Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes.

14 (18.9%)

No.

27 (36.5%)

I had no idea it existed until I read this.

33 (44.6%)

Total Members Voted: 73

[wierd]

That is debatable. I may not process it "properly", but I still take the effort, almost obcessive-compulsively.  Information is my drug of choice. I try to do as much as I am able.

Chaoticag:

I am able to draw a common ground with them, by framing the argument in areas they are more familar with, and thus more open to. If you have a problem with doing so, to me at least it shows that you haven't invested time exploring their worldview, and have instead rejected it completely. This is exactly what they are doing when they reject yours. Reaching a commonality requires leaving your own box of cognition, to explore somebody else's that you disagree with.

You don't get that by ignoring them.

[Criptfeind]

I still take the effort

No you don't. Citation: You are talking to me. The fact is every day in every instant you are making choices on what information to process and what information to seek out. Making the conscious choice that some people offer information of lower quality then average is not only valid, but correct.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

I put myself in my buddy list, so every time I sign on I have at least one friend.

That's poetry. :')

I don't use it, or the ignore list. Gonna have to agree with wierd here.

Ignore's got a purpose, and I can't think of anyone who's used it because of a disagreement or petty dislike.

^ I hope this is true. I think insulating yourself from people ['ignoring' them] due to disagreement/petty annoyance on an otherwise completely public forum is a bit silly.


And cript, there's a difference between not giving a foolish thought the time of day and ignoring the speaker completely.

[chaoticag]

Chaoticag:

I am able to draw a common ground with them, by framing the argument in areas they are more familar with, and thus more open to. If you have a problem with doing so, to me at least it shows that you haven't invested time exploring their worldview, and have instead rejected it completely. This is exactly what they are doing when they reject yours. Reaching a commonality requires leaving your own box of cognition, to explore somebody else's that you disagree with.

You don't get that by ignoring them.

But remind me again, why would I have a duty of talking to them and convincing them and putting an effort into something that ultimately burns me out? Isn't doing that completely irresponsible? If you wish to talk to them and convince them that they're wrong, then fine, but I've gone through so much vitriol and hate directed at me and my close friends. I'd rather spend my time with them than talk to someone unwilling to listen. Though if they do want to have a conversation that's a different matter.

[wierd]

No. Only within a specific context.

If discussing theology, as a concept, a firm understanding of many religions is required; it does not mean you must believe them all. Only that you understand them all.

That knowledge is not terribly helpful when dealing with astrophysics, say. That does not mean theology is useless. Just not very applicable to astrophysics.

The beliefs and ideological systems that produce identifiably distinct social group identities within human societies is of considerable interest to me. The belief in a supreme deity that lives in a lake may seem silly, but understanding it can bear unexpected fruit in understanding humanity in general. That makes the knowledge useful.

If you dont find any piece of knowledge useful, it means you aren't looking big enough.

[Elephant Parade]

This is quite the derail.

Also, the three poll options are almost exactly equal.

[wierd]

Chaoticag:

I am able to draw a common ground with them, by framing the argument in areas they are more familar with, and thus more open to. If you have a problem with doing so, to me at least it shows that you haven't invested time exploring their worldview, and have instead rejected it completely. This is exactly what they are doing when they reject yours. Reaching a commonality requires leaving your own box of cognition, to explore somebody else's that you disagree with.

You don't get that by ignoring them.

But remind me again, why would I have a duty of talking to them and convincing them and putting an effort into something that ultimately burns me out? Isn't doing that completely irresponsible? If you wish to talk to them and convince them that they're wrong, then fine, but I've gone through so much vitriol and hate directed at me and my close friends. I'd rather spend my time with them than talk to someone unwilling to listen. Though if they do want to have a conversation that's a different matter.

If you summarily ignore them, by asserting "they are all ignorant biggots", and they all ignore you, by asserting that you are an egotistical godless heathen, there will never be a dialog worthy of mention.

That can only happen when one side or the other takes a vested interest.  We can't force other people to take that step, but we can force ourselves to take it.

Taking that step makes us better, more rounded people. The treasure is the journey, not the destination.

[Karlito]

I use the ignore list, pretty much exclusively for that one guy who posts that one shock image. You know the one.

[WillowLuman]

I buddied Corai once. But really, since we're such a tight-knit community, people aren't that hard to find so I haven't used it since.

