Are you like this face-to-face? page 3

Originally posted by MyTie:

See, like this post, flabby, I just read the first sentence. It’s pointed and insulting, so I just kind of skimmed over the rest. Nothing I saw noteworthy, so I’m just going to dismiss it.

Yes because, as we all know, the first sentence is always the most important part of a post, even when it has nothing to do with a different part of the post.

And you wonder why I don’t answer many of your questions. Try to approach the debate without heaving out a smelly mud monkey on the middle of the table.

Okay.

But anyhow, I think it’s easier to be ‘rude’ towards ‘faceless’ strangers that you have very strong clashing opinions with.
But then again I have had some heated arguments face to face…I wll point out though that I don’t go ‘seeking’ debates about religion in real life, but if someone sits down next to me and tries to tell me that atheist scientists are conspiriing against God…well, I have to say something. But on the whole, most religious people I argue in real life with are decent, down to earth people that just happen to believe in something I think is imaginary.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

QFT.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

My hypothesis is that bipolarality <?> is an innately latent condition of which is triggered by certain mechanisms and it is the troubles with those mechanisms that causes one to sporadically fluctuate between mental states of which clinically registers as so-called insanity.

there should be a comma before “and”. “of which” should just be “which”. and the last part “of which clinically registers as so-called insanity” is just plain wrong.

i’ve found you out. you are so bad with words, you have no choice but to obfuscate with your grandiloquence and stretch it out with your verbosity; you can’t speak normal English. you can only spam lexicon in large, improperly conjuncted chains.

Your failing came with “speak normal english”

I just type my first impressions down and that happens to be what I would say instead if typing wasn’t so necessary to forums discussions.

In any case, I am not really a verbose braggart at heart. I spam lexicon in large, as you said, but that is the vernacular I am most intimately associated with and therefore the most comfortable way for me to communicate my ideas

Besides, aren’t the ideas I’m offering to the central platter good enough to warrant compensation as to my superficially deficient comprehension of the grammatical conventions and thus qualitatively equilibriate the aformentioned devices?

Honestly simeng, your posts are hard to decipher. More than that, they’re annoying to read because the word choice is usually off. If this is how you speak to people, I’m surprised you haven’t been punished for it.

I feel that the goal of communication is to be understood. You’re hard to understand, so you’re not really good at communicating.

To the original post:

How I act in person and over the internet are fairly similar. It’s less obvious since certain things don’t translate over text at all, but it’s still the same. I can only think of three times I have argued religion in person, and two of those I’m fairly certain I didn’t start. I argue it more here because it’s an appropriate place. In person, there’s rarely a good opportunity to argue religion.

Originally posted by Ketsy:

Honestly simeng, your posts are hard to decipher. More than that, they’re annoying to read because the word choice is usually off. If this is how you speak to people, I’m surprised you haven’t been punished for it.

I feel that the goal of communication is to be understood. You’re hard to understand, so you’re not really good at communicating.

I just picked these words up from people’s conversations and reading (philosophical texts often incorporate large words, mind you <!>). There is no pecking order here; nobody is to be left out of comprehension. However, while i will try to limit my contributions to “small” words, I am serious in saying these are really my first impressions

Its not that your word choice is hard to decipher, simeng. Its that you type in large walls of text, with no regard to paragraphs or logical flow. If you would add white space into your posts, they would be much easier to read, and the flow would be greatly improved.

Also bear in mind that the population of intelligent minds in SD is actually fairly small. Not everyone is going to be able to read your word choice readilly, if at all. Heck many often stumble over my word choice, and I make a conscious effort to make my posts as accessible as I can.

I have never had any problems with Vika’s posts. On the other side of the spectrum, Karma always has large posts and a “unique” way of expressing himself, but even that I understand. When I read Simeng’s posts, all I see is one long stream of extremely expensive words tripping over each other until the very end. You can convey your ideas in whatever way you want, but I, at least, would like to be sure they’re received by as many people as possible. Don’t think you’re reaching many if you continue on like this.

It’s still your choice, and if you think it’s not being arrogant, then good on you, but you’re not going to have many readers.

Either everyone has opinions and no one should care

This kind of thinking promotes bigotry. I’m fine if you think that painting looks great (even if it looks like it was painted by a child and was sold for billions of dollars). I’m good if you think that hamburger is delicious (even though it makes me puke). Heck, you can think you’re better at chess than I am (even though I beat you at it in 75% of cases)! But once you start thinking homosexuals are spawns from the devil? Black people deserve to be treated badly? Women should not have voting rights? Then, yes, I will battle your supposed “opinion” until the very end.

Oh, no, I’m not suggesting to silence speech at all. I’m suggesting that we purge ignorance and hatred from society. How? I currently don’t have an answer. But people on the internet expressing their supposed opinions that have a form of hatred or inequality in them can expect me to “care”.

We can’t have it both ways, and we certainly can’t have it so only the opinions that agree with us are displayed and everyone likes us personally.

Sounds like a non-argument.

You can personally dislike whomever you want to dislike, but I’m not going to join in with any bigotry. You can hate black people, but you’ll have to deal with us if you think they deserve less rights.

