Doivid said
Well now I understand Gwazi's reputation. What an effective example this is.
They talked about me while I was gone? I'm flattered. <3
Dervish said
Not every disagreement has to end in a debate, as much as you want one.You are literally the only person trying to debate this topic. Claiming to have "won" an argument when literally my entire post was saying how I am not going to get into such nonsense with you is very, very sad. Insinuating you have more of a life than me was also a nice touch after lamenting how insulting I apparently was. :P Way to take the high road.
As Jorick highlighted I did have the biggest role in starting it, but you constantly replying is also keeping the debate alive.
If I leave a point/argument and no one replies it really just sits there, it doesn't keep going unless someone replies and feeds the fire.
I will admit the claim of winning was pretty dickish, so I'm sorry about that.
Though I did go back and review the debate, there wasn't a single case I spotted of me suggesting that I had more of a life.
Unless if you meant: "Although debates entertain me, I have more places to go to than you Dervish. No need to be flattering yourself. :P"
In which case what that was meant to say was that you aren't my only place or person to go for these things. I have other places I can do it at. That's not the same as suggesting I have more of a life, just that my life doesn't revolve around yours.
Jorick said
Fun fact: the moment you start declaring yourself the winner of an internet debate you lose all credibility and end up looking like a twat.
In reflection this is noted and agreed with.
Jorick said
There are no rules for an internet debate, there are no judges, there is no formal scoring system, so on and so forth.
True, but Logical fallacies I meant to address a method of reasoning over all, not specific styles of dialogue.
Jorick said
All such a declaration does is make people dismiss you as an annoying blowhard who can't stand being seen as wrong, so you have to declare the rightness of your opinions by claiming to have won a debate. Seriously, only negative responses come from saying you won the internet debate. Don't do it.
Noted and agreed.
Jorick said
Okay, so, remember how you've said in other places that almost every time you come into Spam you end up in some kind of argument/debate? Remember how they almost always end up with you being viewed in a negative way? Now, here's a simple thought exercise for you. Remember all those past Spam debates. Think of who was involved. Think of all the various people who were part of these debates. Okay, now, what is the common factor to all those poorly viewed debates? You are. You're a part of all of them. An interesting fact to note is that debates and arguments happen all the time in Spam, yet most of the time they don't end with everyone openly saying "ugh fuck that one guy who was part of it." For some reason they do that with you. Hrm.
Now go take a look at how the argument in this thread started and progressed. Dervish posted his opinion about boredom in the modern age, directed at nobody at all, just an opinion drop. Then you posted with a direct disagreement to his opinion. Regardless of the fact that you did not quote his post to make it a direct response, it clearly was meant as a counterpoint to what he said. You started the disagreement. This is an important point, because when stupid arguments debates happen people tend to look at whoever started them as the one more at fault. Dervish responded directly, which turned it into an internet argument. Want to take a wild guess where it went from run of the mill argument to full on debate? That's right, your very next post, where you tried to go big dick internet debater mode and cited a formal logical fallacy. This is also important: people who bring the whole logical fallacy thing up in normal arguments are viewed negatively, because instead of actually continuing any possible rational dialogue it puts up a big wall of "nope, fuck you, you did this so your entire opinion is wrong" between yourself and the person you're calling logical fallacy on. Notice how that was where rational discourse broke down and you started being dismissed as an e-peen stroking internet derpbater. You only exacerbated this by citing further fallacies and claiming to have won the debate.
To be fair, obviously I'm part of all them. They're my own experiences, but I do see your point.
I did though take note to also continue providing arguments even when highlighting fallacies, as to not fall for the "Fallacy Fallacy" myself.
But in reflection, I probably put too much focus on the fallacies rather than the argument itself.
*Makes mental note to remember spam debates are different than OT ones*
Jorick said
This is how it usually goes down with you in Spam, from what I've seen. You go start some argument, try to wheel out the internet debate podiums, and then people shit all over you for it. The majority of people who frequent Spam are not into the whole internet debate thing (they like to keep it to informal arguments), which is why they avoid Off-Topic, so you bringing it here causes negative backlash from both the people you're arguing with and from third parties. Are the other people involved also at fault? Sure, but you're the one who does the internet debate things that people in Spam view negatively, so you get the worst of it. This is of course inflated by you being an outsider going up against a Spam regular, but the core if it is the internet debate thing. That's why people in Spam have a generally negative opinion of you.
I do feel the need to note I wasn't always an outsider, I used to be a spam regular for several years.
It's just that over time my style of communication differed from most of spams over time more conflict started popping up, ultimately resulting in me moving in OT and simply making the occasional visit to spam.
So I was well aware of why spam has a negative opinion of me.
***Note for everyone here, not specifically Jorick***
Honestly, whenever I do come into spam though it is not with the intention of starting conflict. I am honestly trying to get back on good terms, cause as many people there were that grew pissed off with me there were also those who I got along very well with. It's just that my tendencies to not keep my mouth/opinion shut ends up getting the better each time which causes me to back out, wait for stuff to cool down and then try again.
***Public Note over***
Jorick said
I'll end it on some friendly advice. If you want to try to jump into Spam and have fun, then try to avoid getting into arguments. If you must get into an argument, try to keep it in the informal realm instead of going OT debate mode on it. If you cannot avoid arguments and you cannot help going full on internet debate mode, you might want to just call it quits on Spam since you'll just repeat the same cycle of negativity directed at you over and over again, and that's not very conducive to having a good time.
All good points, and stuff I'm going to try to keep in mind.
Smiral said
why did we need 5 paragraphs to explain such a simple concept
That's how I best receive information and criticism. If someone simply goes "You're wrong" without going into much detail, it doesn't give me any knowledge or understanding as to why I'm wrong. Just that they seem to think I'm wrong. But I'm not about to change my mindset just because someone possess a different one, I need to know the reasoning behind said mindset first.
Which honestly might make enough sense in itself for the kinds of topics debated in OT, but I can understand why that's a bit confusing for something such as "Why are people angry?". In which case I should also add on, I'm not always the best at interpreting, understanding or relating to how most people think, act, operate or feel. Where a lot of social cues and norms are simply natural for most people, I tend to act in a far more blunt/fact vs not fact sort of manner. Which often means social norms that are obvious for others may fly right over my head. So it helps when someone can actually explain what's going on, rather than expect that I pick it up naturally. Because usually I won't when it comes to social matters.
idlehands said
Doivid and his food smut. I'm imagining Gwazi furiously typing up a huge response full of direct quotes from yours and Dervish's replies. Despite the fact you're pretty much spot on why we don't like him playing in our sandbox.
Huge response with lots of quotes? Yes.
But do note even if I agree or disagree with what is said for 2 reasons.
1) Just to confirm I've read and at least given thought to everything said
2) That's just part of how I talk/communicate. Even if I agree with the point made, I might still speak up or question certain bits and pieces to get a better understanding.
Hell, there really wasn't anything in Jorick's post I found myself disagreeing, but I still gave points of rebuttal here and there simply to get better clarification and/or add in a tiny note I felt that was missing.
Cpt Toellner said
The righteous one just needs to sleep first or something.
Actually I ended up leaving the house to see my friends at college before anime club.
Kaga said
Also, Gwazi's been online since this whole thing happened. He's online right now, actually.So yeah.
That's a glitch, I had logged off around 3PM (It's almost midnight now for me) and haven't been on since until now.
