Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

My Pet Peeve in the Forums

bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments," "lacking topicality or relevance to the initial OP (300 posts later)," or "conceded points," or some such nonsense.

The forums, while oft-combative (hopefully in a civil fashion), are not debates; they are discussions. That is an important distinction to make. Discussions do not occur under the rigid framework that debates do, for instance--they are fluid and evolve (sometimes they change completely) over time. For example, in a 300 post conversation, the issue at hand may have morphed from Creationism's Validity to whether society could construct a real-life Jurassic Park. Because the discussion has flowed to a new topic, it is not appropriate for someone to chastise me for not be topical (as regards the initial OP of Creationism).

Moreover, in a discussion, the focus on the nitty-gritty of argumentation is deemphasized. In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Frankly, it really irks me sometimes when I see these formal debate concepts--sticking to the topic/resolution/OP, responding to every assertion, etc.--in the forums, because the forums are not debates in the formal sense of the term. They are discussions where ideas are exchanged, but they necessarily lack the rigidity of debates. That is why we have both formal debates as well as forums on this site, because they are not the same thing. I think that's an important distinction to call to mind.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Mikal
Posts: 11,270
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 2:55:31 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments," "lacking topicality or relevance to the initial OP (300 posts later)," or "conceded points," or some such nonsense.

The forums, while oft-combative (hopefully in a civil fashion), are not debates; they are discussions. That is an important distinction to make. Discussions do not occur under the rigid framework that debates do, for instance--they are fluid and evolve (sometimes they change completely) over time. For example, in a 300 post conversation, the issue at hand may have morphed from Creationism's Validity to whether society could construct a real-life Jurassic Park. Because the discussion has flowed to a new topic, it is not appropriate for someone to chastise me for not be topical (as regards the initial OP of Creationism).

Moreover, in a discussion, the focus on the nitty-gritty of argumentation is deemphasized. In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Frankly, it really irks me sometimes when I see these formal debate concepts--sticking to the topic/resolution/OP, responding to every assertion, etc.--in the forums, because the forums are not debates in the formal sense of the term. They are discussions where ideas are exchanged, but they necessarily lack the rigidity of debates. That is why we have both formal debates as well as forums on this site, because they are not the same thing. I think that's an important distinction to call to mind.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

I think it's relative but in most cases, I would agree

If the OP is like, abortion is moral. Generally no matter what you argue, the critera is going to be around the topic which is almost framed as a resolution. So almost no matter which way the topic goes, it's going to branch out to either affirming or negativing the topic of the forum post (which is abortion is moral and which is also framed as a res). Any thing else would not belong in that specific post
dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 3:05:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments," "lacking topicality or relevance to the initial OP (300 posts later)," or "conceded points," or some such nonsense.

The forums, while oft-combative (hopefully in a civil fashion), are not debates; they are discussions. That is an important distinction to make. Discussions do not occur under the rigid framework that debates do, for instance--they are fluid and evolve (sometimes they change completely) over time. For example, in a 300 post conversation, the issue at hand may have morphed from Creationism's Validity to whether society could construct a real-life Jurassic Park. Because the discussion has flowed to a new topic, it is not appropriate for someone to chastise me for not be topical (as regards the initial OP of Creationism).

Moreover, in a discussion, the focus on the nitty-gritty of argumentation is deemphasized. In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Frankly, it really irks me sometimes when I see these formal debate concepts--sticking to the topic/resolution/OP, responding to every assertion, etc.--in the forums, because the forums are not debates in the formal sense of the term. They are discussions where ideas are exchanged, but they necessarily lack the rigidity of debates. That is why we have both formal debates as well as forums on this site, because they are not the same thing. I think that's an important distinction to call to mind.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

This irks me even in debate form, as my opponent usually sets forth the same idea over and over again and it causes me to waste characters. In the forums, it's just stupidity... if someone makes you respond to every sentence in the forums, you know you have been beat.
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,367
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 3:17:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
My pet peeves:
-When you misquote
e.g.
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
My pet peeve...
-when you type a smiley and it comes out like this:
)
-When Rev posts half a chapter and doesn't update it till days after.
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
RevNge
Posts: 13,835
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 3:25:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 3:17:41 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
My pet peeves:
-When you misquote
e.g.
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
My pet peeve...
-when you type a smiley and it comes out like this:
)

You can do this:

(:
-When Rev posts half a chapter and doesn't update it till days after.

Hey, I only did that for Chapter 7... T^T
mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 3:29:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments,"
I think that can be relevant if you're engaging with a person, and there's relevant points you make that are unadressed.
"lacking topicality or relevance to the initial OP (300 posts later),
Agreed. I think forum conversations should be allowed to go off topic a bit so long as the intent is genuine discussion... and so long as it's not just spamming you're opinion.

" or "conceded points,"
I wouldn't frame it that way, but saying that something wasn't addressed is alright I think.

or some such nonsense.

The forums, while oft-combative (hopefully in a civil fashion), are not debates; they are discussions. That is an important distinction to make. Discussions do not occur under the rigid framework that debates do, for instance--they are fluid and evolve (sometimes they change completely) over time. For example, in a 300 post conversation, the issue at hand may have morphed from Creationism's Validity to whether society could construct a real-life Jurassic Park. Because the discussion has flowed to a new topic, it is not appropriate for someone to chastise me for not be topical (as regards the initial OP of Creationism).

Agreed.

Moreover, in a discussion, the focus on the nitty-gritty of argumentation is deemphasized.
Yeah, but it can still be oppositional... and I don't have a problem with people explaining why they disagree... or suggesting that the other person isn't accounting for things.

In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Sure, unless those unadressed points are of particular relevance... Then I can see them being brought up again.

