Some Tips

[Audie]

I do read OPs and was recently dismayed to discover that some people only respond to titles. Also that others simply skim threads, and as I had problems in my other one with people saying I had generalised when I had clearly stated that I was not talking about an entire group does illustrate that an OP can be perfectly well written, but that people are too lazy to read it thoroughly and respond to what they thought the thread said instead of what it actually said - so one can absolutely blame the audience.

I was referring to your OP.

As in-

I'll rewrite my OP for the reading impaired of RF.

A little more care in writing it the first time would
do so much to prevent "reading impairment ",
dont you think so?

You CAN indeed blame your audience.
"Can" does not necessarily include
"appropriately".

Arrogant as it may sound,

Good that you noticed that, for
arrogant indeed thou doth sound.

You'd like people to heed your ideas, and
improve themselves?

Arrogant and touchy tend to go together.
But-
Neither sets an example of how to profit
from your otherwise reasonable suggestions.

 

[Rival]

I'll rewrite my OP for the reading impaired of RF.

This was a joke.

A little more care in writing it the first time would
do so much to prevent "reading impairment ",
dont you think so?

No, a little more care with their reading would have. Most members had no problem with my OP on that thread. The first sentence was very clear, if only certain people had read it. This was the first sentence:

"Of most of the theists I have met, of all stripes, none are theists because they:"

And then some people accused me of generalising, which was absurd. How could I have made it any clearer that I was talking about theists I had met?

You CAN indeed blame your audience.
"Can" does not necessarily include
"appropriately".

I did. My OP was fine.

Good that you noticed that, for
arrogant indeed thou doth sound.

Thou dost. Second person singular takes an -st or -est ending

You'd like people to heed your ideas, and
improve themselves?

If my ideas would benefit, sure, and as this thread seems to have been well recieved and liked I'll take that as a positive.

Arrogant and touchy tend to go together.
But-
Neither sets an example of how to profit
from your otherwise reasonable suggestions.

I said in my OP that I am not meaning to be arrogant, which somehow makes me arrogant because I have suggested ways that people can improve their tact? No. It is not arrogant to find ways to help people, but others appear to view it as being dictated to for some reason

 

[Audie]

This was a joke.


No, a little more care with their reading would have. Most members had no problem with my OP on that thread. The first sentence was very clear, if only certain people had read it. This was the first sentence:

"Of most of the theists I have met, of all stripes, none are theists because they:"

And then some people accused me of generalising, which was absurd.


I did. My OP was fine.


Thou dost. Second person singular takes an -st or -est ending


If my ideas would benefit, sure, and as this thread seems to have been well recieved and liked I'll take that as a positive.


I said in my OP that I am not meaning to be arrogant, which somehow makes me arrogant because I have suggested ways that people can improve their tact? No. It is not arrogant to find ways to help people, but others appear to view it as being dictated to for some reason

Thou dost. Second person singular takes an -st or -est ending

Ok, I will look into my KJ English.
Unlike you, I can take a suggestion.

 

[Mindmaster]

I've recently participated in debate threads which took a serious turn for the worst. Arrogant as it may sound, I would like to offer some tips to RFians (and welcome other suggestions also).

1. Read the OP. Read it all. Then read it again.

The demons demand distraction and derailing, take it up with them.

Anyway, generally when that happens it's just that the thread is not as entertaining as the diversions. It's simply fundamental human nature to seek the novel or pleasurable -- even if it infuriates the OP.

 

[Milton Platt]

While this seems like a tangent to your thread:
Personal experience is indeed data, evidence, and powerfully persuasive at times. Personal anecdotes are often used as rhetorical devices that serve to both ethos and pathos (both are parts of persuasive communication).

Furthermore, couching statements in I statements can help keep discussion from escalating at times. This is not meant to challenge or discredit number six on your list. Number 6 is a good tip. Relying too heavily on I statements leads to passive communication (and in some cases passive aggressive communication). Overuse can also work against pathos and ethos.

Noting that you did not say to exclude any and all I statements, I took your meaning to suggest that one ought to analyze their use of I statements for relevancy and necessity. Is that correct?

Would it be fair to say that personal experience is proof that the person had an experience, but not proof that the person’s interpretation of the experience was correct?

 

[Curious George]

Would it be fair to say that personal experience is proof that the person had an experience, but not proof that the person’s interpretation of the experience was correct?

