Agreement, Disagreement, and Getting Along with Other Members

[ChristineM]

Is it my obsession with heavy cream sauce on snails?
I've cut way back on that stereotype lately.

Not way back, but a little.

And i think the way you come across, your personality, outweighs your obsession with all things froggy. Quite a good example of my meaning you are

 

[Left Coast]

Over the years, I have always noticed that some posters may completely disagree with each other on numerous issues in different threads but still get along well, while others may agree on most issues of note but still not be exactly fond of each other.

Have you noticed this in your own interactions? I have. There are multiple members here whom I consider friends or at least people I'm on good terms with, but we disagree left and right on the forums. To me, that doesn't change my friendly terms with them in the slightest.

It goes without saying, but per Rule 1, please avoid naming names if you talk about unpleasant or less friendly interactions.

Since I was a teenager, I've had friends in my offline life who have very different religious and political beliefs than me. So I've never seen it as unusual to be friends with people who have differing views. I think what makes the difference is if we can be respectful and see each other as human beings and try to empathize and understand each other rather than going down the road of insults.

What grinds my gears around here is when folks basically just troll and seem uninterested in genuine discussion. Their goal isn't thoughtful discussion, it's just to poke the "other" (whoever that is) in the eye. That gets old and my patience wears thin with those types.

 

[icehorse]

Over the years, I have always noticed that some posters may completely disagree with each other on numerous issues in different threads but still get along well, while others may agree on most issues of note but still not be exactly fond of each other.

I'm here to share information and knowledge and ideas.

I have no issues disagreeing with posters as long as it seems as though they're debating in good faith. I do have a hard time with posters who deflect, obfuscate, repeatedly use fallacy arguments and so on. No one learns anything of use from such tactics.

 

[JustGeorge]

I think you're projecting. I don't 'know' anyone on here. And I have no like or dislike of anyone as a result. All I know is what the post in front of me is saying, or I think is saying, and that's all I have to respond to. So I can't assign personalities to aliases, or even to individual posts a lot of the time. If I did, it'd be based mostly on writing style rather than any actual knowledge of the person writing.

I guess I do things a bit differently. I try to get to 'know' posters to the extent I'm able. I'm here with hopes of friendship. Discussion/debate is fun, but this place fills a social need for me. There are some really lovely people here who keep me thinking positive, and help fight off loneliness. (And there's some not so lovely ones who are a lot of fun anyways. )

 

[Twilight Hue]

You've always been civil, despite being so frequently wrong.

I dunno about that! :0p

 

[sun rise]

There are some who have a very different religious perspective who I would enjoy meeting IRL That even applies to a few in the political realm. Others? "not so much"

 

[Debater Slayer]

There are some who have a very different religious perspective who I would enjoy meeting IRL That even applies to a few in the political realm. Others? "not so much"

Give me a heads-up if you ever visit Egypt.

 

[PureX]

Perhaps I should have clarified that I'm referring to situations where posters may know each other beyond the surface level of public posts. This has been a core aspect of the RF community for years; many members have even met each other in person.

I have several long-term friends with whom I stay in touch elsewhere, and I first met them here.

I guess I do things a bit differently. I try to get to 'know' posters to the extent I'm able. I'm here with hopes of friendship. Discussion/debate is fun, but this place fills a social need for me. There are some really lovely people here who keep me thinking positive, and help fight off loneliness. (And there's some not so lovely ones who are a lot of fun anyways. )

I didn't realize that people on here connected with each other apart from just participating in the threads. That would never have occurred to me.

 

[JustGeorge]

I didn't realize that people on here connected with each other apart from just participating in the threads. That would never have occurred to me.

I've got running PMs with some members on personal life/topics. I've zoomed with some members. I've sent stuff in the mail to a member. I have a few member's emails. I've had members reach out when it was obvious I wasn't doing well, and I've reached out or had members reach out when they weren't doing well. I've never met anyone here, but I wouldn't be opposed to it.

I think the debate aspect of the forum speaks the loudest and is often a source of entertainment for many(who come primarily for that purpose), but there's definitely a community going on here, if one desires to be a part of it.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I didn't realize that people on here connected with each other apart from just participating in the threads. That would never have occurred to me.

Some have even met their spouses through RF. Others have been regularly in contact with friends they met here for a decade or longer. (I'm within the latter category.)

I'm in Egypt, and I'm waiting for a letter from Down Under to arrive in the mail. It's taking a few weeks, but that should give you an idea of how much this community can bring people together.

 

[Revoltingest]

And you ain't no one's judge or teacher.