Related to the OP, no, I’m not like this in real life, because this is specifically a discussion section. People don’t randomly come into my room and state “hey, I really hate dogs, let’s discuss on how we should kill them all”. I have discussions after a very interesting movie, or when we’re directly affected by it, but when I come in this forum there’s a discussion in every thread, and you don’t do much else than discuss it.

Originally posted by Darkruler2005:Karma always has large posts and a “unique” way of expressing himself, but even that I understand.

I honestly have a very hard time understanding him. A big part of it is how his thoughts while writing seem to rapidly change, and go in random directions. One second he’ll be talking about something, and in that same sentence be talking about something that has absolutely nothing to do with the first part of the sentence. Add grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation onto that. Finally, his posts are usually very distasteful and directed at people. I’ve taken to skipping his posts altogether lately. Any tips to understanding him would be appreciated.

That’s easy, understanding the core message is usually the key. Remember that you can flag posts if people get messy, but other than that you can still see the main message he’s trying to give. His posts are long, sometimes repetitive, and may include irrelevant issues, but at least I can understand him. That includes the majority of people, really.

Oh. Well then all his posts have said the same thing: “MyTie, you are wrong, and an idiot”. The core meaning was clear. His supporting arguments, though, might as well be written in German.

No, that would be the irrelevant, insulting part. I’m sure the main message would be something along the lines of “you have stated X, but this is not in line with Y, blah, blah”.

Mind you, I’m talking generally, so you could always find examples where the core of his post is exactly that.

Maybe that’s why he comes across as such a jerk. All I can understand is the insults, which seem to be the only times he types it clearly.

with Karma i roughly skip every second paragraph or every second sentence. too much redundancy. but overall it usually borders comprehensibility, if you just ignore the overused symbols.

with Vika i sometimes have to look up a word, but overall her writing is very clear.

Related to the OP, no, I’m not like this in real life, because this is specifically a discussion section. People don’t randomly come into my room and state “hey, I really hate dogs, let’s discuss on how we should kill them all”. I have discussions after a very interesting movie, or when we’re directly affected by it, but when I come in this forum there’s a discussion in every thread, and you don’t do much else than discuss it.

that’s why i don’t like real life. too much triviality. to me, all this trivial socialising, partying etc that people do is just filling up blanks. that’s not life. debate is life. intellectual discourse.

a day without laughter is no waste. a day without learning is a waste. a day without change is a waste.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

with Vika i sometimes have to look up a word, but overall her writing is very clear.

I try to keep it that way, but I can understand why not everyone does. When I really get into it, slinging terminology around like confetti, it does lead to a lot of complaints for that reason – lots and lots and lots of new words to look up.

I have no problems with Karma’s writing, but its like listening to an old long-retired guy talk; the way it meanders between different topics. A lot of the post-war era old-folk talk exactly like that. He just does the same thing in text.

With simeng, I’m reminded a lot of a good guy I knew once. He would always use a long word in place of a short one, and try to impress people with his verbosity, and talent for twisting words around. There was always this one annoying woman who would listen to him talk, then correct him on where he was talking bullshit – and why. Somehow out of that grew a long, long friendship that lasted till the year after his wife died. He never stopped talking like that though. I suppose that was part of why he always seemed so lonely.

that’s why i don’t like real life. too much triviality. to me, all this trivial socialising, partying etc that people do is just filling up blanks. that’s not life.

Really? I’m no party animal, but it sure feels good to spend time with friends. That, and spending time with the wife.

debate is life. intellectual discourse.

It’s only really part of the day when I have time for it, unfortunately. I do like discussions online, but face-to-face discussions usually are annoying and people don’t really logically formulate their arguments. I prefer to keep the discussions online, and do other fun stuff out there in the real world.

well, this has been thouroughly derailed.

Wouldn’t say so. The OP may be asking specifically to “atheists” whether or not they behave in real life as they behave online. I’m broadening the subject.

I had the distinct feeling they were asking anyone really, as to whether we behave the same way when a strong belief invades up close and personal, as we do online.

Originally posted by simeng:

How can no one ever trying to debate me in real life be a flawed point? Are you watching everything I do and I just forgot debating someone?

Everyone is louder and more obnoxious on the internet, it’s a sad truth. The feeling of being anonymous makes it easier for them to behave poorly, which is too bad.

actually, i kinda like it that way.

Haha, yeah maybe the world would become a less interesting place if the internet become more serious and polite.

Originally posted by FlabbyWoofWoof:

Haha, yeah maybe the world would become a less interesting place if the internet become more serious and polite.

Certainly nothing wrong with parts of it becoming that way.

less random nonsense would be nice. but i like how it brings out the deepest and crudest and normally most censored or flowered up in people, that’s normally only shared with like-minded people if at all. it takes away a large part of inhibition, which is good. it brings things out into the open that otherwise stay more-or-less covered or masked.

and of course, paradoxily it also makes people far more elogant. everyone on the internet can express themselves far more eloquently, clearly and coherently than in any normal auditive conversation.

Originally posted by OmegaDoom:

and of course, paradoxily it also makes people far more elogant. everyone on the internet can express themselves far more eloquently, clearly and coherently than in any normal auditive conversation.

Very, very true. It is often used to bypass a physical disability that serves as a barrier to communication, and to being treated as an equal.