Yup this cite is full of people hiding under bridges waiting for the write moment to say "you're wrong"
Editor's Note: You're Wrong
- Thread starter Russ Pitts
- Start date
... how?Irridium said:Nuke_em_05 said:
1+1=Fun on a bun.
... how could I have been... so foolish?
/tear
You are correct, people all over the internet love to say "your wrong". But there is more to the story than just overly competitive or argumentative people. Any article worth writing is going to contain something new, and scare people, or something controversial. An article "The sky is blue" won't get people saying "Your wrong", but are you going to waste your time writing an article sighting 3 sources for proof the sky is blue? Will any publisher actually print such a story, even online? It's just plain boring.
On the other hand an article "Video games cause dogs to commit suicide" is both controversial and will instigate a fear reaction. It will have lots of "your wrong" comments.
On the other hand an article "Video games cause dogs to commit suicide" is both controversial and will instigate a fear reaction. It will have lots of "your wrong" comments.
The problem is... -and yes please feel free to tell me I'm wrong- we are aware of the limits of our own intelligence for the most part, very few of us have the sort of I.Q that renders us immune to insecurity and because info constructed by more intelligent ppl is freely available these days, we delight in using it as a weapon to defend our own ego and bash someone who is probably far more gifted as a writer and formulator of opinion than we are, without saying anything we actually thought of ourselves. Hell every thread here is a response to the article. So no matter how strong your rebuttal is, you will always be playing second fiddle to the person who used what really matters... imagination.
You are absolutely unbelievable.incal11 said:
First of all, they probably picked the theme of the issue long before our "discussion".
Second, this would be a much better example for you to use:
But seriously, holy crap.incal11 said:
I'm done here.
I look forward to starting every commentary I make on this issue with, 'You're wrong.' Will I get a special Letters to the Editor issue dedicated to me on the next?
The first person you should always say 'You're wrong' is yourself. Tell yourself why you're wrong and then try to convince yourself that you're not. If you can't, change. It'll have an amazing effect: when other people tell you you're wrong, you'll be more open to their views (since you already emulated them) but also less likely to change your point of view over unimportant details (since you already brought them up yourself, so if someone brings up something you didn't think of it's a legitimately new viewpoint). Everyone do that, being right all the time is overrated.
The first person you should always say 'You're wrong' is yourself. Tell yourself why you're wrong and then try to convince yourself that you're not. If you can't, change. It'll have an amazing effect: when other people tell you you're wrong, you'll be more open to their views (since you already emulated them) but also less likely to change your point of view over unimportant details (since you already brought them up yourself, so if someone brings up something you didn't think of it's a legitimately new viewpoint). Everyone do that, being right all the time is overrated.
How many days did our argument last ? Anyway I did say maybe, and I was mocking ourselves.Nuke_em_05 said:
I know it's hard being wrong, I feel for you.
Farewell then.
Exactly, and that's what I did about the issue discussed in that other thread.The Random One said:
Doing that I often find that I'm wrong, but not in this case.
Also that's what "Dialectics" are for, getting new perspectives and insights ; not just bickering, like the Anglo-saxons tend to believe.
One possible, cynical reason is that people like feeling they are better than other people, and feel the need to prove it by correcting them. Even when they themselves are wrong.
Personally, I just have a pathological need to correct most things. If someone thinks they know something, and they're wrong, I see it almost as a duty to correct them of the misconception.
Personally, I just have a pathological need to correct most things. If someone thinks they know something, and they're wrong, I see it almost as a duty to correct them of the misconception.
I rather agree, I swear most people's responses to me start with the word "No" regardless of what we're talking about or if it's even relevant. It's annoying as all hell.
I also fully know that I often disagree with people, thus being the "No-Man" but at the same time instead of just saying it because I don't think about it and just say no for no reason I try to be reasonable >_>
I also fully know that I often disagree with people, thus being the "No-Man" but at the same time instead of just saying it because I don't think about it and just say no for no reason I try to be reasonable >_>
When it comes to right and wrong, what matters most is evidence and supportive variables, theories, ideas, etc. If someone posts an article that is flat out wrong, because the evidence doesn't indicate that they are correct. Then I think that such articles are worthy of being attributed with the "wrong" status. The worst articles are ones that are not based on facts, rather opinions. And in that arena there can only be controversy. Especially when such opinions tend to distort the facts. That is wrong, in my opinion. If I'm wrong, then I don't want to be right.
If someone tells you a piece of information, using your own internal error-checking, you can decide that they speak truth, they speak lies, they speak truth but think they are lying, they speak lies but think they are telling the truth. Or you can be unable to make a conclusion.
On the internet trolling has become such a common occurrence that many people have become good at reading intent as well as content.
Fact A - true/false/unknown?
With enough perspectives and enough information you're bound to see the answer, weather in the "Fact A" post, in the responses, or through a combination of a progressive *discussion*.
Each post/comment in a discussion should be additive, taking in the previous posts and putting the individual "take" on the topic. It could be thought of like a work of art with many, many paint brushes, each adding on and adding on. (or maybe hundreds of finger-painters on one big wall?)
Trolls are people that draw big smiley faces over everyone's else work. Sometimes it's nice to see. INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUISNESS, trolls are here to keep the balance (they may not know it).
With any wrong there must be some right, you just gotta see it from the right angle.
On the internet trolling has become such a common occurrence that many people have become good at reading intent as well as content.
Fact A - true/false/unknown?
With enough perspectives and enough information you're bound to see the answer, weather in the "Fact A" post, in the responses, or through a combination of a progressive *discussion*.
Each post/comment in a discussion should be additive, taking in the previous posts and putting the individual "take" on the topic. It could be thought of like a work of art with many, many paint brushes, each adding on and adding on. (or maybe hundreds of finger-painters on one big wall?)
Trolls are people that draw big smiley faces over everyone's else work. Sometimes it's nice to see. INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUISNESS, trolls are here to keep the balance (they may not know it).
With any wrong there must be some right, you just gotta see it from the right angle.
What's great is, when I say the words, "You're Wrong", I can feel the dopamine flowing through my brain like liquid rice cakes! There's nothing more rewarding than feeling like I'm right and you're wrong.
As other people have said, it's human nature.
I've lived for X years in contentment believing Y, and that has served me well. The fact that you have also lived X years but believe Z is obviously a statistical anomaly or oversight on your part which I will now correct purely because it's not X. That mindset has been around for a while and has led to far more noteworthy occurrences than a few forum scuffles.
As to gamers, (if we assume there is an actual correlation between being a gamer and being freely argumentative) our hobby or past time that has given us that moniker is pretty ego-centric. It was I who rescued the princess, blew up the enemy fleet, whom the villagers turned to and therefore I'm the one that matters. So yeah, I can see that being a factor, but I honestly don't think that being a gamer is indicative of someone who is argumentative.
I've lived for X years in contentment believing Y, and that has served me well. The fact that you have also lived X years but believe Z is obviously a statistical anomaly or oversight on your part which I will now correct purely because it's not X. That mindset has been around for a while and has led to far more noteworthy occurrences than a few forum scuffles.
As to gamers, (if we assume there is an actual correlation between being a gamer and being freely argumentative) our hobby or past time that has given us that moniker is pretty ego-centric. It was I who rescued the princess, blew up the enemy fleet, whom the villagers turned to and therefore I'm the one that matters. So yeah, I can see that being a factor, but I honestly don't think that being a gamer is indicative of someone who is argumentative.
