What phrases or topics immediately shut down your interest in a conversation?

[sethisjimmy]

"privileged"

No. No matter who you are, you are always going to be more privileged than someone else, so don't use this word to demean others. As soon as I see this word I tend to ignore the rest of the argument, because it's clear to me this person has no intention of giving any actual perspective, and is more interested in playing a game of "who has it worse".

 

[Mr Companion]

Am I the only one that (blank}?

No, no you are not a unique snowflake or special like mummy told you. We in fact are all homogeneous shambling fleshbags with no special purpose or meaning and we cling helplessly to a dirty rock spinning round and round a sun that will eventually explode. You are not special, anything you ever think feel or do has been done so a thousand times over. There are billions of us and one day you will pass away, only to be replaced by another just like you, and within a decade or two nobody will remember. You're not smart, you're not a scientist. You're not even a full time employee.

Also forums asking if I will be getting the latest hype game.

 

[BishopofAges]

That's the joke . Notice the " i'm not racist but.." At the end of my post . Referring to a black man that would get shot or go to jail, which is apprently stereotypical.

I think your reply was a bit too black and white serious, pardon the pun, for anyone to get a joke or sarcasm without you actually referencing it.

Sarcasm and other inflections are so very hard to convey with words alone.

OT: I don't like to talk about politics, gender equality, religion, and various other topics that can quickly turn into an arguement.

What drops me off a topic of discussion is when the topic has NOTHING to do with any of those topics then suddenly some jerk feels the need to INJECT it into the discussion like so much rotten mayonaise in what was once a delightful pastry of civil conversation.

 

[C4tt4nn4]

"I listened to (Insert Band Name Here) before they were cool".

Nobody cares when you listened to them. If you like their music, great, but nobody cares if you started listening to them back when nobody had ever heard of them. Gosh! It frutrates me a lot.

for me, that extends to just talking about music in general. "this music sucks, you're a moron", "my band is superior": music is personal, so shove it! i could go the rest of my life not discussing this and I would die happy. now if only my class wasn't so full of hipsters... >.<

 

[Mr Companion]

The term "deconstruction." When talking about fiction, it has become the Godwin's law of literary criticism and ruin's any potential discussion.

"That's just the way it is." Or "That's just the way s/he is." Worthless cop-out argument used to justify the faults in things or people.

Most logical fallacies, but "appeal to popularity" especially. Popularity does not equal quality.

Agreed, just because something is massively popular it doesn't mean its any good. If lots of people can't be wrong then how come the minellium bug never happened, and how come Nazi Germany took off, or how come Bleach is one of the most popular anime of all time? Most people will enjoy any game or show with lots of movement and sound, because it appeals to basic animal stimuli. That is why shows where ninjas shoot lazer beams out of their face at dinosaur mechs are more popular than something with great characterization, story and themes.

 

[bojackx]

This only applies to conversations online, but "walah". Seriously, whenever I see that, I want to reach through the internet and throttle the other person.

It's spelled "voila"! There isn't even a 'w' in the word!

I'm not sure why, but that complete butchery of spelling drives me mad.

Also, people who say "per say". It's "per se" dammit!

OT: The "As a [profession]" thing.

 

[Jynthor]

"Rape Culture"
My brain just shuts down whenever someone says it while not joking.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

This only applies to conversations online, but "walah". Seriously, whenever I see that, I want to reach through the internet and throttle the other person.

It's spelled "voila"! There isn't even a 'w' in the word!

I'm not sure why, but that complete butchery of spelling drives me mad.

Also, people who say "per say". It's "per se" dammit!

OT: The "As a [profession]" thing.

But... It's pronounced "per say". That's how you say it, even though it's spelled "per se".

Any mention of logical fallacies.

How about coming up with a real point, eh guys? ;p

Fallacies completely undermine any attempt at a meaningful discussion. Logical fallacies should not be tolerated - pointing them out is the right thing to do. Most people probably don't even realize they are doing it, and it makes us all dumber if we accept them.

