Info: Why forum discussion are bound to escalate

For the sake of simplicity i will set an example utilizing this good old question:

Which Came First: The Hen or the Egg?

Click to expand...

It also has the advantage that there is no "easy to grasp" solution, which provides a perfect scenario for our purposes.
We also add the assumption that none of the participants is (deliberately) trolling, and they all are interested in finding a solution that is acceptable for everyone.




Anna is starting a thread about it, Bob is the first one to reply.

After a few posts they agree on the fact that an egg has to be fertilized, and therefor, in case the egg was first, there has to be not only a non-existant hen, but on top of that a non-existant rooster!

Bob makes the objection that the non-existant rooster doesn't go too well with the "law of parsimony", as it requires an additional assumption (see Occam's razor).

They both carry on with the debate, examining the circumstances of the "hen was first" side of the scenario.





This is where Charlie enters the debate.
Charlie has read the opening post as well as all the posts Anna and Bob made so far, but he does not agree on the "non-existant" rooster deduction - in his opinion, assumptions about "how the egg came into existance" totally defeat the idea of "the egg was first".

He calls out Bob on one of his older posts.
Bob replies with a short, angry post, summarizing what he wrote with Anna before - he has no interest in starting the debate over with Charlie and instead tries to continue the debate at the point where he was with Anna already.

Before Anna replies, Dave enters the debate.
He has read the opening post, and the last page of the discussion, but none of the posts that have been made before Charlie entered. He is a friend of Charlie, and deems Charlies points very valid, whereas Bob appears to be rude and too terse to be still rated "polite".


Dave posts a short post about Charlie being totally right, and add a snipe comment aimed at Bob.


Bob, meanwhile involved in 2 different debates (one with Anna, at an advanced stage, and one with Charlie, albeit unwanted), he thinks Charlie should either stay out of the discussion or tries to catch up with the discussion he has with Anna - he tries to brush Charlie and Dave off with a short but sarcastic comment.



This is where Edith and Fred enter the discussion - both did read the opening post, but the thread is meanwhile a bit too long to catch up quickly - Fred is eager to comment, intrigued by the first posts of Anna and Bob, so he skips all except the last few posts.
Edith reads all.


Edith supports Bobs point of view, and would like to carry on with the debate, from the point right before Charlie entered. She aims a comment at Dave, telling him he has not posted anything substantial so far, and confirms Bobs point of view.

Now Fred, who never liked Edith, tells her to shut up, because she doesn't have a clue anyway, and he adds a short comment aimed at Charlie, telling him that an egg has always to be fertilized in order to hatch.

Anna, a good friend of Edith, asks Fred whether he just joined to ruin the debate.

Now we have a lot of conversations going on:
- Anna shouting at Fred
- Fred argueing with Charlie about biology basics
- Bob exchanging insults with Dave
- some are argueing about different aspects of former posts
- and some more are about to unfold.

Hardly anyone cares about the original subject anymore, things have begun to turn into a "who got more supporters for his (not necessarily right) point" contest, points that have been valid and accepted by the "other side" are invalidated and shred into pieces, not because the are wrong all of a sudden, they simply have enough supporters, who reinforce it on a mutual basis, and nobody wants to admit that his point is wrong.


Soon a moderator pops up, bans Fred, cautions Edith and locks the thread.


And this is a NORMAL thread, nobody has (purposely) taken actions to derail the discussion or start a flaming war.


Feel free to comment, or point out where my scenario is unrealistic, but please try to stick to the "Hen or Egg" thingie, as well as to the original persons where possible.

When i have some feedback about the scenario, i will add my personal thoughts on "what can we do better?".

The issue seems to be that we are all frustrated seeing a game we love not going the way we would like. The same issues keep being raised and MA and FPC do not address them. People get angry because they are not being listened to by MA and FPC.
This forum is a great learning tool for all players and allows discussion on many issues, which is vital for on going game play and development. If MA/FPC just addressed the issues, this forum would be a happier place. The silence from MA/FPC just fuels speculation.

All MA needs to do is say the Hen will Fertilise the Egg in two months, plus or minus a week! No more speculation and we can wait patiently until the Egg is fertilised.

Cheers
Bjorn

Hang on ...

Isnt it an Atrox Egg ???

I don't care how cocky that rooster thinks he is, he's got Buckley's on fertilizing an Atrox Queen!! She'd be picking the feathers out from between her teeth before he got past 'hey honey, how about it ?'

