Is it SDN's fault that you're aggressive or argumentative

Post by **Vympel** » 2007-10-04 02:16am

Yes, it did. I used to be quite a Golden Mean-monger, but now I viciously engage my Dad whenever the subject of religion comes up. He doesn't believe in Christianity, but he chastises me because I'm too "extremist" on the subject - ie. I argue with him in a very annoyed manner when he gives me his vaccuous "it's bad to be one way or another" speech and pontificates that "something can't come from nothing."

The response "and where did the something that made the something come from, then?" always ends the discussion (he'll resort to mocking and imitating my body movements because I'll get worked up at that point - while he's realized he's lost so he changes the subject to me being pissed).

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2007-10-04 02:20am

The Golden Mean is the perfect argument for the person who doesn't entirely understand the argument, and doesn't care to educate himself. Why bother learning a complex issue when you can just figure out where the two sides stand, plant yourself in the middle, and say "I'm more reasonable than either of you!" with a smug look on your face?

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2007-10-04 03:16am

I guess I've become more aggressive, which is good since I am such a non-aggressive person. Some aggressiveness is needed as not to become a door mat. Just recently when I was filling up my car some welfare bums drove up in a shitty car and started talking in some foreign language, sounded russian and holding up some ugly jewelry, they wanted me to fill up their car in exchange for some necklace.

Pretty obvious it's a swindle and that was some fake cheap ass bullshit they probably had plenty off, they'd pull some sob story and get some sucker to fill their car up. Well I wasn't having any of it so I killed them, sold their car as scrap and fed their remains to the pigs.

...

Actually I just told them to fuck off.

Medic · Post by **Medic** » 2007-10-04 09:14am

My 1st comment in this thread was a throw-away when this was still in testing so...

The board hasn't really made me any more argumentative than I already was. I liked what I saw to begin with and though there are times when it seems crazy, at the end of the day it can be just too damned funny to stop posting or post with the intent of getting banned. Suicide-by-mod if you will.

Besides that, a lot of times if you are emotionally over-invested and, well, wrong, it'll be easier to come to grips the day after as with most things in life.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2007-10-04 10:19am

Seriously now, since the topic ain't in Testing anymore. SD.net hasn't made me more hostile towards stupid people or more willing to abuse them, I've been that way for longer than I care to remember. SD.net just lets me unload on the dipshits like they deserve instead of being forced to "be nice & civil" like on most other boards.

Lord Poe · Post by **Lord Poe** » 2007-10-04 01:34pm

How the fuck did I miss this thread?

"God didn't make Rambo. I made him."

SDnet didn't mold my attitude, it just allowed me to express it as freely as I did on USENET. The "net-nanny" bullshit on other boards is sickening. "Let's all agree to disagree" makes me want to throw puppies at my computer screen.

Am I like this in "real life"? Yes. I don't scream or curse or rant like I do here, though. I'm pretty quiet in RL. The one SNnet poster who approached me in a Borders last year to ask if it was really me looked like he was approaching an open lion cage!
I hope I made him feel at ease after he met me.

Mike and I weren't screaming "FUUUCK YOU TREKKKIES!!!!!!ZZZZLOLOL" when we met in a restaurant. We were just like anyone else having a conversation at a table. Although, Rebecca had that "approaching the lion cage" look, too. Which made me wonder if she's just wary of people that post on Mike's board, or she read a few of my posts!

If you have a discussion with me in real life, you're not going to walk away wondering what my position is. And I am reserved, up to a point, if I'm asked to be beforehand. Rosie makes sure to check with me when her super religious brother comes by. We get along great, but when he starts his, "We all believe in God here, don't we?" I can already see Rosie racing toward me to change the subject.

In short, I know what tact is. I do actually employ it. I will NOT remain quiet and "neutral" if someone else in the room decides to voice their opinion and expect it to stand unmolested if they say something contrary to my thinking. FFS, even my co-workers know this about me.

Post by **Dalton** » 2007-10-04 01:56pm

Lord Poe wrote:Mike and I weren't screaming "FUUUCK YOU TREKKKIES!!!!!!ZZZZLOLOL" when we met in a restaurant.

I thought I felt a nexus of dark energy...

