StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bounty wrote: I've stopped bothering with SDN when it comes to sensitive topics. Like people have said before, the board culture is to try and apply the conveniently black-and-white principles of mathematics on issues that really can't be expressed in a funny string of numbers. There is always the assumption that one side must hold the Absolute Truth and the other is by definition either lying or stupid, which makes for a very poor and poisonous atmosphere. As long as you're "winning" I suppose it's a barrel of laughs, but heaven help you if you aren't.

Some things really do boil down to being either right or wrong with no in-between. It's just a matter of being able to tell what those are and knowing when to break out the flamethrowers as opposed to taking it relatively easy.

Pick wrote:I think this board encourages a very Ancient Greek perspective on things, which is that it's more important to "win" than to actually be right.

You're totally right. We've failed to produce Superior Humans who have overcome their instincts and eliminated their competitive male nature. I feel ashamed.

Pick wrote:Referring back to the Greeks: it's really half content, half presentation. That's why vagueness and difficulty of communication time and time again skew the actual result of debates. Someone trips up in the way that they word a specific viewpoint, are cornered, and the debate's over before the original subject has been meaningfully explored.
Cool. Yeah, I don't see any assumptions there at all.

Sarcasm?

So, if done properly, the honest discourse you alluded to is exactly the debates that go on.

No, because we don't see thesis/antithesis/synthesis, which is important to refining arguments into the closest thing to truth. In the system usually evident here, one wins out, despite its flaws, because the other has been proven more incorrect. And then it ends. As the very same issue is rarely discussed in more than one thread, this beautiful allusion to a mathematical trend is moot.

I'm not sure what you mean by "thesis/antithesis/synthesis". If it's what it sounds like, that's exactly what a series of debates ideally does (given honesty and a long period of time). I mean, isn't that how science got where it is today? I'm also not sure why you think each issue is rarely discussed in more than one thread; we have had hundreds of threads on Iraq or the problems with religion. And over time (a long period of time, often -- perhaps longer than the board's current life, perhaps longer), as incorrect ideas are weeded out -- i.e., ideas that are more correct consistently win more -- it tends toward truth.

The added bonus here is that since this is originally a sci-fi debate board, probably more than 80% of the board is men. That might have something to do with it.

... Bonus?

Oh, yes. It really helps with the overall board humility.

PS- The next time Valdemar bases a monetary argument on false premises, you should call him out, if you've got the time.

I did, it was ignored. So was my comment to someone else that FSLIC and the Federal Reserve are different entities with different roles in the economic crisis of the 80s. Of course, that might have been neglected because no one knows what FSLIC is. Which makes for a kind of ironic point there.

You get to flame the shit out of him the next time he makes a mistake like that, then. You're probably not interested in that, so I suppose that's the way the cookie crumbles.

Anyway, my point's pretty clear, so I see no reason to further expand on it, especially since I don't really give a shit, considering that those who agree with me do, and those who don't don't, and that's basically where it'll stand regardless of further posting.

I'm not really sure why you think that you're incapable of changing people's minds. You should be confident in yourself than that.

Bounty wrote:Like people have said before, the board culture is to try and apply the conveniently black-and-white principles of mathematics on issues that really can't be expressed in a funny string of numbers. There is always the assumption that one side must hold the Absolute Truth and the other is by definition either lying or stupid, which makes for a very poor and poisonous atmosphere.

I'm not sure what you mean by the "conveniently black-and-white principles of mathematics ... a funny string of numbers." Are you saying that logic isn't always true? Math isn't about Absolute Truth or funny numbers at all.

That is, interestingly enough, how religious people almost always try to describe what's wrong with the scientific mindset. We're trying to "reduce" things to "mere numbers", as if numbers can't be used to describe anything important.

Darth Wong wrote:

Pick wrote:I think this board encourages a very Ancient Greek perspective on things, which is that it's more important to "win" than to actually be right.

You're totally right. We've failed to produce Superior Humans who have overcome their instincts and eliminated their competitive male nature. I feel ashamed.

Honestly I much prefer to be right than win. Or win by being right, something this board IMO encourages in spades.

Sure there are some people that get in arguments only to win, but there are enough people on here that use debate for what is is intended. One of the things I like about this site is that Golden Means bullshit is not tolerated like it is in the real world. Too many times i've had to play the "truth is somewhere in the middle" game only to either be fucked over in some kind of situation, or to watch an idiot feel vindicated.

I also love watching Star Trek fans get intellectually curbstomped IS THAT SUCH A BAD THING?

Usually when people discuss things in real life, it's not about winning or being right, it's about exchanging ideas and opinions. Having opinions about things and not being able to back them up with logical reasoning is discouraged on this board. That's great; it keeps threads from cluttering and encourages justifying one's opinions, but one must realise that the same approach in real life is going to hurt people's feelings.

Dooey Jo wrote:Usually when people discuss things in real life, it's not about winning or being right, it's about exchanging ideas and opinions. Having opinions about things and not being able to back them up with logical reasoning is discouraged on this board. That's great; it keeps threads from cluttering and encourages justifying one's opinions, but one must realise that the same approach in real life is going to hurt people's feelings.

"Exchanging ideas" only works so much when you're dealing with something where there's really only one right answer to it. Although the fact that a lot of people in this thread seem to think that people who argue "SDN style" do so in real life is amusing.

General Zod wrote:"Exchanging ideas" only works so much when you're dealing with something where there's really only one right answer to it. Although the fact that a lot of people in this thread seem to think that people who argue "SDN style" do so in real life is amusing.