(You forgot Greta, who never bothers to read more than the first 2 sentences of the opening post, and then posts something totally off topic )

The chronological existence of the concept known as an egg_000000001 predates the chronological existence of the concept known as a Hen_0000000001.

Since Hen_0000000001 comes from egg_4739852325325-c, and will eventually produce egg_4739852325326-a to egg_4739852325326-z (or it could be Hen_egg_000000001-a to Hen_egg_000000001-z), but the assumption that egg_4739852325326-a and egg_4739852325325-c are the same object is why the uneducated get confused.

Pretty straightforward , right?

And gives no explanation as to why the theoretical hen only lays 26 eggs

ahh, the egg ;-)

Few Scars said:

The issue seems to be that we are all frustrated seeing a game we love not going the way we would like. The same issues keep being raised and MA and FPC do not address them. People get angry because they are not being listened to by MA and FPC.
This forum is a great learning tool for all players and allows discussion on many issues, which is vital for on going game play and development. If MA/FPC just addressed the issues, this forum would be a happier place. The silence from MA/FPC just fuels speculation.

All MA needs to do is say the Hen will Fertilise the Egg in two months, plus or minus a week! No more speculation and we can wait patiently until the Egg is fertilised.

Cheers
Bjorn

Click to expand...

One issue being a few people here are trying to speak their own mind in a sence that they speak on the behalf of the whole community !
I hereby declare that the whole community as I know it is happy as it is...atleast the way I see it

Immortal said:

The chronological existence of the concept known as an egg_000000001 predates the chronological existence of the concept known as a Hen_0000000001.

Since Hen_0000000001 comes from egg_4739852325325-c, and will eventually produce egg_4739852325326-a to egg_4739852325326-z (or it could be Hen_egg_000000001-a to Hen_egg_000000001-z), but the assumption that egg_4739852325326-a and egg_4739852325325-c are the same object is why the uneducated get confused.

Pretty straightforward , right?

And gives no explanation as to why the theoretical hen only lays 26 eggs

Click to expand...

you gave my head an owie

You forgot the people who ride the dedicated fanbus that support the "Entity" no matter what.

You know the ones with the ass plasterd to their lips blocking the view of reality so they can only regurgitate the Totoo on the ass reading "We are your God you must serve us blindly to the end of days".

As for the Chicken many species start out single cells and reproduce asexually. Only evolution and adaptation to their environment made the chicken split into male and female. There for if we are talking the original Chicken and Egg that just means the creator of life was simply hungry and invented sandwich material.

Very nice and insightful OP.

wizzszz said:

Why forum discussion are bound to escalate...

Click to expand...

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. - Frederick Douglass






<Yes, this can apply to the "Hen or Egg" thingie...>

Few Scars said:

The issue seems to be that we are all frustrated seeing a game we love not going the way we would like. The same issues keep being raised and MA and FPC do not address them. People get angry because they are not being listened to by MA and FPC.
This forum is a great learning tool for all players and allows discussion on many issues, which is vital for on going game play and development. If MA/FPC just addressed the issues, this forum would be a happier place. The silence from MA/FPC just fuels speculation.

All MA needs to do is say the Hen will Fertilise the Egg in two months, plus or minus a week! No more speculation and we can wait patiently until the Egg is fertilised.

Cheers
Bjorn

Click to expand...

Not possible.. then we get part of the community whining about the time. or about the fact that it came late. or the fact that it didn't come at all. or the fact that it changed how they had to play. or it came to early. Perhaps the community shouldn't panic when speculating and just discuss speculation in a mild manner while patiently waiting for a response or an in-game update.

Serica said:

Hang on ...

Isnt it an Atrox Egg ???

I don't care how cocky that rooster thinks he is, he's got Buckley's on fertilizing an Atrox Queen!! She'd be picking the feathers out from between her teeth before he got past 'hey honey, how about it ?'

(You forgot Greta, who never bothers to read more than the first 2 sentences of the opening post, and then posts something totally off topic )

Click to expand...

I vote for Greta for the win. To those noobs who don't read the discuss that is already occuring.

Immortal said:

The chronological existence of the concept known as an egg_000000001 predates the chronological existence of the concept known as a Hen_0000000001.

