The changing face of disagreements

I haven't read the article yet but i've always thought that in any discussion if one person resorts to personal comments it means that they know they're losing the essence of the argument.
eg in a game of football - you're losing the ball so you kick the player who has it.

I agree Doodledog

I'm never sure why people think you have to be 'brave' to join in political discussions - no point of view is more important than another. I find that having to defend my point of view makes me think about why I hold it, and I can modify it if I learn something new.

I agree with the article about context, though. Offline, when we listen to someone, we know where their expertise lies, and can judge their opinion accordingly. Online, there is no way of telling whether someone knows about the topic under discussion or not, and a lot of people insist that their opinion is as relevant as that of an expert, which can make for a lot of pointless discussions and misinformation. A virologist can explain why she thinks something about Covid, for instance, and then someone with no training in virology will come along and say 'That's rubbish! in my opinion . . .'

I don't think the article was referring to sites like this, though. It was more about Twitter and similar unmoderated 'anything goes' places. There are so many rules here that I don't think that the communication is natural at all.

No Suzie my post wasn't 'goady' .

It was my opinion which I'm allowed to have just as you are allowed to have an alternative opinion.

I couldn't give a stuff if our opinions vary but i do defend my right to not only have an opinion but to be able to post it.

Thanks for posting this Sarah48. It made me think. I like the ‘Chat’ threads, but I’m also somebody who likes facts, to check things out for myself, and I do like a good debate on things that interest me. I also struggle not to comment when I see ‘facts’ that are not evidence based being promulgated.

The political and news debates in particular aren’t for the faint hearted on Gransnet, as people can be quite vicious in defending their beliefs. The main message I took from the article was to recognise that I’m really annoying - not a keyboard warrior or discourteous I hope, but not good enough at acknowledging why people have reached different conclusions. Onward and upward!

Do we need a dedicated Argument Thread? Somewhere to go to for a good ol' ding dong?
It would be great
(I'm only half joking)

No it wasn’t

lemongrove

Are you looking for an argument Suzie ? Because I doubt very much that Nana is.
Starting a post ‘FGS are you looking for an argument’ is a typical aggressive social media comment.
Read the article.

I’m tired of posts about banning posters and reporting comments you don’t agree with - the post in question was goady . FGS

On social media you see one facet of a person, in real life you may be aware of contributory factors to a person’s attitude which may be a consideration.. True JaxJacky. The article says: Nuance, reflection and mutual understanding are casualties of the crossfire with on-line arguments.

FGS - are you looking for an argument? I couldn’t disagree more with what you’ve posted. Disagree by all means but the first part is unwarranted Suzie. Read the article please.

nanna Agree. I'm sure they do - the writer of the article draws attention to this.

I would never report a post unless it was racist. If it was rude I would just ignore it the same as in real life. No point in engaging with rude, offensive people. I always think they have had something difficult in their lives to be like that.

No gauntlet. I have absolutely no problem disagreeing on GN. I have managed to have very lively disagreements mostly on politics and have only been deleted once. And they were right to delete me.

My thoughts exactly lemongrove

Or because it became obvious that you could be reported simply because you disagreed with a post and someone took offensive rather than debating the point?

I agree with this point and I can't be the only one to have had the odd post deleted lately because somebody has disagreed and reported it rather than reply.

It does rather leave you scratching your head

I haven't read the article yet as there's rather a lot going on this morning.

Are you looking for an argument Suzie ? Because I doubt very much that Nana is.
Starting a post ‘FGS are you looking for an argument’ is a typical aggressive social media comment.
Read the article.

NanaandGrampy

Very interesting read.

Maybe the change in tone here is because now posters are fearful of being banned for breaking a rule that they didn't know was there?

Or because it became obvious that you could be reported simply because you disagreed with a post and someone took offensive rather than debating the point?

You mention Muse you didn't agree with a post but didn't say so - maybe lots of people feel like that now? Unable to disagree?

FGS - are you looking for an argument? I couldn’t disagree more with what you’ve posted.