I mean really. How do you suggest dealing with a logical fallacy if not by calling it out? You can't argue their point, that's setting yourself up to fail. You can't ignore the argument because that makes it seem like it's such a good point that you don't have an answer for it. It might be annoying, but it's necessary because fallacies are so prevalent.

True, but a lot of people see the use of a logical fallacy as an excuse to immediately declare that they have won the argument, no matter how small a part of the opposing argument the fallacy is.

The way I see it there's a difference between pointing out the fallacy someone has made in their argument and therefore why your argument beats theirs, and what a lot of people online do. A lot of people online just say, for exameple, "Ahahahaha! That's a Strawman! Strawman there! Game over, I win, because you made a bad argument!". This is not constructive. If someone has used a fallacious argument, then it should become clear when you explain in detail why their argument is flawed and yours is correct. Simply labelling what their argument is doesn't help.

It also doesn't help that people often forget that making a fallacious argument for one side doesn't inherently make that side more wrong, it's just a bad argument. I could come up with logical fallacies to explain why the sky is blue all day long, that doesn't make the fact that the sky is blue less correct.

 

[krazykidd]

That's the joke . Notice the " i'm not racist but.." At the end of my post . Referring to a black man that would get shot or go to jail, which is apprently stereotypical.

I think your reply was a bit too black and white serious, pardon the pun, for anyone to get a joke or sarcasm without you actually referencing it.

Sarcasm and other inflections are so very hard to convey with words alone.

OT: I don't like to talk about politics, gender equality, religion, and various other topics that can quickly turn into an arguement.

What drops me off a topic of discussion is when the topic has NOTHING to do with any of those topics then suddenly some jerk feels the need to INJECT it into the discussion like so much rotten mayonaise in what was once a delightful pastry of civil conversation.

Yeah . You're . But the guy i quoted got it . And that was my goal . I'm was guessing that people wrhat are familiar with racist stereotypes would have got it . Anyways the damage is done .

 

[Lt._nefarious]

Anything going on about why there "aren't enough unattractive women in..." or "the problem with hot chicks..." or anything that even touches on the whole beta males thing...

Seriously, when did attractive women in media start being a problem? If something is fantasy then you'd imagine it's have pleasing forms.

And the "beat-male, alpha-male, chicks only date jerks" thing makes me vomit agony rainbows...

 

[Pink Gregory]

"Clean". "BBQ" and "In my opinion". Cause honestly now, I don't care about YOUR opinion.

I care about other people's opinions, if they're going to be reasonable about it and accept that it's an opinion, and not superior to anyone else's; that's what I try to do whenever I express an opinion anyway.

Within reason, of course, there are exceptions to that rule when isms/real issues come into play, actually I suppose there's a point where the rule doesn't apply.

That being said, I'm sure that I'm a right dickhead.

OT - To be honest, I try to tune out when anyone gets vitriolic, the language some people use gives me the impression that people are hypersensitive to normal emotions; but I get some sort of sick cathartic thrill from watching someone be more and more of an ass, and then it dwells on my mind and fucks me right off. I think I have a problem.

I also don't like the 'Everyone's a ****/an idiot/has no taste in X/the problem except me' attitude that one occasionally sees around. Narcissism at its worst.

I also sort of tune out when I see someone use the word 'defiantely' instead of 'definitely'. But that's me being a spelling bastard.

 

[Vegosiux]

"Let's be honest here..."

Usually implying "I'm right, and if you don't agree with me you're either stupid or a liar". It's not a genuine call for honesty.

 

[AsbestosMoth]

Not really a subject, but as soon as someone abuses the word 'literally' I am filled with contempt.

 

[lord.jeff]

Other then the "I'm not an asshole but here's me being an Asshole" crap, I've started to hate the phrase haters gonna hate I've seen it used to many times as a dismal of valid points. Also I really hate arguments about proper word usage.

 

[Legion]

Arguments made using emotion as opposed to logic.

People who use the phrases "Am I the only one...?" when asking for peoples opinions and "First world problems" as a criticism of people mentioning their issues.

