Matt Colville's Community

[Umbran]

Whereas I don’t understand why anyone would need for someone to state their opinion is in fact an opinion.

You don't? Hopefully I can enlighten you.

Speaking broadly about human psychology (so, there are exceptions) - the words we use matter. How we speak about things changes how we think about them, the emotions we attach to them, and how others think about them.

The most basic example which is perhaps most relevant to these messageboards - for human beings, the more authoritatively we state a position, the more compelled we will feel to defend that position, up to and including making crap up to not have to back down. Backing down is seen as a threat to one's position in the social order, and to our hindbrains, that's not really different from a physical threat.

The more we explicitly build pressure releases into our statements - "In my opinion" and "as far as I understand" and so on, the less we feel a need to defend the position. And, the less others will feel a need to attack them. And, when someone does question a position, we will tend to give the new information more honest consideration if we have already openly admitted our position isn't necessarily absolute truth.

 

[Umbran]

I might be the odd man out here, but I remember in 4th or 5th grade completing quizzes where I had to determine whether a statement was a fact or opinion. Discerning a statement of fact from opinion is something I expect the listener to automatically do.

Really?

We were taught in kindergarten how to share, to not hit each other, and not to say mean things to each other, right?

See how well that took?

 

[Umbran]

Discerning a statement of fact from opinion is something I expect the listener to automatically do.

I want to drill a little bit more into this.

MGibster, if you haven't noticed... you don't live on the Planet Vulcan. Expecting folks to behave as if they were... isn't appropriate.

Let me tell you about the limbic system. It is a set of subsections, networks, and processes in your brain that is in charge of mood, basic emotions, and what we might call, "instinctive behavior," for lack of a better term. If you were out walking on the savannah, and a huge spotted cat was in your field of view, your limbic system is responsible for the, "Oh CRAP! Jaguar!" response that then kicks your adrenal glands into high gear, and so on.

To perform that function, the limbic system has to be, and is, much quicker than any rational thought process in your brain. When presented with a stimulus, your limbic system returns how you feel about it well before your rational mind returns what you think about it. And then, unless we are very careful, we unconsciously filter the rational responses to the ones suitable to the limbic response.

So, if what someone says makes us feel angry, or threatened, we will have a tendency to respond as if we should be angry, or threatened, even if logic or rationality would seem to say otherwise. This is a major contributor to how we see so many people refusing to accept actual evidence over things that support their preferred narratives.

Vulcans may have beaten their limbic systems into submission. We have not. When prompted to specifically disregard it on a test in a class where we are otherwise safe and not being personally challenged, we can likely disregard the emotional responses, and see an opinion for what it is. But in the wild, unprompted, that's much less likely to happen.

 

[TiQuinn]

I think this is a really good point. What's also important is that gaming has quite a number of neurodivergent folks (trust me, I gamed in the 70s and we didn't know what to call it then), so there can be issues where someone might completely innocently not understand how what they are saying comes off.

I have a bunch of people who I joke around with here, and sometimes we talk smack (hey, I love 4E so I wear the red letter) and that's fine. It's fine because we have years of history of talking about all sorts of things. But someone who doesn't know that might take offense.

I think it's really best to ask for clarification, as in "did you mean X?" and much of the time you'll get a "good heavens no!" response. I think I'd recommend assuming something just didn't come across in the language unless I see a really pattern of activity. And, unfortunately, we have some of those folks here (and that's just my opinion, of course). I am rethinking my own practice of just hitting the ignore button as this means I won't be able to report something that person might say to someone new to the site.

I know that sometimes I have come across as ... grumpy ... let's say that. And if someone asks about it, I'll certainly apologize and clarify comments because we're all here to talk about things we love, right?

I've noticed that there are certain turns of phrases that will put me on edge very quickly, and my interactions from that point forward are going to be much more based on the assumption that I'm dealing with a person who doesn't want or expect a pleasant interaction. I'm with Bae'zel - I put these people on ignore. I know some have claimed such behavior is because they are neurodivergent but I can't know if that's where their response is coming from.

