|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wishbone Redemption Captain
|
Posted: Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:07 pm
This is actually really simple, but some people, myself included, take a little while to get the hang of it.
The ED's an interesting place. It can be a heated environment, or it can be pretty placid, depending upon the tone of the particular thread you're in- to succeed, there are a few general things to remember.
1. Read the rules, and don't make a new thread if there's already one addressing the subject. It's quick, it's easy, and it's where EDers are most notorious- virtually all of the agression surfaces when someone misposts. Luckily, it's easy to avoid misposting if you just pay attention.
2. Do your absolute best to back yourself up. This clause includes not taking a stance that's impossible to support- for example any purely opinion-based adjective (wrong, right, gross, innocent, evil, good, etc) is not worth saying. You don't have to cite every other statement, but be prepared to provide proof if challenged. The fun of the Extended Discussion is that we're not just here to post our opinions- we're here to challenge and debate our own and those of others.
3. If you realize your point has been disproven, concede. You end up looking like a jerk if you're a bad sport about it.
4. Ad hominem (insults) are a no-go. You'll look dumb. Verbal sparring tends to be half the fun, and if that's your thing, go for it- but remember to attack the argument, not your opponant.
5. All fallacies are to be avoided- if you don't know whether or not it's a fallacy, refer to our guide. They don't help your argument, they aggravate those who have experience with them, and odds are at least five people before you have tried the very same train of faulty reasoning. If you find yourself with nothing but a fallacy to work with, you may need to reconsider your stance. (Thanks to BlackShadow for bringing it up.)
6. Don't feed the trolls. Report, and move on. If someone posts something obviously calibrated to piss you off, don't. Some trolls post to evoke a point, but that's called satire, and another ballgame; trolling is presenting something outrageous or offensive for the sake of outrage or offense. As has been pointed out, a troll as an individual might not be a nasty little gopher, but they are in groups.
7. There are stupid questions, but ask anyway. It's kind of like rock 'em sock 'em robots with a diverse working knowledge of anything you might want to know. If you get punched in the face, maybe you can learn something.
8. Don't take it personally.
9. Read the opening post (OP) of a thread, and skim the first page of responses. If something important is realized (for example, that the OP is actually a peice of well-known satire), you won't look like you were slow on the uptake. On the flip side, if you do miss something like that, refer to number seven.
10. Keep your temper. This is probably the number one reason people start mudslinging, and it can cause an otherwise valuable debate to degenerate, quickly.
These are pretty simple- a step up from the manners you supposedly learned in primary school. Not tough. Essentially, it's all you need to get started, and you could have figured it out by yourself.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 7:47 am
I want to expand on #4: ANY logical fallacy should be avoided...not just the ad hominem. They're aggravating for everyone involved. Not to mention, they don't help your argument in the slightest. The end result of logical fallacies is a thread full of angry posters who are tired of trying to get the point across and have lost all respect for the person who posted the fallacy.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wishbone Redemption Captain
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:46 am
Included. Thanks, Shadow.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:55 am
Addendum to 3: Remember, it is Possible to concede with out admitting to being wrong.
i.e: "Your argument is well formed, and I can not retort or contest it. At the moment, I have but only to concede."
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 2:26 pm
May I sum up 3, 4 and 8 in one?
In short, "Tact and maturity should be your guiding principles."
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:31 pm
I want to sumerize number 6. If someone posts a thred that has to relavence, or is a clear "stupid question", don't flame them. Quietly ignore it and use the report system.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:27 pm
Bah. Number 6 is a dream world.
Feeding trolls is fun. Unless, of course, the troll is an a*****e. Which, I'd like to point out, they often aren't. Porn trolls, for instance. I love 'em! xD They aren't mean, evil people. The opinionated ones are. Don't generalize all trolls, because many of them ARE good people.
Also, no one ever just insults the argument. They go after the level of intelligence the poster has as well. You should warn the newbies about that. People like me... Well, we're assholes. But, we can also admit it. The ones you really want to watch out for are the assholes who WON'T admit it. Those bitches will lie to you.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:38 pm
Number 3 is fantasy. Most people I have gone up against don't follow it, they grasp at straws, fling insults then vanish.
May I add a number ten? Keep your temper in check. If you've seen me post, you do notice that I rarely am openly pissed. That's because I listen to music or rant elsewhere, or just put my anger in and come out with firmness. Most people walk the line or use ad hominem out of anger at something their opponent said, or sheer lack of tolerance - and idiocy is EXTREMELY hard (read: impossible) to tolerate in the amounts that one can expect to see in ED.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 12:32 pm
Just don't illegalize dumping immense sarcasm into arguments that not only blatantly mock the opponent's arguments, but proves it wrong.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:40 pm
I disagree with five entirely.
Some fallacies cannot be proven a.k.a. they are subjective depending upon your perspective in the situation. Some fallacies, too, can be reasoned out of, and some fallacies are just evoked to try to command an "instant-victory" even though, they have no grounded to really evoke them.
I think fallacies should be called upon sparingly. If you really want to use one, you need to thoroughly explain why and then you need to allow your opponent to either justify: -why you were wrong in doing it -why the fallacy itself is wrong.
And, yes, I DO disagree with some fallacies.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:18 pm
Lord Setar Number 3 is fantasy. Most people I have gone up against don't follow it, they grasp at straws, fling insults then vanish. May I add a number ten? Keep your temper in check. If you've seen me post, you do notice that I rarely am openly pissed. That's because I listen to music or rant elsewhere, or just put my anger in and come out with firmness. Most people walk the line or use ad hominem out of anger at something their opponent said, or sheer lack of tolerance - and idiocy is EXTREMELY hard (read: impossible) to tolerate in the amounts that one can expect to see in ED. And another thing about keeping you temper in check: if you do lash out at someone, it only encourages them to lash back out at you, so there really is no point to getting mad anyway. Believe me, I have learned this lesson.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:30 pm
YOU should add this.
If you are looking for intelligent, literate feedback/discussion
DO NOT POST IN THE GD. sad but true. i tried this. i phailed, and then I lost my temper.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wishbone Redemption Captain
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 5:26 pm
kp is dcvi I disagree with five entirely. Some fallacies cannot be proven a.k.a. they are subjective depending upon your perspective in the situation. Some fallacies, too, can be reasoned out of, and some fallacies are just evoked to try to command an "instant-victory" even though, they have no grounded to really evoke them. I think fallacies should be called upon sparingly. If you really want to use one, you need to thoroughly explain why and then you need to allow your opponent to either justify: -why you were wrong in doing it -why the fallacy itself is wrong. And, yes, I DO disagree with some fallacies. Aren't fallacies called such because they're illogical or unsupportable trains of thought? AKA, not sound reasoning? I'm not advocating tossing out some long Latin term every other paragraph as opposed to working through and disproving the opposition's argument. That's just annoying.
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|