Since Hen_0000000001 comes from egg_4739852325325-c, and will eventually produce egg_4739852325326-a to egg_4739852325326-z (or it could be Hen_egg_000000001-a to Hen_egg_000000001-z), but the assumption that egg_4739852325326-a and egg_4739852325325-c are the same object is why the uneducated get confused.

Pretty straightforward , right?

And gives no explanation as to why the theoretical hen only lays 26 eggs

Click to expand...

Yes very straight forward but far to many generation numbers. Use the KISS system and Keep It Simple Stupid; PS. Theoretically, its a possibility but in real life science just doesn't work that way.

strakkan said:

One issue being a few people here are trying to speak their own mind in a sence that they speak on the behalf of the whole community !
I hereby declare that the whole community as I know it is happy as it is...atleast the way I see it

Click to expand...

You have convinced me... marginally.

kosmos said:

you gave my head an owie

Click to expand...

Me toooo.

wizzszz said:

"what can we do better?".

Click to expand...

A small list:

1) Try to understand that not everyone is going to agree with you

2) Do not accuse others of being a troll just because they don't agree with what you have to say. A troll is someone who posts unnecessary, usually off-topic posts, or is very purposely inflammatory and insulting for the sole purpose of making people angry. A person who disagrees with your point is just that - someone who thinks there is a flaw in the way you have presented your thoughts. Either counter the point they've made or decide that you agree with them instead of just throwing names at them (btw, if you reach that point, YOU then become the troll)

3) Try to look at any given situation from multiple perspectives

4) Understand that just because person A, C, and D all agree with each other, it doesn't mean that person B, E, and F also agree with them. Do not try to present your side of the debate as "Well we all agree" when there may very well be (and probably are) people who still do not agree with you.

5) Also understand that just because person B stopped posting, does not mean that they also agree with you. Don't speak for them unless you have been given express permission to do so from that individual. They won't appreciate it.

6) Take the time to look up a word if you do not understand the meaning of it, instead of trying to assume what it means and risking making yourself angry over nothing.

7) Do not confuse facts with morals. Do not present facts as morals, and do not present morals as facts. The two are not the same thing. See rule# 6 if you need further clarification.

8) Do not forget that nearly everyone on a forum thinks that he/she is the ultimate judge, believes he/she knows everything there is to know about law, and believes he/she can also act as a forum lawyer.

9) Don't jump on the bandwagon to start bashing somebody just because everyone else appears to be... read the points of the discussion and form your own unbiased opinion based on those facts. Avoid the mob mentality and use your own brain.

10) Realize that people get angry, and that when people get angry sometimes they become irrational. Deflect insults and anger, and steer the topic back to the points instead of trying to redirect that anger back towards an individual (Usually, a simple "I'm sorry that you feel that way towards me, but that does not address the issue of _____" then restating your point can completely turn a conversation around.) If you must, totally ignore the fact that someone just tried to insult you, and look for any parts of their post that relate to the topic being discussed. If you find those points, focus on those... if not, ask them kindly to clarify how their point relates to the debate because you don't quite understand the connection they are attempting to present.

11) Telling someone they are wrong does not make it so. Give valid, indisputable points. If someone can dispute your points, then they weren't indisputable. Don't take it personally. Instead, fix your side of the debate until it cannot be disputed, or clarify your stance if it is being misunderstood.

12) If it turns out you are wrong, then don't be ashamed to admit it. It is much harder to debate in favor of an idea you don't really believe or that you no longer believe. You will make mistakes in your arguments and chase your own tail, then everyone will laugh at you. People tend to have a great amount of respect for someone who can admit that they were wrong.

13) Realize that "you just don't know" or "you just don't understand" or "you don't know all the facts" are not valid arguments. If you think someone doesn't know, don't imply that they are below your comprehension level by simply throwing these statements out there. Explain your side of the debate if you must; otherwise you aren't going to be very convincing. Either the facts have been presented or they haven't, and if you're not presenting facts, then why the heck are you trying to debate to begin with?

14) Ask yourself "Does it really matter if the chicken or the egg came first?" and "How much does it matter?" then post accordingly. Don't cry over spilled milk, and don't insult someone over spilled milk.

16) If you don't understand, try to get someone to explain in more detail.

17) Don't fling poop. It is a disgusting habit.

18) I skipped the number 15. Did you notice? That means there are only 17 guidelines listed here. Lesson? Pay attention to the details whenever possible, some of those missed details may be important to your side of the debate.