Galaxy, your contribution makes me smile. Interpretation of the written word indeed. I can't decide whether your statement is a gauntlet or tongue in cheek or..... whatever. I'm sure this is exactly what you intended and rightly so. Well done.

Pamela I agree with you and I have found the same. I got told off for using the phrase ‘pet hates’ when in fact it was meant to be a lighthearted look at small irritants in life. I nearly left because I thought if the people here are like that, with little sense of humour, well ‘I’m off’ Glad I stayed though because it has definitely got better .

That was certainly some read and very interesting delving into the human psyche!
Thank I enjoyed it but need to have another read to analyse it and comment properly.
And that is exactly the issue for me. Like several here I don’t have an encyclopaedic knowledge of most subjects and I just post my feelings. Yes,muse flippant comments at times, but true to the heart. I guess that infuriates some into disagreements and giving me the (sigh) word, but that's fine. We all express ourselves differently, especially on social media. Live and let live.

NanaandGrampy

Very interesting read.

Maybe the change in tone here is because now posters are fearful of being banned for breaking a rule that they didn't know was there?

Or because it became obvious that you could be reported simply because you disagreed with a post and someone took offensive rather than debating the point?

You mention Muse you didn't agree with a post but didn't say so - maybe lots of people feel like that now? Unable to disagree?

Spot on nana I think that’s exactly the case.
Things will be more anodyne if that’s the case, which isn’t great. It will become like the Universities ‘no platforming’ which has gone on up to now ( although that could change).
An interesting read, thank you to Sarah48

FannyCornforth

*Muse*, that was me - who said that it was a bit uninteresting at present.

Thank you FC. I spent ages on GN yesterday and couldn't remember. A point was made in your thread about why such threads were not appearing. The current ^climate* is to blame. That I do agree with that.

If the title of thread grabs me, I continue to read on. I do find myself drawn to the Chat one.

N&G well said.

Excellent article. I'd hope that someone at GNHQ spots it.

NanaandGrampy

Very interesting read.

Maybe the change in tone here is because now posters are fearful of being banned for breaking a rule that they didn't know was there?

Or because it became obvious that you could be reported simply because you disagreed with a post and someone took offensive rather than debating the point?

You mention Muse you didn't agree with a post but didn't say so - maybe lots of people feel like that now? Unable to disagree?

Good post n&g!

Sarah48 thanks for the post, got the old brain cells working early!
Although it’s a bit sad in places with its conclusions, in some areas, like marketing, it makes logical sense. GN is different from some other social media in that it’s rules of transgression are different and it’s general audience is niche. I’m like some others, I follow threads, comment on some, particularly if I think I can be helpful. I rarely confront because in real life I would address any issues face to face, one on one, without an audience. On social media you see one facet of a person, in real life you may be aware of contributory factors to a person’s attitude which may be a consideration. I like GN, but I’m wary in what I say sometimes.

Do I post on here or not? I have made a decision not to post on anything that could be a bit controversial. I am not a particularly ‘deep’ person so,like grandmajet don’t have an encyclopaedic knowledge of most subjects.
In real life my usually flippant remarks are not taken seriously and I don’t seem to upset anyone.
On here, however, even if I accompany my posts with a laughing ? there are so many posters that seem to lack the ability to see my remarks are a bit tongue in cheek.
I started what I thought was a lighthearted thread and some of the responses were really nasty. I don’t think that I am allowed to name the thread as that would be a thread about a thread?

Muse, I think you’re right that it’s the comments that make a thread interesting/amusing or otherwise. The interest is in seeing other people’s take on the same subject.
I’m not always comfortable disagreeing publicly either; I’m not sure if that’s because I’m often uncertain of my facts, or that I don’t want to be ‘attacked’, whereas I’m often just curious as to why people feel a certain way.
The article is interesting and led to a discussion with my husband yesterday evening on this subject - he is of very old fashioned working class origins but now is distinctly right of centre and can get a bit of stick for this.

DH blames a lot of things on social media.

Often he's right - like the misinformation about Covid-19.

Sometimes, though, it can be a force for good, like the supportive posts on GN.