The rules in question: “don't use a blog to vent” and “don't metablog.”
Briefly, though, I take it as pretty basic that hostile argument in comment boxes never works. If you actually want someone to change her mind, friendly questions might do it. Long posts on your own blog might do it. Chances aren't good, but I've seen people adjust position after such exchanges. The shadowy facsimiles of friendship that comprise most of our online “relationships” aren't good for much, but you need at least that much if you want even a ghost of a chance of changing someone's mind. Why should I even bother with terse, aggressive comments from total strangers?
So I think my new rule should be never to respond to someone who hasn't already demonstrated good faith.
Or maybe I should implement Zeke's rule: “Remember to pre-emptively disavow every conceivable inference that you don’t intend next time!”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I actually have a long-standing rule about not responding to jerk-headed comments from people who are clearly more interested in fighting than any kind of dialogue. I even manage to follow it, like, 30, maybe 40 percent of the time!
I kind of wonder what it is about the Internet that engenders the urge to argue; there are times when I'm reading comments and realize that I'm actively looking for a fight. It's not a feeling I'm proud of, but it's there. Is it just safety + (relative) anonymity + typing mechanism?
I'm never tempted to drop by someone's blog and start a fight just because I think they're wrong. I don't really know what drives people to make jerk-headed comments.
What's happened to me a few times is that someone drops a quick scornful comment, and then I dig in my heels a bit because they didn't really have much to say, and then when it turns out they have an interesting point it's hard to back down. Whereas if the interesting point had been made to begin with, we could have had a nice little talk.
People who are already convinced that they're smarter than everyone else get off on “winning” arguments. (I say “winning” because such people act as both participant and judge.)
Yeah, I, uh, may be tempted to do that occasionally, and still don't really know what drives it. The "thinking I'm smarter I'm everyone else" thing is probably a good bet, though -- despite the scads and scads of evidence that ought to disabuse me of that belief. Sigh.
Post a Comment