Not even that necessarily. They could be lying, exaggerating, omitting pertinent information or attention seeking. That said, personal experiences are still a part of persuasive communication. It is the testimony itself that is evidence.

I feel like a pedantic jerk distinguishing the terms proof and evidence here, but I do not want to give the mistaken impression we should ever consider persinal experience as proof. Personal experience is offered as evidence to the audience. While it may serve as definitive evidence to the person who had the experience (and indeed some audiences as well), it is not proof.

 

[Milton Platt]

Not even that necessarily. They could be lying, exaggerating, omitting pertinent information or attention seeking. That said, personal experiences are still a part of persuasive communication. It is the testimony itself that is evidence.

I feel like a pedantic jerk distinguishing the terms proof and evidence here, but I do not want to give the mistaken impression we should ever consider persinal experience as proof. Personal experience is offered as evidence to the audience. While it may serve as definitive evidence to the person who had the experience (and indeed some audiences as well), it is not proof.

I am the king of pedantic, so no, you are not a jerk. The clairty is vital. I sometimes use the word proof instead of evidence even though Im8nderstand the difference. Trying to not do that..

 

[Thief]

Would it be fair to say that personal experience is proof that the person had an experience, but not proof that the person’s interpretation of the experience was correct?

and so you doubt every experience....

even your own

you can believe.....nothing

 

[Rival]

and so you doubt every experience....

even your own

you can believe.....nothing

Of course. One must scientifically verify one's own existence before acting on it! Silly!

 

[Milton Platt]

and so you doubt every experience....

even your own

you can believe.....nothing

No, I can believe lots of things.

And I didn’t say you had to doubt that you had an experience, only that the experience didn’t provide evidence for one’s interpretation of what the experience was.

Saying you beleived an experiece was caused by X does not equal having evidence that the experience was caused by X.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I've recently participated in debate threads which took a serious turn for the worst. Arrogant as it may sound, I would like to offer some tips to RFians (and welcome other suggestions also).

1. Read the OP. Read it all. Then read it again.

2. You're frustrated? Write the response that, in your frustration, you want to say (don't post it) - then delete it, take a breather, and compose a more civil response without the caps and the exclamation marks.

3. Don't feel forced to respond. If something has been going in a circle, drop it. You've not 'lost' by not responding to the latest attack, it just didn't deserve a reply.

4. Consider that your opponent may actually be right, even just about some things. I know, I know, fat chance, right?

5. Read through your own response. Is any of it vague? Have you listed your sources? Or worse: are you actually trying to convince yourself, rather than your opponent?

6. How many times have you used 'I' in your response? Your opponent isn't interested in you, s/he's interested in what and why, generally. Present the argument, the sources and the conclusion. A sound argument shouldn't really be dependent upon you, how you feel and your beliefs; this isn't really going to convince anyone. This is not to say that one should never use 'I', but just make sure it's relevent.

Why would you even say such a thing. I disagree completely.

I leave at least an 18% tip if the service was satisfactory. Anything less is unacceptable. If service is mediocre, I would consider leaving a 15% tip.

Though I have been known to leave a penny on the table if the service was extremely poor, just so the waiter(ess) didn't think I forgot to leave a tip.

 

[Rival]

Why would you even say such a thing. I disagree completely.

I leave at least an 18% tip if the service was satisfactory. Anything less is unacceptable. If service is mediocre, I would consider leaving a 15% tip.

Though I have been known to leave a penny on the table if the service was extremely poor, just so the waiter(ess) didn't think I forgot to leave a tip.

Or the owner could actually pay the staff, so you could keep the rest of your money.

 

[Thief]

No, I can believe lots of things.

And I didn’t say you had to doubt that you had an experience, only that the experience didn’t provide evidence for one’s interpretation of what the experience was.

Saying you beleived an experiece was caused by X does not equal having evidence that the experience was caused by X.

you may doubt me if you care to

I see no cause to doubt what has happened to me

if we go about doubting what happens to us......
then this life....which is designed to be a learning experience....
is a fail

 

[Thief]

Of course. One must scientifically verify one's own existence before acting on it! Silly!

and of course.....for a good many things....
there will not be a photo, a fingerprint, an equation, nor a repeatable experiment

for sooooooo many things that we profess to be sure of.....
all you CAN do is think about it

got any dark matter?
got any dark energy?

willing to believe what you cannot put in a petri dish?