 

[MGibster]

MGibster, if you haven't noticed... you don't live on the Planet Vulcan. Expecting folks to behave as if they were... isn't appropriate.

I honestly don't believe my expectations are unreasonable because they're the norm (in my opinion). When someone tells me Starship Troopers is a terrible movie or the lunch special at the grill is horrible they generally don't don't feel the need to make it clear they're giving me an opinion rather than a factual statement. When some prissy Federation officer tells me there are four lights I don't need to follow up by asking if he's giving me a factual statement or an opinion because I already know.

So, if what someone says makes us feel angry, or threatened, we will have a tendency to respond as if we should be angry, or threatened, even if logic or rationality would seem to say otherwise.

When someone tells me Savage Worlds is too swingy, the initiative system is too slow, or all the characters are the same I don't feel angry or threatened. It's got nothing to do with me living on planet Vulcan and everything to do with me understanding the difference between an opinion and a fact. Anyone who feels angry or threatened by a negative statement made about a game they love probably needs to work through some issues with that. In my opinion.

 

[Bae'zel]

When someone tells me Savage Worlds is too swingy, the initiative system is too slow, or all the characters are the same I don't feel angry or threatened. It's got nothing to do with me living on planet Vulcan and everything to do with me understanding the difference between an opinion and a fact. Anyone who feels angry or threatened by a negative statement made about a game they love probably needs to work through some issues with that. In my opinion.

Not everyone uses a neutral tone when expressing their opinions. They often weave in snark, condescension or even implication. Or flat out insults.

The fact that you think that anyone who gets upset at online discourse “needs to work through some issues” is pretty ableist and demeaning. In my opinion.

 

[TiQuinn]

When someone tells me Savage Worlds is too swingy, the initiative system is too slow, or all the characters are the same I don't feel angry or threatened. It's got nothing to do with me living on planet Vulcan and everything to do with me understanding the difference between an opinion and a fact. Anyone who feels angry or threatened by a negative statement made about a game they love probably needs to work through some issues with that. In my opinion.

Personally, I don't have a problem as long as the focus of the negativity remains on the game, but a lot of the time, the discussion moves towards opinions that aren't about the game - they start to be about the person or about people in general.

 

[MGibster]

The fact that you think that anyone who gets upset at online discourse “needs to work through some issues” is pretty ableist and demeaning. In my opinion.

I don't remember writing anything saying anyone who gets upset at online discourse needs to work through some issues. Here's what I actually wrote:

Anyone who feels angry or threatened by a negative statement made about a game they love probably needs to work through some issues with that. In my opinion.

Do you see how my sentence is narrowly tailored compared to yours?

 

[Scribe]

I honestly don't believe my expectations are unreasonable because they're the norm (in my opinion). When someone tells me Starship Troopers is a terrible movie or the lunch special at the grill is horrible they generally don't don't feel the need to make it clear they're giving me an opinion rather than a factual statement. When some prissy Federation officer tells me there are four lights I don't need to follow up by asking if he's giving me a factual statement or an opinion because I already know.


When someone tells me Savage Worlds is too swingy, the initiative system is too slow, or all the characters are the same I don't feel angry or threatened. It's got nothing to do with me living on planet Vulcan and everything to do with me understanding the difference between an opinion and a fact. Anyone who feels angry or threatened by a negative statement made about a game they love probably needs to work through some issues with that. In my opinion.

So, just to confirm.

You have not observed in online discourse an increasingly uhh fervent attitude that there are 'right' opinions, statements, or views on pretty much everything no matter how silly it would seem?

 

[MGibster]

You have not observed in online discourse an increasingly uhh fervent attitude that there are 'right' opinions, statements, or views on pretty much everything no matter how silly it would seem?

I feel as though that's a different question. Sure. One of the biggest problems with online discourse is it's easy to forget you're communicating with other human beings. We can't read one another's body language, put any inflection onto the words we write, and sometimes people read something and the message they receive is completely different from the one the sender intended (and it's not always the senders fault).