Nice post. So the Unique Male Bercycled (rooster) of uber maturity is all we need to fertilize the atrox egg?

do ya think its DYNAMIC ???

Can I be Bob....

Only thing i got out of all this was i now feel like some scrambled eggs.

I've posted this somewhere before, but for the sake of arguement i'll share it again.

Ok, I'm confused. Did Neverdie have anything to do with the chicken or with the egg?

It's my belief that the egg came first. Now you might ask, "so what laid the egg?" It was not a hen, but something very similar. We know through the reproduction process that abnormalities can occur, where the offspring have ever so slightly different traits then that of the parents. These abnormalities can occasionally prove to be beneficial to the offspring, which improve it's chances of survival, sometimes more so than it's siblings. If that offspring survives and the siblings perish, then it will be able to pass on it's genetic traits whereas it's siblings will not. This is the basic premise behind Natural Selection and Evolution. The idea that you can start with an organism, and over a long period of time, and many, many generations, what results is a creature that bears little to no resemblance to it's great ancestor.

For example, sometimes humans are born with 6 fingers instead of 5. If having 6 fingers would be a trait that helped us to survive, or is seen as more attractive, then you would expect those with 6 fingers to be reproducing more, therefore, creating more people with 6 fingers. Getting into modern day human evolution, or even de-evolution is another topic entirely. And if Greta, Heather, or Ian want to comment on that, feel free. I'd be happy to discuss my take on it.

However, back on topic (though it's the basic topic and not the underlying meaning that was intended in the OP), what laid the egg may not have been defined specifically as a hen, but is nearly identical to what was produced, with the exception of perhaps only one trait that makes all the difference. And that is why I conclude that the egg came first.

Clearly the answer lies here ...




People disagree .. it's part of being human.

lol - I find forum fights mildly retarded, but kind of sinfully entertaining.
Like watching a three legged turtle swim in circles .. until it dies.

Hi,

[Disclaimer 1: This is a really huge wall of text. If you think you'd not be able to handle it, better look at here. Loads of cool links, especially in the lower part. Enjoy, and cya!]

[Disclaimer 2: You'll find answers to some of your most urgent questions here. This might contain spoilers. Beware!]






as already mentioned it started with a mutation, for sure! 2 Berycleds "did it", and among the offspring was a strange critter, smaller, with feathers, wings and a quite different look. Pa Beryc disgusted it, and demanded it for lunch. Ma Beryc disgusted it, too, but after all it was her child - so she fiercly defended it against Pa's hunger.

Have you ever seen a mother Beryc really angry? Well, Pa Beryc has, and it didn't go well for him. After countless months in Beryc hospital he could be released, but little was left resembling the former proud, strong Beryc baseball bully. Ma's arguments had ripped him of most of his claws, of two thirds of his flesh and bones, and of his complete reproduction apparatus.

The Beryc surgeons had done their best to keep the remains of Pa Beryc intact, and they excelled themselves creating a new, viable life form from him. They even succeeded in implementing a basic, hermaphrodite reproduction system!

Unfortunately this wasn't exactly what Pa Bercy had wished. Of the once proud, strong, straight "Redneck Baseball Beryc (tm)" had become a small, harmless critter, and to add wine to the cheese, a hermaphrodite! The creature formerly known as Pa Beryc ("TCFKAPB") went nuts, completely.

He started working out with brukite stones he found in the remote area he had escaped to, and his strength grew. Soon he was able to waste other small critters nearby, and to feed on them. Not long it took until he lived close to completely from Snablesnots and young Exarosaurs.
It was a break through when he met his first human. A nOOb in OJ's that had just found a Iron VIII claim - TCFKAPB waited patiently in a tree until the nOOb had extracted it all, then went in for the kill. Hours later, after an epic battle, TCFKAPB managed to drag the many Iron Stones to his hideout before falling unconsciousless.

It took him a few weeks to recover, but now he had a lot of more heavy material for his workout! His strenght grew further, as did his hate. It wasn't only that he was now in the body of a small critter resembling the reason of his disaster, additionally his artificial reproduction system had started working, so he was nearly constantly pregnant. Pregnant, a former proud, strong, straight "Redneck Baseball Beryc (tm)"! Imagine! He snapped completely.

Ruling harshly above his growing offspring, working out 24/7 with them, he managed to create a small community of full grown maniacs, that only was driven of hate, and thirst for destruction. For sure, they all started to reproduce at a certain age, so there was a constant growth.