I sincerely hope we start a trend or two with logical argument. Also, is it me or is this thread a bit serious to be in Testing? Maybe SLAM material?

General Zod wrote:

Dooey Jo wrote:Usually when people discuss things in real life, it's not about winning or being right, it's about exchanging ideas and opinions. Having opinions about things and not being able to back them up with logical reasoning is discouraged on this board. That's great; it keeps threads from cluttering and encourages justifying one's opinions, but one must realise that the same approach in real life is going to hurt people's feelings.

"Exchanging ideas" only works so much when you're dealing with something where there's really only one right answer to it. Although the fact that a lot of people in this thread seem to think that people who argue "SDN style" do so in real life is amusing.

Yes, but how often does that happen? I discuss a lot of things, in projects and otherwise, and the times when there is one right answer to something are rare, to say the least.

Also, people do crop up from time to time, complaining about how the SDN style doesn't work when they tried to apply it where it doesn't belong.

Dooey Jo wrote: Yes, but how often does that happen? I discuss a lot of things, in projects and otherwise, and the times when there is one right answer to something are rare, to say the least.

I've had people try claiming that the laws of physics are wrong or that aliens caused x y z to happen, what have you. It happens often enough.

Also, people do crop up from time to time, complaining about how the SDN style doesn't work when they tried to apply it where it doesn't belong.

I've only ever heard of people trying to use SDN style on other boards, not in real life.

This thread is exactly the headache I expected, for exactly the reasons I was complaining about to begin with. The irony is fascinating, in that completely worthless kind of way.

PS. Surlethe-- think about whether that ideal is actually being expressed, and further then if the same thing couldn't be done with a more exploratory atmosphere just as easily, if not more easily. If nothing else, we wouldn't need to wait for these "consecutive debates tending toward truth," since it would be perfectly acceptable to hone ideas without blatant one-on-one bitchfights while in the same sphere. If anything, these defensive and offensive tactics skewer the real benefit to exploring the initial inquiry: an improvement in one's vantage. It's not that I think everyone's perspective is equally valid, it's that the way SDnet goes about finding the truth is much more long, obfuscated, and unpleasant than it needs to be, to the point where people with actual input (such as Bounty or Dooey) don't even want to get involved. Then everyone misses out, just for the sake of the aggressive atmosphere.

Also, cute for you to pass it off on me with your passive-aggressive bullshit in your final comment, asshole.

Pick wrote:Also, cute for you to pass it off on me with your passive-aggressive bullshit in your final comment, asshole.

Gee, what a poisonous comment. You're making it difficult for him to express himself, you know.

Come on, now. There's no reason for you to get snippy. There's nothing debate-based in his statement, only the insinuation that the reason I don't debate is I'm easily butthurt, instead of the content of my prior posts. Even that I wouldn't particularly mind were he honest about it, but he's trying to slip it in via one of the most annoying internet tactics I've ever seen.

You're free to say I'm a wuss, Surlethe, but for fuck's sake, don't wrap it like it's a pity-present.

Pick wrote:Come on, now. There's no reason for you to get snippy.

"Snippy?" That sounds like a personal attack again. I'm not sure I feel welcome to participate in your thread. You didn't even greet me or say hello.

This thread is definitely serious now, but I think SLAM or OT is starting to look less appealing as compared to Sector 12.

Oh, and this is Stark's thread, Mike

Yes dammit, it's all SD.net's fault.

Not the myriad of real life morons, clients, and door to door dimwits I've encountered over the years on other boards, in my face, or any of that.

Only here did I become the sarcastic bastard I was eight years ago .

This has nothing to do with the content of my posts, but I'm glad to see you're interested enough to pretend it does.

I never claimed that people should be flowers-n-kittens nice to one another. If anything, I think that also distracts from the validity of the information being presented, as well as discussions that arise from it. My ideal is neutrality when dealing with issues and trying to make opinions from collections of information.

Pick wrote:This has nothing to do with the content of my posts, but I'm glad to see you're interested enough to pretend it does.

I never claimed that people should be flowers-n-kittens nice to one another. If anything, I think that also distracts from the validity of the information being presented, as well as discussions that arise from it. My ideal is neutrality when dealing with issues and trying to make opinions from collections of information.

That's not really possible when the other side starts spewing off blatant lies, distortions and misinformation unfortunately.

Ghost Rider wrote:Yes dammit, it's all SD.net's fault.

Not the myriad of real life morons, clients, and door to door dimwits I've encountered over the years on other boards, in my face, or any of that.

Only here did I become the sarcastic bastard I was eight years ago .

I see SDN as a result and a backlash against the shit you rail against, not the instigator. Cause and effect, after all.

Pick wrote:This has nothing to do with the content of my posts, but I'm glad to see you're interested enough to pretend it does.

What's that? It looks like an accusation of dishonesty! I definitely feel unwelcome now. I don't know how anyone can be expected to engage in a free exchange of ideas in such a hostile environment, where ideas are so unwelcome.

Darth Wong wrote:"Snippy?" That sounds like a personal attack again. I'm not sure I feel welcome to participate in your thread. You didn't even greet me or say hello.

I think my sarcasometer just imploded...

Darth Wong wrote:

Pick wrote:This has nothing to do with the content of my posts, but I'm glad to see you're interested enough to pretend it does.

What's that? It looks like an accusation of dishonesty! I definitely feel unwelcome now. I don't know how anyone can be expected to engage in a free exchange of ideas in such a hostile environment, where ideas are so unwelcome.

I think mine just did too, Dallas

SDN has made me a better debater and a bit smarter.