The first because it's pointless, especially as in 99.9% of the cases, they are most certainly not the only one to have that view. The latter because it comes across as smug and condescending, as if you do not have the right to be unhappy unless you spend your entire life on the brink of death or in permanent danger.

Not really a subject, but as soon as someone abuses the word 'literally' I am filled with contempt.

I am always tempted to say "As opposed to metaphorically?" whenever people misuse it.

 

[Sutter Cane]

Any mention of logical fallacies.

How about coming up with a real point, eh guys? ;p

Oh god this. I hate seeing an argument on these forums devolve into each person pointing out different logical fallacies in each others posts, it ruins good forum drama.

The phrase "let me demonstrate my point with an analogy" makes me hate myself for ever having tried it and realise that any subsequent post will simply be people pointing out tiny holes in it. After someone has used an analogy you should just bail.

So you're saying that we should just let faulty logic slide? Sorry not going to happen, at least for me. If you're going to make an argument, at least make sure it's a proper argument.

 

[Euryalus]

-When people just say "Your argument is an X fallacy" rather than just explaining what is wrong with the statement! For God''s sake, the name "Strawman" is an analogy for what the fallacy is (misrepresenting an argument, then "fighting" it). Apparently the internet thinks it means "you're wrong."

- Framing religious or political debates in such a way as to make reality seem simple.

-"There's an exception to every rule"
...That statement logically destroys itself XD
If there's an exception to every rule, then there's an exception to the "there's an exception to every rule" rule. That exception being there are rules without exceptions. (I know it's a turn of phrase, its logic just irks me)

-"when you've blah blah blah then you can criticise me"

 

[Weeden Project]

Whenever people start talking about their relationships or anything related to that, my brain instantly shuts down all senses.

 

[Vegosiux]

Examples? Recently there was that lad in my TS talking to a mutual friend how he was stopped by the police on the way home every day during the week at the same spot. After asking him if he did memorize the face of the officer in question to file in a complaint he answered that those guys in uniforms all look the same to him. After that I knew that he was just another bloody left-winged idiot and that is exactly what I said to him with the statement that if he found it such an annoyance that the police stopped him every day he could've done something about it. He than started yabbing about how his eyes are bad to what I could only reply that pub, mine are worse than yours - unless you are blind.

So when you say "left-winged" you actually aren't referring to anyone's political affiliation, but are rather using the expression as a derisive term towards someone, anyone, you happen do disagree with or dislike, without even knowing what their political leaning actually is?

Seriously. Not two weeks ago you called someone a "left-wing stoner" on this board, someone who's actually quite right-wing and shares your dislike for the left, at that.

For one: As soon as someone tends to rely on memes and viral videos instead of / as addition to his arguments. If you can't be assed to form a sentence then I can't be assed to continue talking / writing to you.

Well if you can't be assed to actually get a proper picture about people before calling them "left-wing stoners", then don't expect them to take you seriously either.

I mean, what would you do if that guy went "LOL ur just a fascist wannabe, HURR DURR I WIN" at you? I really wonder, since it'd be one of those "perfectly symmetrical bigotry" kind of things.

 

[Marter]

Fallacies completely undermine any attempt at a meaningful discussion. Logical fallacies should not be tolerated - pointing them out is the right thing to do. Most people probably don't even realize they are doing it, and it makes us all dumber if we accept them.

I mean really. How do you suggest dealing with a logical fallacy if not by calling it out? You can't argue their point, that's setting yourself up to fail. You can't ignore the argument because that makes it seem like it's such a good point that you don't have an answer for it. It might be annoying, but it's necessary because fallacies are so prevalent.

Any attempt at meaningful discussion? I think you overestimate their impact, for one.

And for two -- and I can't speak from experience because I don't remember actually being in an argument in which a fallacy was brought up -- bringing them up at all often tends to make the argument deteriorate and wind up far less enjoyable to read. Once I see that, I'll stop reading a conversation that I was enjoying, simply because I can figure out where it's headed.

I agree that they can devalue a debate, and I don't even really mind someone occasionally calling them out, but it's the amount they're leaned upon as a crux -- as the point, instead of just as one tool -- that really bores me.