As we all know, Eudoria is a hostile planet. Quite some radiation that makes creatures (including humans) go haywire, and develop strange behaviors. And mutations, see the huge amount of mutants! Well, there was mutants in the TCFKAPB population, too. Usually they were torn to pieces in the first seconds of their lives, as ordered by TCFKAPB, but even Hermaphrodites can have "mother feelings", so a few survived, was brought away, to secure places, to have a chance to grow.

So it happened that 2 of these mutants met, befriended, and more. Both of them were very untypical, they surely had the same appearance as the TCFKAPB maniacs, but both were born with a preference to vegan food, and a hippie mindset. They soon discovered the powers of the Bombardo fruit, that, when dried, watered, and drunk has psychedelic powers, and that even has a quite strong aphrodisiac effect. Not long later they had multiplied - drinking Bombardo extracts all day long, popping like rabbits, well, you can imagine?

This was the moment of birth of the creatures we know as "Chirpies". And Entropedia is wrong, they wasn't brought by humans, plz someone corrects this?

The Chirpies rapidly spread, quite soon they covered huge areas, and were to be found everywhere. Their cute appearance, poor loot and their nice, friendly habit made them able to live & multiply undisturbed - not even the ever hungry Atrox and Atrax would hurt them, contrarily, they went into a symbiosis with them. Chirpies would pick parasites from those huge, dangerous monsters, while they'd frantically would defend them.

This was the last brick in the wall for TCFKAPB. Seeing that hippie-like miss-happened offspring, escaped and survived against his explicit order, easily outperformed his minions in matter of evolutionary success, this made the last fuse break in the small brain of the former "Redneck Baseball Beryc (tm)". He ordered his troops to war, against all and everything. We know this as the "mutated Chirpy accident".

For sure, humans went in and made short process. We're quite good in eradicating species ...


Ahem. OMG! Seems I'm completely off topic now - what was it, hens and eggs? OK.


After Ma Beryc had shredded Pa Beryc, for his intentions to eat their mis-happened offspring, she brought the baby to a good friend of her, far away. A young noble Feffoid lady, that once had saved her cute behind from a ruthless human hunter, calling for help to a nearby Feffo Champ when she watched what this well known member of a well known human Soc planned to do to the poor Beryc teen, against all rules of nature.

The baby, let's name her "Initial hen" grew up among the Feffoids, in the warm and cosy environment this species provides to their youngsters and to all that don't plan to harm them. Feffoids once even had traders for peaceful commerce, but when the humans grow stronger they got attacked and cruelly killed constantly, so they withdraw 'em, and became more cautious.

Initial hen grow up to maturity, and it seemed that she'd be quite a good mutation. She was not the brightest, but otherwise nice, peaceful and a happy camper. Feffos loved her. But nature takes his toll, she became restless at a certain age. Since she was this popular even Feffoid high council discussed this topic. It was decided to ask the robots, which them they had opened trading connections after the frustration with the humans.

The robots carried our Initial hen to their home world, did long and painful experiments with her. Then decided all they could do would be to inseminate her artificially using her own genome, so that maybe there'd be male offspring that later could help her desires ...

And they did. For security reasons they kept the Initial hen at their home world, but they feared that the atmosphere there wouldn't be this good for a developing organic youngster. Meanwhile the Feffoids had been torn in an all-out war with the humans that had decided to rob them of their sparse Korss H400 (L) supplies, so the robots decided to pass the egg of the Initial hen to a more reliable instance.

This reliable instance was, as the robots thought, the Atrox Queen. Until then she had always stayed in the back, and no knowledge was known of even her existence at the humans. And she was a mighty critter! And she was ready to take the egg, and swore to protect it with all her insane power. She got it, to keep it, until the new hen would hatch.

Unfortunately the humans found the Atrox Queen very soon after she accepted the egg, and attacked her, even if she didn't made any effort to attack them at first, but retreated. A lot of humans that need to kill anything that's bigger that themselves, to compensate their small ego, what a pity!

It was long battle until the Atrox Queen fell. And she managed to pass the egg to a nearby Feffoid that was stunned in horror, disgust and abomination about this senseless killing of an unique, shining and respectable creature. He escaped with the egg, but not for long. The irresistible force of human will to destruction hit him too, and the egg was looted.

