I'm here. Are you there?

[Pæs]

Hello?

Hel-

Yeah, I'm still here. I thought we must have got cut off.

I can only just hear you, have you heard any of what I've been saying?
About... eh, I'm not going to go through it all again.

I was just thinking that, y'know, if you had heard it you might have said made some reply, y'know?
And I wasn't sure if it was just a bad connection or errors in communication or whether you were just ignoring me...
Because, well, let's be fair; quite often I say things and you clearly hear them but don't actually acknowledge it.

I'm not talking just for the hell of it. I'm trying to have a fucking conversation with you and...

I just want you to acknowledge my opinion as being valuable, okay?

Even if you don't think it is, I want it to be responded to respectfully and not only when you agree with it.

Otherwise, why do I even keep talking?

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I admit of being guilty of this. Not with you specifically, but in general.

It's something I'm working on.

[Pæs]

I admit of being guilty of this. Not with you specifically, but in general.

It's something I'm working on.

The piece isn't from me specifically.
It's a response to the general phenomenon.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

I admit of being guilty of this. Not with you specifically, but in general.

It's something I'm working on.

The piece isn't from me specifically.
It's a response to the general phenomenon.

Fair enough. I do also find myself still hitting F5 more than I should. Some habits are hard to break.

I like the piece though, and its a good reminder of what we should be working towards, forumwise.

[Pæs]

One day Paesior asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to go and find the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice.
Shortly afterwards the television came on by itself, and a face could be seen in the static.



       "Oh, for fuck's sake, Paes. What do you want NOW?"

       "O! Eris! Eris whose fingers are ten armies! Eris whose breast is a cannibal dynamo! Eris whose ear is a smoking tomb!
       I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!"

       GET TO THE POINT, PAES.

       "I am filled with angst and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are arguing with one another, the forum is rampant with butthurt,
       whole threads are spagged up by perceived injustices, bipeds are flinging shit, appearing right is valued over being right. O, woe!"

       SO THE FUCK WHAT? EVERYONE CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.

       "But nobody wants it! Everybody hates it."

       OH. WELL, THEN STOP.

       At which moment She turned herself into an oak tree and left Signor Paesior stranded alone with the Discordians.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

One day Paesior asked the messenger spirit Saint Gulik to go and find the Goddess and request Her presence for some desperate advice.
Shortly afterwards the television came on by itself, and a face could be seen in the static.



       "Oh, for fuck's sake, Paes. What do you want NOW?"

       "O! Eris! Eris whose fingers are ten armies! Eris whose breast is a cannibal dynamo! Eris whose ear is a smoking tomb!
       I beseech You to lift a heavy burden from my heart!"

       GET TO THE POINT, PAES.

       "I am filled with angst and tormented with terrible visions of pain. Everywhere people are arguing with one another, the forum is rampant with butthurt,
       whole threads are spagged up by perceived injustices, bipeds are flinging shit, appearing right is valued over being right. O, woe!"

       SO THE FUCK WHAT? EVERYONE CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT.

       "But nobody wants it! Everybody hates it."

       OH. WELL, THEN STOP.

       At which moment She turned herself into an oak tree and left Signor Paesior stranded alone with the Discordians.

Wow, that kinda hits to the point. Excellent remix of a classic passage.

[Pæs]

Roger called it first, but I figured the whole piece might be useful.

[Nephew Twiddleton]

Roger called it first, but I figured the whole piece might be useful.

Natch. But riffing off of the idea is a good thing, especially from different perspectives.

I found the PD remix piece funny as well, but it does kinda sum up the mood I'm feeling.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

For years, one of the things I liked most about this place was that you could address the argument in whatever way you wanted to, and people would respond to the argument, not to the person. You could be a total dick to the argument. You could make fun of the argument and say that the argument was an ugly retarded baby playing in a sandbox full of poop, and people would still respond to the argument, and not the person.

Somewhere along the line maybe a year and a half ago, that changed, and if someone made an uninformed, circular, or specious argument, and you called it uninformed, circular, or specious, or god forbid used less than the most delicate e-prime with which to pick it apart, or... worst of all... called it wrong, well, then, it became time for the butthurt and martyrdom and taking sides and accusations of personal vendettas and etc. etc.

Or maybe I'm wrong and it was always this way. I don't know.

[Pæs]

Really, though. There are more respectful ways of attacking an argument than, for example, those mentioned in the post where you discussed the differences, Nigel.

Why is "I'm really tired of your hypersensitive drama" better than "you're a stubborn bitch"?
Would "I'm really tired of your stubborn bitchiness" be better than "you're hypersensitive and dramatic."

Do you think that "I have no more fucking patience for your misanthropic jaded schtick, it's old and boring" is a constructive way of addressing a behaviour?

Is it actually entirely unreasonable to interpret "what you said is stupid and wrong" as "you are stupid and wrong"?
If you're attacking a belief someone holds as stupid, surely "you are stupid if you believe a stupid thing" is implied?
Can you tell someone that the thing they believe is wrong without also saying that they are wrong for believing it?

Would you really be comfortable with someone addressing you with "that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard anyone express and I cannot fathom what made you say it, are you attention-whoring or something?" and refrain from responding as if that was a personal attack, getting butthurt about the accusation of attention whoring?

Personally, I doubt it.

If I said that to you, I would anticipate a fuckload of snarky "oh, but apparently I'm just an attention whore anyway" tacked on to the end of every post. And not just from you, Nigel. I would expect it from a lot of the posters here. I'm just using your examples because I disagree with the distinction you're making between attacking people and attacking behaviour.

