The Disagreement Hierarchy - Read and improve your posting.

[Chief]

Where does your last post fit?

The bottom three are really, really boring to read unless they are really, really clever or witty.

Put them on your "to stop doing" list.

The next one up is just a lazy way to go. We all do it but know we should try harder.

Aim for one of the top three.

 

[vealesy]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Up Yours.

 

[tandino]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Is there something I'm missing Chieftain?

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Probably.

 

[theGimp]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Complex thread.

 

[Tex_21]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Chief fails-red x.

 

[Sigh RolleyEyes]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

"If moving up the disagreement hierarchy makes people less mean, that will make most of them happier. Most people don't really enjoy being mean; they do it because they can't help it."

maybe you could make it a rule Chief that people have to say something nice to/about another poster before they say something mean (if they have to be mean at all that is).

also, as well as red and yellow cards maybe there could be green and/or blue cards for being especially nice to people?

 

[ManInTheArena]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

also, as well as red and yellow cards maybe there could be green and/or blue cards for being especially nice to people?

Dude I think your on the wrong forum. Did you mean to post this on the Ballet forum? http://www.bigballet.com/forum

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Rainbow Card!

 

[Upgrayedd]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Ranging from responding to tone to counterargument(what everyone thinks they are)

Its much easier hanging dirt on your opponent in discussions then using your intelligence to prove a point.

 

[Sigh RolleyEyes]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Its much easier hanging dirt on your opponent in discussions then using your intelligence to prove a point.

stfu you whorethorn flog!!

that really was easy. thanks for the tip

 

[bunsen burner]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

I usually do a mix of the top three and then slide in some bottom rung stuff to get the quoted poster fired up.

People always do the "respond to tone" on me when quoting me. If I had a dollar for every time some twat agreed with my post but quoted me and tried to argue with me I'd have my own private jet by now. I'd just be flying over f***ers heads.

 

[FIGJAM]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

I usually do a mix of the top three and then slide in some bottom rung stuff to get the quoted poster fired up.

Contradiction: I personally doubt you venture too far up that hierarchy buns. I'd find some examples, but I can't be arsed.

Name Calling: Ya d:ckead!

 

[bunsen burner]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Contradiction: I personally doubt you venture too far up that hierarchy buns. I'd find some examples, but I can't be arsed.

Humour me. Go find some examples.

 

[EasternTiger]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Very interesting topic this. I sometimes don't think before I post (as thinking requires effort)

eg

It's obvious to any intelligent person the OP has neither of these and is living vicariously through the opinions of others. His evangelical stance on GW is evidence his brain enjoys mixing fantasy with reality.
Money: NO
Drugs: YES.

Now if I go to the disagreement hierarchy chart, I can clearly see I have made an ad hominem attack on the poster, which is on the lower rung of the ladder...and really added nothing of substance to the debate.

Chief took umbrage and responded with

Jesus ET stop being so ridiculously petty. Keep on topic or leave.

At first glance, I thought the Chief was resorting to name calling. He did call me Jesus so I guess he was responding to tone. Chief had gone up a gear and was in front of the argument at this stage. Of course I pwned him with my next response, but that's neither here nor there.

It takes effort to counterargue and refute the central points of an argument. This is why most of my posts in debates are of the ad hominem or contradiction type. I clearly need to work on my posting.

I can't believed i just learned something valuable. On Bigfooty no less.
Thanks Chief

 

[FIGJAM]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Humour me. Go find some examples.

I'm only taking the piss bb!

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Chief took umbrage and responded with

As I said, you were being petty posting about a disagreement in a different thread(s) on an entirely different topic just to score a cheap point on someone. It's one of the most boring types of posts to read.

 

[fairdinkum]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

As I said, you were being petty posting about a disagreement in a different thread(s) on an entirely different topic just to score a cheap point on someone. It's one of the most boring types of posts to read.

Have you been reading KP's stuff in the thread about the Bomb?

 

[bit_pattern]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

 

[ReservoirDog]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

---------------------------------------------------------
^ Everybody posting above this line is an asshat.

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

---------------------------------------------------------
^ The guy posting immediately above this line is gaaaaaawn.

 

[fairdinkum]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

--------------------------------------------
^The guy above this line is asking for trouble, which is sad, because I like him as a poster. He should probably PM and ask me about my dealings with mods on this site before trying this angle to make a difference. Heck, I didn't even try this angle myself, but because I follow the same team as a group of posters who did, I got a holiday anyway.



EDIT: Nooooooooooooooooooooooo.

 

[HarryTiger]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

I'm glad I found this, and the original source http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy

Thanks HT

 

[Chief]

Re: The Disagreement Hierarchy - Read an improve your posting.

Seth Godin weighs in...

http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2009/11/how-to-lose-an-argument-online.html

How to lose an argument online

1. Have an argument. Once you start an argument, not a discussion, you've already lost. Think about it: have you ever changed your mind because someone online started yelling at you? They might get you to shut up, but it's unlikely they've actually changed your opinion.
2. Forget the pitfalls of Godwin's law. Any time you mention Hitler or even Communist China or Bill O'Reilly, you've lost.
3. Use faulty analogies. If someone is trying to make a point about, say, health care, try to make an analogy to something conceptually unrelated, like the space shuttle program, and you've lost.
4. Question motives. The best way to get someone annoyed and then have them ignore you is to bypass any thoughtful discussion of facts and instead question what's in it for the person on the other end. Make assumptions about their motivations and lose their respect.
5. Act anonymously. What are the chances that heckled comments from the bleachers will have an impact?
6. Threaten to take action in another venue. Insist that this will come back to haunt the other person. Guarantee you will spread the word or stop purchasing.
7. Bring up the slippery slope. Actually, the slope isn't that slippery. People don't end up marrying dogs, becoming cannibals or harvesting organs because of changes in organization, technology or law.
8. Go to the edges. This is a variant of the slippery slope, in which you bring up extremes at either end of whatever spectrum is being discussed.

So, what works?