And sold for insane PED, whatever to expect?

Initial hen is dead meanwhile. She died unsatisfiedly. The egg seems to have gone into some kind of hibernation state, lacking the nutrition it needs. Will there be a way to hatch it? Will we find a way to reproduce it, as the robots did? Will we ever have hens on Calypso?


Questions above questions.

Have fun!

PS: Forum discussions go haywire because the player base is very nervous. We care about the RL money we've put in, some more, some less. At the moment a sudden crash of the game isn't this far fetched anymore, so there's some options available:

1. Defend the game at all costs, anyone criticizing is a criminal, attacking my deposit. We need to keep nice Potemkin villages at least until I have sold out. Don't disturb my withdrawal! Whack 'em criminals!
   
2. This game has potential. We should help to improve it, and pointing at the weak spots is the way to go. Even if it would make some of our investments obsolete. It's the game that counts! For a better EU!
   
3. I love you all, but I'm in Wurm since ages now, and I feel good,

Well, i have nothing constructive to add atm, but from a glance at this thread, we can clearly add:

Graham, who reads the OP, infers that the chicken and egg must be intended as mephaphors, thinks he knows what they are metaphors for, and who constructs a sincere, cogent and completely irrelevant reply, based on this assumption
Hannah, who reads the word egg, and can't resist adding a quip about eggs

just wait for Izzy, who "knows" what was really going on in that other thread, is frustrated by the limitations imposed the chicken-egg scenario. aaaaand....


gl with getting anything constructive out of this

actually, i do think that the cast of characters you gave so far is sufficient to demonstrate that things will probably get out of hand, for what that's worth


jay

Actually, on reflection, I do have something constructive to add:

As you clearly demonstated , even if you don't get get a whole bunch of people taking the chicken-egg scenario for a veiled reference to a personal issue , from the outset, there comes a point where tempers get frayed and personal issues develop (or re-surface)

Its my opinion that the single most powerful tool that a forum can use to combat this is:

create a subforum where the usual rules are relaxed and personal issues can be frankly acknowledged and thrashed out.


If nothing else , this clears a lot of dross out of threads. It also stops people from resorting to oblique references to personal issues; and this , in turn, helps prevent others from getting paranoid and seeing personal issues where none exist.

I really don't think FPC are ever gonna take up this suggestion though. The rules in existence reinforce the all-important message that they are not to blamefor flame-wars, and they are doing all they can to suppress them. They are a business, which inevitably means that "We are not responsible for this problem" takes clear priority over fixing the problem.

Or am I being cynical?

jay

The big flaw with a list such as Silverice's is that it consists entirely of advice to individual posters, Now , I don't think that we suffer from a deficiency of good advice ; just that people will be human and ignore the advice.

The question posed by the OP, as i see it is: what do we do about that?

The conventional solution is:attempt to identify the poster who went furthest, in terms of ignoring good advice, ban that poster, and close the thread. Obviously, Wizz doesn't think that's good enough, and neither do I.

I don't like banning people , if this can be avoided, and this is bouund on occasions to be unfair, guiven that a poster has to be reported by others to get the mod's attention (so which "trolls" get banned will be largely dependent on who is mosr trigger-happy with the report button. That trigger -happy person is probably not the best judge); and the mod is not likely to have rime to read the whole thread, so might not have the full picture. Also, by the time this happens, much damage is already done

I find the practice of banning a "troll" AND simultaneously closing the thread astonishing. Like "There, there, I've got rid of your troll for you, now you can all continue your nice debate,...ooops, no, you can't haha, I've closed the thread". Apart from this being more effective than any troll in destroying the debate, doesn't this effectively tar all participants with the same brush?

So please, please can we have some better ideas?

jay


[

OK, time for a Mod to lock this thread...

Yep,

LOL,

Got to say, the poster hit the nail on the head.

To many people today don't want to discuss, they want to force what 'they' think is correct or if not correct, what is best for them.

That is one of the Major reasons, I don't post that much. One of the reasons a 'Good Friend' of mine was Banned FOREVER.

LOL...

But, with the first poster I agree, and with the second poster I agree...(did not really read that much after number 1 and 2)

Seoul...

Maybe i've been a bit too subtle in the opening post, so here some clarifications:


Respect the progress of a debate

I think that one of the main issues are people who do not want to join a discussion at its current stage, but rather try to get one of the participants to start the discussion over from scratch.