[wierd]

Hmm.. I find the shock image guy "interesting". Specifically, his choices in shock images.

Is it tub girl? Goatse? Lemon party? Something else entirely? The choice of shock image posted often says a great deal about the troll. More than they would probably feel comfortable revealing in fact.

[chaoticag]

If you summarily ignore them, by asserting "they are all ignorant biggots", and they all ignore you, by asserting that you are an egotistical godless heathen, there will never be a dialog worthy of mention.

That can only happen when one side or the other takes a vested interest.  We can't force other people to take that step, but we can force ourselves to take it.

Taking that step makes us better, more rounded people. The treasure is the journey, not the destination.

People aren't machines however. We can't separate ourselves from that which hurts us in order to debate ideas and ideologies and screeds. Besides, how long do you have to live? How much time are you going to invest in talking to people of no consequence who go out their way to insulate themselves from  others? You have a very romantic idea of how people work, but as for me, I'd rather not talk to people that have given the impression from what little I talked to them that they'd cheer if I died on the spot.

People should be free to associate and talk to those they wish to talk to, or listen to. Hell, I think understanding that is integral to working with people. If they don't want to talk to you you make things worse by forcing a conversation with them.

Plus, can you really guarantee that frustrating conversations with others isn't poisoning your view of them? You idealize things too much, and if you can honestly do that, then you expect too much out of people. Or rather, it seems you expect people to be able to do what you do.

[Gunner-Chan]

We can't force other people to take that step, but we can force ourselves to take it.

Taking that step makes us better, more rounded people. The treasure is the journey, not the destination.

The problem with that mindset is if you can't actively make someone take that step since they're not willing to, no amount of trying to make the best of the situation is going to make it better if they're already set against it. Or if in comparison, if you already know that you can't actively make that step and actually mean it.

On top of that, it's a message board on the internet. Nothing here really matters in the long run to be honest.

Long story short, weird I think you're trying too hard when that sort of willpower is better used somewhere far more constructive.

Also cag what are you doing, do your freaking school work.

[chaoticag]

AAAAA

Well I got caught XD

Sorta anyway. Class didn't really happen today, sorta, joined the argument and got kinda caught up. All that's left today are review stuff anyway, and I can afford to skip them actually.

[wierd]

If you note, I said I was philosophicaly opposed to the idea. I never said I wanted to take the button from you.

Some people indeed cannot be reached, but it is unfair to the people that can be, and to yourself, to choose not to try despite this.

It isn't about wasting energy; it's more about how deep your ability to comprehend and cope with the existence of completely incompatible worldviews you have.

For instance, to reach the previously mentioned southern baptists, you have to frame your arguments from within a biblical context, because that is where they draw their axioms from. Arguing from a secular context is every bit as inapplicable, as theirs are from a religious one are at winning you over.  If they want to win you to the jesus camp, they have to frame a solid secular argument no? That is what you expect of them, right? How is the inverse any different?

Specifically, to combat the violent radicalism of the southern baptist, I would start asking them some honest questions concerning several applicable biblical passages, and their stances. You would be surprised at how profitable that is.

I probably have abnormal amounts of patience there, being addicted to information-- (and love being corrected), but logically, you still only truly fail when you fail to try. To me, clicking "ignore" is choosing to fail, because trying is too hard.

I don't mean anything personal by that. It may well BE too hard. But to me, choosing to fail is silly.

[Stuebi]

I disagree heavily with the whole "Ignore is unhealthy und thus should not be used.".

If I do not want to read what a certain person writes, I dont. Its common to find people on the Internet who write stuff that completely infuriates me, viewpoints that I heavily disagree with and just general trolling/spamming/provoking that makes my visit less enjoyable. If I cant find common ground after such postings, I see no point in further interaction with the Poster. If he sours my Forum-Visit, he goes on ignore.

Granted, it takes A LOT for me to actually ignore a person.

Friendlist on the other hand... I only use them if I have regular PM-Conversations with the person, play a Forum-Game or if im specifically asked to friend someone. But generally I dont use it very often. If I find someone particularly nice to talk to, I generally try to get their Skype/Steam/other-Information and chat them up outside. Well, at least that'd be what I WOULD do if I could actually muster enough courage to ask. I think it's potentially creepy.

PS. This was in no way a stab at you, wierd. I actually respect your attitude, but I dont possess a fraction of the patience you display.