it's just around four or five posters multi-quoting each other. It's not always the case but that's what I think.

Like that ''Will religion die out?'' thread. I haven't gone into but I'm just assuming that there's loads of multi-quoting going at the back-end of that thread.

ejmaztec

donfers wrote: »

so why do we have these lengthy arguments? pointless

Because some people just don't know when to shut the fuck up.

7Sins

I poop my pants when it gets serious

Downlinz

For a serious answer for the exact same reason we have arguments in real life, we have a differing point of view from someone else and enjoy debating it. The joys of the internet are you can let it become serious all you like since you wont have to deal with the guy on the other side.

Kevin Duffy

You may never change the mind of the person you're arguing with, but threads get far more views than posts. If your argument is worth having, it's worth having the audience who might be persuaded.

chin_grin

Arguing on the internet.

Dudess

Very much agree OP, but sometimes you just get sucked in, and no amount of "Right, last post - switch off the laptop then" thoughts to yourself can stop it.

I get involved in such debates a lot less than I used to though - not worth getting worked up over.

Calibos

Anyone ever type a big reply but get to a point and just say, "Fcuk it, couldn't be arsed." and hit the delete button. I don't do that much anymore because I simply don't even start big replies anymore.

gbee

These type of replies are professional trolls. I tend not to reply, it's not a court of law like and I'm not on trial.

Denerick

Because on the internet, someone is always wrong.


http://xkcd.com/386/

donfers

Denerick wrote: »

Because on the internet, someone is always wrong.


http://xkcd.com/386/

but...

amacca

gbee wrote: »

These type of replies are professional trolls.

professional trolls you say...who is paying them?

gbee wrote: »

I tend not to reply,

oh really?

gbee wrote: »

it's not a court of law like and I'm not on trial.

Yes..yes it is...and yes, yes you are!


I Win!



I love a good multi quote back and forth...

donfers

but nobody has ever said in the history of the internet "you know what thanks for pointing that out, having re-evalued my position i now realise i am wrong and you're right" indeed the serious and intense arguing only makes people ....well more serious and intense, entrenched i think is the word and by god are we a miserable bunch of entrenched blagards

Badgermonkey

I sometimes think someone beams a 'Star of David' sign into the night sky above certain posters houses to let them know the Palestine question is being discussed.

Only time some of 'em show up in AH.

Solnskaya

maybe the serious argument types are just arguementative feckers(I know I am) and it's easier to log out of boards than it is to patch it up again with the wife.:) Anyway, I think you're wrong, OP, whatever your point was. And Professor Anjay Ogram agrees with me. And I've no idea how to multiquote, or I would.

Chuck Stone

donfers wrote: »

but nobody has ever said in the history of the internet "you know what thanks for pointing that out, having re-evalued my position i now realise i am wrong and you're right"

That's not true.

People change thier views all the time. I've seen it loads of times on here. I do it myself.

In a recent thread I described people who walk up mountains as 'eejits' and after reading the thread I realised that I was the eejit - not the people who walk up mountains - who seem to get a lot out of it.

FlutterinBantam

Badgermonkey wrote: »

I sometimes think someone beams a 'Star of David' sign into the night sky above certain posters houses to let them know the Palestine question is being discussed.

Only time some of 'em show up in AH.

Beats me why this 'Palestine Question' gets so much traction here.

I mean the country we live in is in hock, we are basically fooked,we are on our focking knees, and yet these dudes tonk out the same anti US, anti Israeli anti establishment diatribe ad nauseum..

Beats the fuck out of me, so it does.

LeeHoffmann

I sometimes (well...often ) get sucked into arguments either because I'm far too easily provoked by trolls or because, as somebody on the previous page said, threads get more views than posts. You might persuade some people to re-evaulate their position or consider things from another point of view. I guess I feel obligated to argue against points of view that I see as dangerous.

I agree with you donfers that you never see people say that. However once I changed my mind on a topic after getting new evidence from someone on the net. The person I'd been arguing with was less than gracious when I told him he'd changed my mind. I guess that's why people don't admit to it

LeeHoffmann

maybe the serious argument types are just arguementative feckers(I know I am) and it's easier to log out of boards than it is to patch it up again with the wife

yep me too - another argumentative fecker:D My OH's too laid back to have such arguments with me (we only argue about important stuff like who fooked up the computer game we were playing) - hence I have to get my fix on boards!

Standman

Debates I've had online have made me think about issues in ways I wouldn't have before, and also changed my opinions slightly on some things. So, it isn't a complete waste of time if you are truly open to learning, and not just in it for a point scoring contest.

gbee

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That's not true. People change thier views all the time. I've seen it loads of times on here. I do it myself..

Sure we do. I've supported many things I would not have supported in the past, I did not vote FF but did SF and Indos ~ against all the teaching of my long lost gone father.