Pretty much hand in hand with it goes this one:
Then we have people who feel the need to comment, but they obviously haven't made an effort to catch up on what has been posted so far - when i have spent hours to create an easy-to-follow-chain-of-deductions and someone comes up with something that has been ruled out pages ago.




And, one of my all time favourites: Opinions

An opinion should grow over time, the more facts you gather, the "better" your opinion gets - that means, too, that you should start off with NO opinion at all and from there try to gather as much input as you can get, to "arrive" at an opinion eventually. And it is highly likely that more input will shift your opinion (somewhat), if you allow it to "grow" further. (Actually, exactly that is the purpose of having a debate: not trying to find a "winner", but trying to exchange pieces of input that others have been missing so far, no matter if it is "just" a different angle of view or indeed a completely new information)

Why people have an opinion instantly, and defend it as if their lifes depend on it... is above me.

I thoroughly agree with you Wizzszz (surprise, surprise )

...but then what we have here is not a debate, but a discussion...which not only allows for more that two POVs, there's no onus on any participant to "prove" one POV to be "correct" above another.

Where things often go wrong, IMO, is that something which really should be a discussion is treated, instead, as a debate. Even the chicken-and-egg question is a pretty dumb topic for debate , as such, because a true, formal debate excludes the POV that neither came first which looks like a likely logical conclusion to me.

wizzszz said:

Why people have an opinion instantly, and defend it as if their lifes depend on it... is above me.

Click to expand...

This comment however, comes across as a little bit disingenuous. I can think of several answers to that, and I'm sure that you can, too. Here are a few:

A) those of us who suffer from being over-rational , as opposed to over-emotional, tend to identify with our opinions to the point that an attack on our opinion is felt as a personal attack ( a very simplified explanation for the sake of brevity; so please don't pick holes in it)
B) often an opinion will be pre-conceived, because the poster isn't new to the issue under discussion; they've researched it and thought about it prior to the thread's creation, so it's had a lot of time to firm up. This is perfectly reasonable, so long as the poster really is open to considering info that is new to him, should any emerge
C) Outside the chicken-and-egg parameter, sorry, but its worth adding that some issues are, of their nature, emotive; and some touch on matters of ethics. Many, maybe most people will defend an ethical principle to the hilt. Nothing wrong with this IMO, except inasmuch as it gives a lot of room for self-righteousness to creep in, which really can be a problem (disclaimer: I am not accusing any individual of self-righteousnes here. This really is just a general observation)

jay

Sorry, but i have used "debate" and "discussion" as synonyms here, because they are in my language, and i was (actually i still am, my dictionary appears to confirm that) under the impression they are synonyms in english as well - care to elaborate, because atm, the first part makes absolutely no sense to me, until i am able to apply your set of (obviously deviating) definitions to it.



And, to stick to the terms you've introduced:
Over-emotional people do NOT tend to identify with their opinions?
Actually, i believe they do even more, and on top of that, identify with opinions derived from feelings rather than logics, which makes it very likely that their conclusions are not exactly spot on, you know... and aint disproving such a point even worse, because you attack their very own emotions by disproving a point derived from feelings?


And imo, you cannot be too rational (over-rational, as you put it) when it comes to discussions - w/o logics there is no debate (discussion, whichever term you like better), if you base a debate on feelings you can as well just drop it, same as debates based on belief, or debates based on taste - there is nothing of substance in it that could be proven/disproven or otherwise utilized to deduct conclusions from it.

Sorry but, on second thoughts I do have to adress this part

wizzszz said:

And imo, you cannot be too rational (over-rational, as you put it) when it comes to discussions - w/o logics there is no debate (discussion, whichever term you like better), if you base a debate on feelings you can as well just drop it, same as debates based on belief, or debates based on taste - there is nothing of substance in it that could be proven/disproven or otherwise utilized to deduct conclusions from it.

Click to expand...

The chicken-and-egg scenario is not a suitable example to take, if we are going to discuss this point; so if you really want to, i suggest you start a new thread. But I totally disagree: a discussion which limits itself to a basis of rational thinking. and excludes everything else, is pretty damned useless in most contexts. Even most (perhaps all) significant advances in science were kickstarted by a flash of intuition (which is not rational). Rational thinking is just one of the mental tools at our disposal, and not a very sharp one at that, in most cases. Just look at how many conflicting ideas are amenable to rational support

jay