Chardok · Post by **Chardok** » 2007-10-04 02:30pm

Dalton wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:Mike and I weren't screaming "FUUUCK YOU TREKKKIES!!!!!!ZZZZLOLOL" when we met in a restaurant.
I thought I felt a nexus of dark energy...

Nope. That was the burrito you had for lunch. If you were close enough to feel anything from this meeting, you'd have likely gone insane and clawed your nipples off.

drachefly · Post by **drachefly** » 2007-10-05 05:14pm

Surlethe wrote:
ray245 wrote:Finally there are a few other people who dislike everything turning into a debate. Sometime, I just want a simple discussion.
I do believe I've asked you this before. What's the difference between a debate and a discussion? Lack of analysis? Lack of critical thought? What's the difference?

I'm not ray, but I think the distinction here is that in a debate, each person advocates one side and not the others; in a discussion, people will point out advantages of any position, as they are able to do so.

Since debate, in general, encompasses that latter meaning, another way of expressing the distinction would be the difference between versus debate and general debate.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2007-10-05 05:22pm

drachefly wrote: I'm not ray, but I think the distinction here is that in a debate, each person advocates one side and not the others; in a discussion, people will point out advantages of any position, as they are able to do so.

Since debate, in general, encompasses that latter meaning, another way of expressing the distinction would be the difference between versus debate and general debate.

Just for emphasis again:

Main Entry:
1de·bate Listen to the pronunciation of 1debate
Pronunciation:
\di-ˈbāt, dē-\
Function:
noun
Date:
13th century

: a contention by words or arguments: as a: the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

I'm failing to see how your definition fits with this. The only thing I can see here that might fit what Ray wants is a debate without regulation. Which is pretty much a given here considering standards for evidence and claims.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2007-10-05 05:30pm

Chardok wrote:
Dalton wrote:
Lord Poe wrote:Mike and I weren't screaming "FUUUCK YOU TREKKKIES!!!!!!ZZZZLOLOL" when we met in a restaurant.
I thought I felt a nexus of dark energy...
Nope. That was the burrito you had for lunch. If you were close enough to feel anything from this meeting, you'd have likely gone insane and clawed your nipples off.

You haven't met Dalton. A burrito does not survive his awesomeness....unless it's name is Rob Wilson

.

Besides I've been in the nexus of Wilson, Wilkens, and Dalton here...and I'm no worse for the wear....though I will never forgive Wilson or Wilkens for using me as the test subject of "Dalton and KK donuts, see what happens!".

Lord Pounder · Post by **Lord Pounder** » 2007-10-05 07:54pm

I was always aggressive and argumentative, SDnet merely taught me that these where traits to be proud of and enhance. And if anyone has a problem with that then can fuck off and die painfully.

Metatwaddle · Post by **Metatwaddle** » 2007-10-10 05:10am

I'm jumping in here really late (I've been gone for a while), but SDN actually has made me a little more aggressive (I was always argumentative). But frankly, I think I needed that, because I was pretty timid before. I'm still not as confident in my ideas and arguments as I'd like to be, either here or in real life. I think I do better here because I'm less concerned with hurting people's feelings and losing social status because of that. Even among my smart, scientifically literate physics major friends, there's a sort of "every religious belief is valid" meme that's a bit too intractable for me to combat.

I don't debate as much as I probably should here, because I'm not all that confident about my abilities or my positions, but I enjoy the way the board feels like a very cutthroat marketplace of ideas. I also admit that I like the fact that it's dominated by liberal atheists. (My join date is the day after I got home from the church youth group trip that turned me into an atheist. This is not a coincidence.)

As an aside, I'm a little mystified by the idea that some people here use the board as part of their social life, because I don't think the environment here is conducive to that sort of thing at all. I've formed friendships with SDNers (and a more-than-friendship) by meeting them in person, but that's different.

Haruko · Post by **Haruko** » 2007-10-10 05:45am

SDN has not made me more aggressive, but it has made me much more appreciative and understanding of the anti-Net Nanny environment. But then again, I've never had a problem with such an environment. One of the other admins of my forum, Saint, is a natural for the anti-Net Nanny environment, and even pushed for new board rules modeled after the ones here.

Yeah, this forum has actually inspired at least my forum to make rules that are like it and break away from the common Net Nanny forum. Hooray.