And sometimes I've been misinformed, and in any event, information may be correct only for a specific time period, or specific event and my views generally might not otherwise be so.

Norwayviking

I am always right,end of discussion

volvoman480

I know I'm prone to indulge in a good argument from time to time. Haven't had too many here as I haven't been around too long. However it's only a matter of time before I gain my full "keyboard warrior" status and argue with everyone I chance to meet.



By the way, ye're all wrong and know absolutely nothing about anything. I can back this up with many references to various eminent academics but to be honest, I just couldn't be arsed right now... So there.......

Solnskaya

Norwayviking wrote: »

I am always right,end of discussion

so am I. It always amazes me that not everyone agrees. How can they be so wrong?:D

volvoman480

Norwayviking wrote: »

I am always right,end of discussion

No you're not, I am....;)

Agricola

Never understood it myself. We all know there's certain subjects that attract certain posters. Whenever that subject is mentioned in a thread title, you can be sure that poster will parachute in and begin arguing with someone passionately, just like hes (its always a he btw!) being doing for the last x years!
You imagine these people live and breath this one subject, spending their days boning up on obscure facts, just so they can throw them out in future Boards debates. I have no desire to bring people around to my way of thinking on anything, and Im too fúckin lazy to try impress Internet people with long winded and wordy speechifying.

Blondini

donfers wrote: »

you know, when people multi-quote and answer every single assertion and look up google for some madcap academic that backs up their views

i used to do that a bit well minus the googling and multiquoting, i just kind of ranted really but then i realised what's the point, people have different views and i have no idea of the personal or societal circumstances that led to the other to form the views they have, and they are likely as stubborn or dogmatic as me so why sit there bashing away at a long wordy response, you ain't going to convince anybody, i mean if it's a thanks contest then it will depend on what forum the debate takes place in but even that means sfa so why do we bother, real-life passionate debates are just about worth it if only because at least you may know the other person and see them and have a bit of a laugh but i have come to the conclusion that serious and intense arguments on the internet are just not worth the effort, idealogues and zealots will always exist and the perception of what is a zealot or idealogue will tend to be frustratingly subjective or the sheep-minded fashion of the day

so why do we have these lengthy arguments? pointless

(i reserve the right to respond in depth to those who disagree with my hypothesis)

I seriously and intensely disagree.

RayM

I enjoy a good internet argument - mainly because I'm a complete coward who would do anything to avoid any form of real-life confrontation. In that respect, I have a feeling that I'm probably not alone. The great thing about the internet is that you can be as objectionable towards your opponent as you want, without having to worry about the argument being cut short by an abrupt blow to the head. Also, I completely flounder when in need of an immediate, effortless comeback, but when given a bit of time to compose (yes, compose) a response, I find that becomes less of an issue.

Arguing on the Internet is easy - if you do it properly. Don't have high hopes and don't ever expect to bring anybody round to your eminently sensible and measured way of thinking. Just remember that the best you can possibly hope for is that your opponent will leave the thread before you do (which can occur for any number of reasons, including, but not limited to, a tacit admission of defeat)... or resort to horrible insults, littered with capital letters and careless typos, thus getting themselves infracted or banned. If that's a victory, it's a pyrrhic one.

Causing your opponent to flip out and resort to an angry torrent of abuse may well provide little more than a very hollow feeling of satisfaction... but - let's face it - if you're devoting your spare time to arguing with strangers on the internet, you'll probably be quite glad to take whatever satisfaction you can get. If you want to really annoy them, begin by repeating their spelling errors back to them (more often than not, I find that people who hold stupid opinions are pretty poor spellers too). Make sure to get "(sic)" all over the place. This will usually cause them to become more and more flustered. You can piss them off even further by showing a bit of pseudo-concern... tell them that they really need to calm down, because their anger is only serving to stultify what wasn't a very well-constructed argument in the first place.

Carry on like that for a while, and it will only be a matter of time before they insult you. When this happens, remain calm and respond with something insufferably smug, along the lines of: "Well, you know, it's such a shame that you lack the maturity to engage in a civil discussion. Perhaps we'll continue this some other time; preferably when you've picked your toys up off the floor". Consider the argument thoroughly won.

RayM

Oh yeah... just one more thing... don't ever make two posts in a row. Whenever someone does this, I want to shake them. It looks ridiculous. It's like an admission that you were not only unable to articulate yourself sufficiently in your last post, but you're also really desperate to get your point across. You thought of something great afterwards? Tough. L'esprit de l'escalier, my friend.

The same rule applies to ninja edits too, obviously.

orourkeda

I find a healthy dose of big tit porn diffuses the situation.

amacca

orourkeda wrote: »

I find a healthy dose of big tit porn diffuses the situation.

diffuses most situations tbh.................................gentlemen prefer an unhealthy dose however.

fonecrusher1

Serious & intense arguments on the internet???

Its usually just 2 sexually frustrated hermits having a go at each other.