Matt Colville's Community

[Micah Sweet]

The problem is that 99% of the time it isn't criticism, it is a statement of preference couched as objective fact--often because folks can have blinkers when it comes to matters of taste. And that riles peoples' goats. Umm. Is "riles peoples' goats" a thing?

This is why I make such a big deal about people not presenting their opinions as opinions. All it does is get people's back up if they don't agree.

 

[Umbran]

Well I agree but I was anticipating backlash in advance. Asking people to be kind by default is... too much for some, I've learned the hard way.

Being absolutely clear that they could have been kind by default, but chose not to, is essential to correcting the behavior.

And anyone giving backlash in advance now has to face that reality - they are making a choice, and they own that choice.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I try not to be negative or just point out what I don't like about something, I don't always succeed; however, there are a number of threads on ENworld that I don't engage with because I know that I'm probably going to end up being a Negative Nelly. I have also improved my experience on this forum by judicious use of the ignore button. I have seen threads where a page is only a few posts long, presumably due to people being blocked. On the whole though, I find ENworld to be a pretty good place for discussion.

I've never really the point of the ignore button, since it's mutual when one side uses it. I don't feel I have the right to force others not to see my contributions, and I've never felt their contributions were so bad I shouldn't see them. So I just never exercise the option.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Conversation and discussion are not synonyms.

Being informed of something you have ignorance of is not a discussion.

Relaying anecdotes back and forth is not a discussion.

“Discussion” has connotations of formality and seriousness that “conversation” lacks.

What we are having here is a discussion. We have disagreements over the semantic content of certain terms and are both asserting our various positions in order to see if there is the possibility of compromise.

Yeah, I really see conversation and discussion as different things.

 

[zakael19]

This is why I make such a big deal about people not presenting their opinions as opinions. All it does is get people's back up if they don't agree.

People in general and in fan-style communities in particular seem to have difficulty using "I" statements. Eg: "I think, I feel..." and you instead get a lot of this posting subjectivity in the frame of absolute truth. And of course when people push back on that style of assertion, things spiral.

 

[SteveC]

This is why I make such a big deal about people not presenting their opinions as opinions. All it does is get people's back up if they don't agree.

It's something I've thought about a lot. In general I take the perspective that anyone who presents something on a forum is just speaking their own opinion, unless they specifically say otherwise. It has helped me a lot.

Now there are people on here who can speak to different issues with authority. It is one of the things I really enjoy about being here. Of course, those people also tend to be the types who are the most humble about things.

And there are people who will go out of their way to say those opinions are the things that are or were. Those are the people I tend to put on ignore.

 

[Umbran]

I've never really the point of the ignore button, since it's mutual when one side uses it.

Whether it is mutual is a choice - I expect most folks do choose to make it mutual, but that is not required.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Whether it is mutual is a choice - I expect most folks do choose to make it mutual, but that is not required.

Is the default mutual? I've never seen it done otherwise that I know of, and inertia is a powerful force.

 

[Velderan]

People in general and in fan-style communities in particular seem to have difficulty using "I" statements. Eg: "I think, I feel..." and you instead get a lot of this posting subjectivity in the frame of absolute truth. And of course when people push back on that style of assertion, things spiral.

And some like to go further by declaring things objectively bad when the thing they're trying to put down is clearly a subjective preference.

 

[bedir than]

Getting into banter and teasing with someone you do not know, and cannot see or hear to know their reaction, is just terribly unwise. If you cannot otherwise prove that you actually care, teasing/mocking is an aggressive action, not a pleasant casual one.

Also, when banter/tease online the audience is not just the target of the bantz, but every other person on the platform -- and it's impossible to know that one's rudeness is meant to be funny because they lack the context your target might have