(Please don't take the bolded as "definitely Nigel would react like this... other people might also")

You don't have to directly say "you're a fucking cunt" for it to be a personal attack.
"That's the kind of argument a fucking cunt would make." <- Attacking the argument?
"I'm really tired of your constantly being a fucking cunt." <- Attacking a behaviour?

Please...

We'd be better off if the suggestion that anyone was a fucking cunt was left out entirely and a demonstration be made of why the idea is wrong.
Rather than "that idea is stupid because", which I have a hard time believing anyone doesn't take "you are stupid for believing that" from, explain the implications of the idea, and the stupidity should be self-evident.

[Pæs]

The OP wasn't going to start a "what is wrong with PD" thread like all the others, but I suppose I kind of took it that way with the "then stop" piece.

[Placid Dingo]

I got something different from the Then Stop piece. PD is just one of many tools a Discordian can use to find what they want.

If it's not serving your needs, move on.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Really, though. There are more respectful ways of attacking an argument than, for example, those mentioned in the post where you discussed the differences, Nigel.

Why is "I'm really tired of your hypersensitive drama" better than "you're a stubborn bitch"?
Would "I'm really tired of your stubborn bitchiness" be better than "you're hypersensitive and dramatic."

Do you think that "I have no more fucking patience for your misanthropic jaded schtick, it's old and boring" is a constructive way of addressing a behaviour?

Is it actually entirely unreasonable to interpret "what you said is stupid and wrong" as "you are stupid and wrong"?
If you're attacking a belief someone holds as stupid, surely "you are stupid if you believe a stupid thing" is implied?
Can you tell someone that the thing they believe is wrong without also saying that they are wrong for believing it?

Would you really be comfortable with someone addressing you with "that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard anyone express and I cannot fathom what made you say it, are you attention-whoring or something?" and refrain from responding as if that was a personal attack, getting butthurt about the accusation of attention whoring?

Personally, I doubt it.

If I said that to you, I would anticipate a fuckload of snarky "oh, but apparently I'm just an attention whore anyway" tacked on to the end of every post. And not just from you, Nigel. I would expect it from a lot of the posters here. I'm just using your examples because I disagree with the distinction you're making between attacking people and attacking behaviour.

(Please don't take the bolded as "definitely Nigel would react like this... other people might also")

You don't have to directly say "you're a fucking cunt" for it to be a personal attack.
"That's the kind of argument a fucking cunt would make." <- Attacking the argument?
"I'm really tired of your constantly being a fucking cunt." <- Attacking a behaviour?

Please...

We'd be better off if the suggestion that anyone was a fucking cunt was left out entirely and a demonstration be made of why the idea is wrong.
Rather than "that idea is stupid because", which I have a hard time believing anyone doesn't take "you are stupid for believing that" from, explain the implications of the idea, and the stupidity should be self-evident.

Half the joy of being here, for me, was that people pushed each other's limits, and forced them to be better people. I don't find that anywhere else; not in places where people can't stay cool in the face of being told they said something stupid, or in the face of having their ideas and behaviors challenged, or being called on it when they said something that they clearly hadn't bothered to think through.

Even in your examples up there, you are conflating personal attacks with attacks on an argument. I don't know how to make it any clearer that what I liked about  this place was that it was constantly testing me and challenging me to control my monkey reactions.

I don't feel like the blanded down, niced-up, be-careful-of-everyone's-feelings, e-primed PD does a good job of that.

I am also not advocating wholesale assholery toward everyone you disagree with. But your (actually, more notably, Khara's) reaction to Cain's bluntness is a good example of an emotional overreaction to not having actually been insulted, but merely sharply contradicted.

And you know, sometimes when someone says something so utterly preposterously wrong and contrary to everything you know about that person's reasoning skills, it is valid to react with incredulity and challenge their motivations for saying it. It may be a slap in the face, but sometimes people need a slap in the face to make them snap the fuck out of whatever self-indulgence they're wallowing in and actually examine what they're saying. And the challenge is, are you going to dig in your heels and screech, or are you going to actually examine your shit and own it?

If someone is consistently histrionic, and approaching them with milder criticism has had no results or negative results, then yes, sometimes "I am fucking fed up with your histrionic behavior" is an appropriate thing to say.

I still don't think you get the difference between attacking an argument and attacking a person.

"That's the kind of argument a fucking cunt would make."
"I'm really tired of your constantly being a fucking cunt."

These are both personal attacks because they both directly imply that the person making the argument is a fucking cunt. "What you just said was a fucking cunt kind of thing to say" is attacking the argument. It's not an effective attack, because it doesn't explain what about the argument made it a fucking cunt thing to say, so I would hope it would be followed up by "and here's why".

"You are being a fucking cunt" is also a personal attack. However, "The way you are acting right now is making you come across as a fucking cunt" is an attack on a behavior. "You are a histrionic twat" is a personal attack, "It is histrionic and twatty to flounce every time you think someone has criticized you" is addressing a behavior.

Frankly, I think that would would benefit from examining the differences and getting to understand them a little better, in order to be better able to manage your reactions to what you are perceiving as personal slams. You perceived Cain as being disrespectful of you as a human being, when he was, in fact, being disrespectful of the idea that signing whitehouse.gov petitions are "better than doing nothing". How would that thread have gone if, rather than anyone attacking Cain for his perceived attack on you, you had simply considered the question and answered it?

[Cuddlefish]

Didn't you know, Nigel, We are our thoughts. And only the current ones. Forever... So any attack on them, naturally, may as well be an attack on our person...

/sarcasm.

[Pæs]

Um, that whole reply assumed that I was Twid.
I'm not upset or discussing anyone's behaviour towards me.