• Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    To be fair, when you try it in person, they’re all “Who are you? How did you get in my house? I’m calling the cops!”, then it’s no fun at all.

  • luciferofastora@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    There’s a weird dynamic to arguing online, particularly when it comes to political topics. Most of the time, you won’t convince your counterpart. Maybe some point sticks with them later and you’ll never know, but either way they’re not really the target of the arguments. It’s the (potential) audience that the argument is supposed to be for: People less emotionally invested in the conflict may take away something useful from the arguments, people on the fence about an issue might come around to your point, and people sharing your opinion will see that they’re not alone and feel affirmed.

    Essentially, it’s a performance on an public stage for the sake of discourse. Phrased strongly, you don’t want “the other side” to dominate the public opinion, so you engage them. In the process, you may hone your own arguments, or you may find them wanting, perhaps even see them start to crack.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      i think that’s true in large social media spaces, but not so much in smaller focused forums.

      but since the latter doesn’t really exist anymore, it is kind of irrelevant.

    • ForeverComical@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I used to enjoy it a while back, now not so much. As long as people understand this is not how you change the world, you are doing this for yourself.

      • FlyingCircus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Online forums definitely have the power to shape discourse. The resurrection of socialism is proof of that. Before the internet, socialism was a dirty word in America, and now any political thread will have socialists in it.

        It’s not that one person makes a difference, it’s the constant exposure achieved by many people posting similar arguments.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Sure, it is the internet and not people’s personal finances imploding. Its why we definitely didnt see pushes like this in any other time before the internet. Nope not ever. It’s by posting to the internet that changes things.

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Absolutely. There’s way too many blithering idiots online. We made the web way too accessible to them back in the ‘90’s.

    And if idiots don’t get challenged, you run the risk of them thinking they’re actually right. And that’s very, very dangerous.

    I will admit the only reason I attempt to verbally correct them is because I don’t have access to a Reaper drone to shove a Flying Ginsu missile up their ass.

    • SippyCup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I mean, evidence shows that having their ideas challenged online tends to entrench people in their ideas more so than it convinces them that they’re wrong.

      So, while I sympathize with your goals, I think your method is having the opposite effect of your intended outcome.

      I say this, knowing it’s true, and still doing the arguing online thing anyway.

      • Kindness is Punk@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It’s not about them it’s about the other people that might be influenced by their post.

        Online is never an A&B conversation, which is why I usually avoid direct confrontation and just provide well structured, clear information, because I don’t really care whether I can convince someone who has made up their mind.

        It’s about deconstructing the argument with clear digestible information for the dozens of lurkers.

        • Krauerking@lemy.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          LOL as if. Literally I will see people with logical responses getting ripped apart because the person they are arguing with just sounds more right and or it fits what people wanted to hear in that specific echo chamber.

          Say something cause you want to say it, not cause you are giving yourself points on an invisible scoreboard for people that might not exist.

          • Kindness is Punk@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            I think you may want to reread what I wrote because this is barely related. Feels more like something happened and you’re just looking for a vent.

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              No its related In that, I dont believe the lurkers are appreciating it like you think they are. And that logical responses are often still beaten by emotional forces. And, getting the high of watching a “nerd” get dunked on is likely more of not all of the counter arguments received perspective when commenting against the perceived right take of a community.

              If you are commenting, you are doing it for yourself. Inventing an imaginary person that is receiving your argument other than the person you are talking to is silly and delusional in the truest sense of that word.

              • Kindness is Punk@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                3 days ago

                I don’t think it’s delusional to want to teach people things. When you respectfully deconstruct someone’s half truths it can help people understand.

                This is not to say that you should take everything seriously or that every person is worth engaging with of course you still have to be selective.

                • Krauerking@lemy.lol
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  Imagining their existence without proof is though. Teaching people is different then screaming into a black box and relying on faith that it did.

                  And here we are back at the emotional response overpowering the logical one. If you want to teach actually do it than hoping you are passively doing it.

      • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Evidence isn’t what bullies and bigots rely on. It’s their feelings of superiority and their justification of violence.

        hence why they will never argue with evidence or facts. They will just insult and harass and threaten.

        and if you use the evidence of their own words against them… well get ready to get reported to the mods.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      I hate saying this, I feel gross saying this, but the internet needs restrictions. I don’t know what the solution is. I hate all the ones that are being tried right now like age verification or needing an ID, because they really seem more focused on surveillance than anything else… But… God damn.

      The general public should not have unfettered access to the internet. I think we have shown that this technology is too dangerous for humanity as a whole. There’s just too many idiots and bad actors. Again, I don’t know what the solution is. How do you balance privacy and personal freedom with the dangers that come with giving everyone access to everything? Unfortunately, I don’t see a solution that doesn’t come off as draconian or controlling in some way, shape, or form.

      Maybe it’s something like a multi-layer internet, where the first layer anyone can access but is mostly read-only with a few exceptions. If you want to access the second layer which allows you to post, comment, upload, etc., you need a license. The barrier to entry should be small, something on the level of a HAM radio license. A simple class, an easy test, and a small one-time fee and you’re good for 10 years. You can even allow access for anyone at a library, university, or business.

      It wouldn’t fix everything, and deep down I know that if anything like this were tried it would be twisted and warped by the powers that be to become just another form of control, but holy shit we need something or society is going to tear itself apart.

      • OpenStars@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        This already exists. News media for instance used to have standards as to who they would hire - like you’d have to spelel properely and everyhting. Then most of the major outlets were bought up by the wealthy and… well, they still exist but people don’t bother to read them anymore.

        Even now, blogs exist (like Mastodon) but people on “social media” (where we are now) prefer to simply scroll and speak rather than listen.

        What you are saying still exists though - it’s simply not here. Read this if you are interested: https://medium.com/@max.p.schlienger/the-cargo-cult-of-the-ennui-engine-890c541cebcb.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      yeah, your such a big tough strong guy who is so smart.

      so strong that you fantasizing about murdering people who upset you by saying things you don’t like… so brave. so smart. so strong.

      • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        All thoughts are not created equal. Something tells me yours are created even less equal than most.

        • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          yeah, so superior when you’re go to is insults and threats.

          almost like you’re a bully, and a coward.

          • bitjunkie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            yeah, so superior when you’re go to is insults and threats.

            yeah, your such a big tough strong guy who is so smart.

  • w3dd1e@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s my favorite hobby.

    At this point, every comment on Lemmy is greeted with angry responses who are willfully choosing to ignore the point I was making and try to fight me.

    If I say “I like dogs” someone is going to come along and tell me I’m a jerk for not liking cats even though I didn’t say I don’t like cats. That or someone mansplaining dogs to me.

    Calm down Lemmy. Take a breather.

    • TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      People like being offended and feeling victimized.

      It’s a rush and they get addicted to it.

      I have a cat and a dog… and a lot of folks will just argue with me on principle or try to make me pick a side. even in real life. or like get in a big stink about if they are purebred or rescue. i have no clue why any of it matters, i guess other than their insecure need to feel validated by getting you to agree with them.

      I hate it. It’s so stupid and annoying. You can’t just like things anymore… anything you enjoy has to ‘hurt’ someone else and they have to let you know how wrong and bad you are for enjoying it.

      I like Cilantro, and I’ve had internet weirdos tell me that it’s able-ist to enjoy it, because my enjoyment of it is some sort of racism against the people for whom it tastes like soap. Or like commentary made at me in the taco line when I order it how it’s so gross. It’s so ridiculous. I think Pinto beans are disgusting, but I don’t feel offended and hurt that other people enjoy them.

  • ashenone@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    6 days ago

    I don’t want to be on my death bed wishing I had argued more, so I’m doing what I can while I’m young and ornery

  • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Was it worth it?

    Well, we’re clearly sitting on a picturesque beach on the Spanish Med, so… yeah? Sure, getting SWATted was no fun, and the bogus restraining orders were a real hassle, but ever since we had no choice but to leave the US things got a lot better.

    Now, how about some sunscreen babe? You’re gonna burn like that.