MennoNet.com

What is it about forums that people want to argue instead of converse?

Forums have so much potential for good conversations but there's always someone or some "ones" who like to start an argument. Sad and a reason for much prayer.

Forums attract trolls whose goal is to stimulate argument, people who make up fake personas and have a fake fantasy life online, and then some of us don't like that state of affairs and don't care to let people live our their fantasies on a forum we otherwise like.

I don't have a problem with arguing. If it is done correctly, I believe it is a valuable and needed aspect of life and learning.

Somethings are drawn out with more talk, especially since we are limited on a forum rather than having tone of voice and facial expressions, etc. Some argue sometimes and some all the time... But often it can help in ironing out personal understandings and new revelations if it is used as a tool that way and one is open to being wrong. Ones that are more resistant even in error can have a place with helping those seeking truth to consider other angles but also confirm truth by holes in things they say... At times I have probably been both of these but hopefully I am leaning more to the former...

RZehr wrote:I don't have a problem with arguing. If it is done correctly, I believe it is a valuable and needed aspect of life and learning.

Wade and RZehr: I'm probably operating under a different definition for "arguing". My words for the type of exchange you describe would be "discussion"; "inquiry"; "examination and exchange of available information". I agree this is valuable and is the type of conversation we used within the academic community for the most part (there were a few exceptions who had fragile egos ).

My definition of argument/arguing involves accusations, name calling and ad hominem attacks with implied and overt immature insults.

There's a lot of nastiness in the public conversation today: some celebrity supporter of Hillary called Trump's son autistic as an insult for one example.

You and many Mennonites have an excellent understanding of good conversation. It's a relief to be able to see that occur in such an otherwise toxic environment on the internet.

MaxPC wrote:

RZehr wrote:I don't have a problem with arguing. If it is done correctly, I believe it is a valuable and needed aspect of life and learning.

I'm probably operating under a different definition for "arguing", RZehr. My words for the type of exchange you describe would be "discussion"; "inquiry"; "examination and exchange of available information". I agree this is valuable and is the type of conversation we used within the academic community for the most part (there were a few exceptions who had fragile egos ).

My definition of argument/arguing involves accusations, name calling and ad hominem attacks with implied and overt immature insults.

Thanks for providing your arguments regarding the proper usage of the word "argue." Maybe you can both be correct!

A good forum has moderators who prevent out of control behaviour or one person dominating the conversation.

MN has unusually lax moderation, compared to other places. It's one step removed from 4chan.

An easy way to improve the tone of online forums is to encourage people to use their real names; then they have to stand behind what they say with real life repercussions if they do things they really shouldn't.

ken_sylvania wrote:

MaxPC wrote:

RZehr wrote:I don't have a problem with arguing. If it is done correctly, I believe it is a valuable and needed aspect of life and learning.

I'm probably operating under a different definition for "arguing", RZehr. My words for the type of exchange you describe would be "discussion"; "inquiry"; "examination and exchange of available information". I agree this is valuable and is the type of conversation we used within the academic community for the most part (there were a few exceptions who had fragile egos ).

My definition of argument/arguing involves accusations, name calling and ad hominem attacks with implied and overt immature insults.

Thanks for providing your arguments regarding the proper usage of the word "argue." :mrgreen:Capture.JPG
Maybe you can both be correct!

Yep: my background uses definition #2 to describe argument/arguing.
#1 would be an inquiry method in my world

I still find this forum a refreshing presence in a toxic world of online viciousness.