Refusing to consider other side.

[thejboy88]

I have looked at a number of internet forums and discussions in my life and the one thing which irritates me above all else about them are the people who post comments whose sole purpose is to state that the people they disagree with are wrong.

You get this in virtually every form of internet discussion. Someone puts forward a legitimate topic for discussion and everythings fine. But as soon as someone says an opinion that people don't agree with, they are on them like a pack of wolves. Making comments like "you can't say that" or "you are wrong". Just throwing those statements out there without even explaining why they disagree with the opposing viewpoint.

I think these people are reffered to as "trolls" but that could be something different.

I usually just abandon forum discussions whenever these people make their presence known. How about you guys? Do you agree that these people are an issue the internet needs to deal with? Because frankly nothing seems to be happening to prevent those sorts of comments.

 

[Chefodeath]

If you make an objection without any reason to back you up, then yes, thats an unmerrited troll post.

If you have a reason though, then I say its open-season.

 

[Kakashi on crack]

The internet isn't dealing with em any time soon

I personally get irritated with them, but a lot of times they aren't trolls, just people with differing views. If they put forth a legitamate arguement, I don't mind too much. The people who tend to just say "this is not correct" without even stating why are the ones I tend to become condescending over as I feel they could be giving a good answer, or constructive criticism but they don't.

The post above this one basically sums it all up though.

 

[GaryH]

I always consider both sides. Anyone who doesn't agree with that is wrong!

Seriously though, that sort of person is the bane of my existence. A good debate is pretty much the only way that we can move forward and discover new ideas as a group. If a decent, rational debate goes right then usually everyone comes out the other side having learned something.

This basically never happens on the internet.

It's largely down to this fallacy that an opinion cannot be wrong, simply by virtue of being an opinion. People don't seem to understand that "*insert thing here* sucks!" isn't an opinion, or that "I think *insert thing here suck!" is an opinion, but one which can be disproven ("I think the sky is green" is also an opinion. See my point?) This, coupled with anonymity and a stubborn refusal to back down when proven wrong (or to continue believing that they are right despite vast evidence to the contrary.), seems to be the perfect recipe for turning a reasonable debate into an all out verbal war.

Case in point, there was a topic recently that posed a hypothetical question asking precisely why it was wrong to kill. It got to four pages and had to be locked due to the sheer weight of people accusing the OP of being a troll; killing a potentially enlightening debate before it had chance to see the light of day.

I, personally, will stand up for what I know to be right and explain my point to the best of my ability. If proven wrong (and it does happen) I will apologise and back down, grateful for the opportunity to learn something new. All we can do is to do our best to be better people than they are.

"Never argue with an idiot. They bring you down to their level and beat you with experience."

 

[Legion]

It's mainly because of this that I frequently stop posting on internet forums.

 

[KiKiweaky]

Its not just an issue on the internet, nobody likes being told they are wrong and very few people will admit when they are wrong.

Take for example the wikileaks story, on one side people think its good to get all the secrets out and on the other people believe we dont need to know everthing. I cant remember how long the thread was but it was bigger than most and neither side would come around to what the other thought.

 

[johnzaku]

I always at least try to consider the other side, but I certainly admit that there are some things I "know" I'm right about.

Meaning I'm very certain based on my own observations, but I still always back it up.

 

[omicron1]

This tends to happen because people come into a discussion with a great degree of certainty that they are right. Generally, people don't come into a discussion to learn, or to change their minds. They come to change other people's minds. And so, their first reaction to something they don't agree with is not "Huh, let me consider that," but "That must be wrong, because I am right."
It happens in physical life, too - get a group of people who disagree on an issue together, and you'll generally have a flamewar long before you have a chance of a meaningful discussion. The reason this doesn't happen as often outside the Internet is that, whereas in real life people tend to gravitate towards groups that they agree with and learn not to discuss certain controversial issues, on the Internet people of all stripes are thrown together with limited common ties.
For instance, on the Escapist, our main tie together is "gaming culture." Within that grouping, there are conservatives and democrats, Christians and atheists, PC gamers and consolites. We have our common cause, but we also have a dozen other causes that we completely disagree about, and discussing such things tends to foment discontent. And so we have flame wars, and the R&P "wild west" forum.