Frankly, it really irks me sometimes when I see these formal debate concepts--sticking to the topic/resolution/OP, responding to every assertion, etc.--in the forums, because the forums are not debates in the formal sense of the term. They are discussions where ideas are exchanged, but they necessarily lack the rigidity of debates. That is why we have both formal debates as well as forums on this site, because they are not the same thing. I think that's an important distinction to call to mind.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

I largely agree, and would imagine we're of the same general perspective... despite my nitpicking :P
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 8:58:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 3:29:48 PM, mortsdor wrote:
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments,"
I think that can be relevant if you're engaging with a person, and there's relevant points you make that are unadressed.

Sure, but I think as long as the big themes are addressed by both participants, I think it's a bit uncharitable and nit-picky to demand that a person address EVERY claim or point.

In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Sure, unless those unadressed points are of particular relevance... Then I can see them being brought up again.

The main themes ought to be address in some fashion, but it, again, shouldn't be expected of discussants to respond to everything.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

I largely agree, and would imagine we're of the same general perspective... despite my nitpicking :P

Lol...
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 9:34:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
Okay...so I just wanted to go on a mini-rant. Well, not really a "rant," but just to make a comment.

Oftentimes, I notice that people in the forums treat those discussions as they would a debate, talking about "dropped arguments," "lacking topicality or relevance to the initial OP (300 posts later)," or "conceded points," or some such nonsense.

The forums, while oft-combative (hopefully in a civil fashion), are not debates; they are discussions. That is an important distinction to make. Discussions do not occur under the rigid framework that debates do, for instance--they are fluid and evolve (sometimes they change completely) over time. For example, in a 300 post conversation, the issue at hand may have morphed from Creationism's Validity to whether society could construct a real-life Jurassic Park. Because the discussion has flowed to a new topic, it is not appropriate for someone to chastise me for not be topical (as regards the initial OP of Creationism).

Moreover, in a discussion, the focus on the nitty-gritty of argumentation is deemphasized. In a normal, IRL, conversation where I am talking with a friend, I cannot be expected to respond to every sentence he/she utters. I am expected to respond to the general gist of ideas put forth. In a debate, responding to each and every point is important on a technical level, but that same kind of precision isn't something required of participants engaging in a non-debate discourse.

Frankly, it really irks me sometimes when I see these formal debate concepts--sticking to the topic/resolution/OP, responding to every assertion, etc.--in the forums, because the forums are not debates in the formal sense of the term. They are discussions where ideas are exchanged, but they necessarily lack the rigidity of debates. That is why we have both formal debates as well as forums on this site, because they are not the same thing. I think that's an important distinction to call to mind.

I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

Even in irl discussions that more closely resemble debates, I'll point out if someone drops a major one of my points when the point that is dropped responds to their continuing criticism of my own position. You can't ignore "dropped" arguments in that regard. But it's not a formal debate thing. I usually just say, "You still haven't answered this issue, which renders your points meaningless."

I think topicality arguments though in a forum discussion are stupid. And I agree that pointing out "drops" when they are technical things that aren't worth responding to is also silly. Even in a debate, you can drop irrelevant statements made by your opponent and still win. It's necessary, actually, to do that in any type of debate event where there is a time skew of any sort.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 9:49:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 9:34:45 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

Even in irl discussions that more closely resemble debates, I'll point out if someone drops a major one of my points when the point that is dropped responds to their continuing criticism of my own position. You can't ignore "dropped" arguments in that regard. But it's not a formal debate thing. I usually just say, "You still haven't answered this issue, which renders your points meaningless."

Sure. It just gets to me when it becomes needless nit-picky.

I think topicality arguments though in a forum discussion are stupid. And I agree that pointing out "drops" when they are technical things that aren't worth responding to is also silly. Even in a debate, you can drop irrelevant statements made by your opponent and still win. It's necessary, actually, to do that in any type of debate event where there is a time skew of any sort.

Agreed.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 9:57:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 9:49:39 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 12/4/2014 9:34:45 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

Even in irl discussions that more closely resemble debates, I'll point out if someone drops a major one of my points when the point that is dropped responds to their continuing criticism of my own position. You can't ignore "dropped" arguments in that regard. But it's not a formal debate thing. I usually just say, "You still haven't answered this issue, which renders your points meaningless."

Sure. It just gets to me when it becomes needless nit-picky.

I'll just end the discussion at the point where it gets excessively nitpicky, the user continually ignores my points, the discussion is stale and not evolving, or the user and I can't agree on very basic fundamental assumptions (e.g. modern chemistry principles are correct).


I think topicality arguments though in a forum discussion are stupid. And I agree that pointing out "drops" when they are technical things that aren't worth responding to is also silly. Even in a debate, you can drop irrelevant statements made by your opponent and still win. It's necessary, actually, to do that in any type of debate event where there is a time skew of any sort.

Agreed.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 9:59:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/4/2014 9:57:46 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/4/2014 9:49:39 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 12/4/2014 9:34:45 PM, bluesteel wrote:
At 12/4/2014 2:48:40 PM, bsh1 wrote:
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on this though, and to engaging in a good discussion (not a formal debate) of this idea.

Even in irl discussions that more closely resemble debates, I'll point out if someone drops a major one of my points when the point that is dropped responds to their continuing criticism of my own position. You can't ignore "dropped" arguments in that regard. But it's not a formal debate thing. I usually just say, "You still haven't answered this issue, which renders your points meaningless."

Sure. It just gets to me when it becomes needless nit-picky.

I'll just end the discussion at the point where it gets excessively nitpicky, the user continually ignores my points, the discussion is stale and not evolving, or the user and I can't agree on very basic fundamental assumptions (e.g. modern chemistry principles are correct).

Me too.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...