I think folks who state their own thoughts and opinions as feelings are less likely to be able to spot bad faith out there.
Would it be fair to say that your perspective is that those who play semantics in a really upsetting way, in gun threads, are the real victims?
all three of your strawmen would have missed the point. All three of them would likely earn a mute (from me) for discussing any of those aspects of firearms in a thread full of greiving people reaching out for human contact after a tragedy. Is that truly the best time and place? Is that the sort of conversation the community wants to encourage?
I personally had these weird mod powers for a day once. It was nice. One of the things I was able to do was pull a comment out of an existing thread, and all of it’s children comments could follow into a new thread.
Nobody wants to silence you. Sometimes though, sometimes it is quiet time because your respect for the dignity of other people is your respect for your own dignity.
Is it a “technical solution” when I don’t answer the door for Jehovah’s Witnesses when they try to come to call, or when I refuse to engage a creepy guy on the subway by moving to a different car?
No one ‘owes’ anyone else here a conversation or any attention, and individuals choosing not to engage others won’t diminish the overall quality of most conversations.
Good for you and how YOU feel; because that’s all that matters right?
It’s not “personal,” if I don’t fucking want to be bothered with someone and they can’t or WON’T respect that, then I shouldn’t be forced to have to endure them on my posts, period.
Anyone who thinks that other people “have to” listen to them has some serious delusions of grandeur going on.
Yes, because demanding attention from people who have no interest in interacting is totally “mature”, and absolutely everyone here is a model citizen who always argues in good faith.
Why are you assuming that the hypothetical gun control thread stems from a post about a tragedy? I only used that example as it was the first contentious topic that came to mind, not because I have strong feelings about it. You’re welcome to search my comment history. You won’t find any tendentious derails, at least vis-a-vis guns.
EDIT: I misread your meaning. If someone were to bring up technical aspects of firearms in a tragedy thread, that would be highly inappropriate, but IMO castigating them would be a better response than silently muting them. They won’t learn anything from an action they’re unaware of.
I didn’t say anything like that. I said that calm rational adults are capable of ignoring posts without a button to make them disappear. You’re right, though, I shouldn’t have said “feel like,” I should have said “think, based on their explicit statements above.”
Which is pretty fucking offensive, as it implies that if a person doesn’t have or wish to exert your preferred level of tolerance for others, then that somehow equates to being emotionally immature or not a “real” adult.
As if such determinations are somehow yours to make.
(Hint; they’re not.)
I’ll give an example of what “calm, rational” adults actually do; THEY RESPECT EACH OTHER’S FUCKING BOUNDARIES.
For instance:
@Mister44 and I currently have an amicable agreement not to engage each other, based upon a personal request on my part; because I’ve been on edge ever since the election and I know it, and we kept butting heads needlessly.
And ever since I made my request, he has been an absolute gentleman about it; acquiescing in not commenting directly to me, posting on my threads or even liking my commentary ironically, or otherwise. We’ve been in the same discussion threads many times since then and his behavior has been exemplary.
If everyone actually had the capacity and the wherewithal to act so responsibly even in the face disagreements and/or mutual dislike, there would never be any need to block anyone; but sadly that is not the case.
Some people are here to leech energy from others, whether that’s their conscious intent or not; and refusing to be someone’s “easy meal” is nothing to be ashamed of.
What I was taught in teachers college was to watch what someone acting out was acting out about. Often, counterintuitively, they’re the one being bullied, while the bully sits back and quietly needles them. It’s too easy to tell a student to stop being disruptive, not appreciating they’ve been pushed there.
It’s a little different in a BBS environment because there’s a text trail, but it’s still easy to miss.
I only want mutes since there are a very small number of people who don’t really go over the edge in terms of community standards but who I can’t have a civil discussion with because they’re fractally wrong and when I do engage it’s to everyone’s detriment. I don’t want them banned, but I don’t think it’s in anyone’s interest for me to chat with them since it either turns into extended epic fruitless back-and-forths, or me slagging them. So I think the hope is more insulating some parties from one another for the benefit of the community, though I can’t say I know it’d work. I think if there’s a bad actor there will be plenty on non-muters who are going to flag.
Yes, they are. My personal opinions about the maturity and rationality of other people’s behavior are absolutely mine to determine. 99.9% of the time I keep it to myself. On the rare occasion that I don’t, it’s not to dismiss or silence anyone, but to suggest that the direction they’re going is not conducive to public discourse. This isn’t a primal therapy session; we’re not here to scream at each other.
In regards to the idea that some detractors seem to have about the potential ‘abuse’ of such a feature, no one seems to have stopped to consider that if someone became a “serial blocker” intent on creating their own echo chamber he or she would be simultaneously blocking him or herself out of the common discourse; not preventing anyone else from carrying on around them.
Correct, that’s true for YOU alone; not anyone else.
We each get to make the determination for ourselves, and no one’s opinion carries any more weight here than anyone else’s.
In the unlikely event that such a feature should ever exist on this site, and you don’t like it, then don’t use it.
But just because you don’t think that such a feature would be useful, doesn’t mean that no one else should have access to it.
That audacity is the issue.
Weird; I never suggested or even implied that it was, in anything that I’ve written.
If that comment is somehow meant to address my “tone;” well, what you get out is whatever you’ve put in.
Are you a paragon of listening for such advice, when so sensitively offered you?
excuse me for being left wondering if the second half of that isn’t dismissive sarcasm ‘thanking’ someone other than the person who tried to gently offer the advice that thoughts and feelings are different.
Thoughts introduced into conversation are fair game for debate. Feelings introduced into conversation are not up for debate. There’s nothing personal in my pointing that out, it’s basic linguistics and getting it backwards, when intentional, is a common con.
Yes, the problem is self-control. Humans don’t always have great self control, even ones that are generally okay at pretending to be an adult. One way we deal with this is by using tools and managing environments to avoid triggering problem behaviors. It’s way easier to not eat the ice cream if it’s not in your freezer and you have to drive to the store, but once it’s in the freezer it’s much harder. While I know I don’t want to engage with some people, when they say things that are utterly wrong-headed my urge to correct can override my reasonable recognition that it’s a fruitless task.
I’m pretty sure @codinghorror has made it clear that Facebook style blocking to make people and their comments invisible to you (or anyone else) isn’t on the table here. In fact, he flat out said it more than once.
This thread would be better served by a more level…tone…with less rancor, don’t people think? Do we really need to be virtually yelling at each other about…the merits of a feature to stop people from yelling at each other?