I'm neither judging nor teaching.
Just pointing out that you do carry baggage
when dealing with posters you know.
The difference between us...I recognize that I do.
It's unavoidable as humans....you're one too, right?

 

[Revoltingest]

Not way back, but a little.

And i think the way you come across, your personality, outweighs your obsession with all things froggy. Quite a good example of my meaning you are

I don't understand your post.
But it seems positive.
Woohoo!

 

[ChristineM]

I don't understand your post.
But it seems positive.
Woohoo!

Yes, it's positive, scrap brass not withstanding

 

[Quagmire]

It's not that we disagree, it's how you voice your disagreement.

Exactly. The fact that somebody may be on the other team doesn't mean I won't get along with them, it's all about how they conduct themselves while the balls in play.

If someone has a habit of cheating once they realize they're losing, this isn't somebody I'm going to want to interact with too much in the future.

In fact, I'm not even going to want to interact with anybody on my team who does that.

My biggest gripe is against people who accuse you of having said something you didn't say and then refuse to show you where you said it. I mean come on, this is the internet. There's a record of everything that we say here.

What's the point of saying, "you said . . ." when it's the easiest thing in the world to just show what was said by hitting the quote button.

The only thing I can think is that if somebody's claiming you said something and refuses to go and get the quote, it's because they know it isn't there. They realize they're not going to win the debate so they've stooped to trying to humiliate you into shutting up.

There are people in here who I literally haven't spoken to for over a decade for doing something like this.

Another version of this is someone who already had a lecture prepared going into the thread and decides to use one of my posts as a springboard, whether it serves as a legitimate response or not.

For instance: I say I like cats better than dogs and someone decides that means they need to send me a 20 paragraph lecture about why it's wrong the torture puppies.

Chances are this isn't someone I'm going to be in a hurry to interact with again (who knows what they're going to have me saying next).

 

[Revoltingest]

Exactly. The fact that somebody may be on the other team doesn't mean I won't get along with them, it's all about how they conduct themselves while the balls in play.

If someone has a habit of cheating once they realize they're losing, this isn't somebody I'm going to want to interact with too much in the future.

In fact, I'm not even going to want to interact with anybody on my team who does that.

My biggest gripe is against people who accuse you of having said something you didn't say and then refuse to show you where you said it. I mean come on, this is the internet. There's a record of everything that we say here.

What's the point of saying, "you said . . ." when it's the easiest thing in the world to just show what was said by hitting the quote button.

The only thing I can think is that if somebody's claiming you said something and refuses to go and get the quote, it's because they know it isn't there. They realize they're not going to win the debate so they've stooped to trying to humiliate you into shutting up.

There are people in here who I literally haven't spoken to for over a decade for doing something like this.

Another version of this is someone who already had a lecture prepared going into the thread and decides to use one of my posts as a springboard, whether it serves as a legitimate response or not.

For instance: I say I like cats better than dogs and someone decides that means they need to send me a 20 paragraph lecture about why it's wrong the torture puppies.

Chances are this isn't someone I'm going to be in a hurry to interact with again (who knows what they're going to have me saying next).

Aye, posters who attribute something to ya falsely,
but won't quote the post....they really burn me bacon.

 

[Heyo]

Exactly. The fact that somebody may be on the other team doesn't mean I won't get along with them, it's all about how they conduct themselves while the balls in play.

If someone has a habit of cheating once they realize they're losing, this isn't somebody I'm going to want to interact with too much in the future.

In fact, I'm not even going to want to interact with anybody on my team who does that.

My biggest gripe is against people who accuse you of having said something you didn't say and then refuse to show you where you said it. I mean come on, this is the internet. There's a record of everything that we say here.

What's the point of saying, "you said . . ." when it's the easiest thing in the world to just show what was said by hitting the quote button.

The only thing I can think is that if somebody's claiming you said something and refuses to go and get the quote, it's because they know it isn't there. They realize they're not going to win the debate so they've stooped to trying to humiliate you into shutting up.

There are people in here who I literally haven't spoken to for over a decade for doing something like this.

Another version of this is someone who already had a lecture prepared going into the thread and decides to use one of my posts as a springboard, whether it serves as a legitimate response or not.

For instance: I say I like cats better than dogs and someone decides that means they need to send me a 20 paragraph lecture about why it's wrong the torture puppies.

Chances are this isn't someone I'm going to be in a hurry to interact with again (who knows what they're going to have me saying next).

I guess we all dislike bad faith debater but for slightly different reasons. I don't like it when someone acts as if I'm stupid. They try to pull some rhetoric trick, mostly a red herring and think I wouldn't notice.