When Does A Good Debate Become A Flame War?
- Thread starter NeutralMunchHotel
- Start date
I think the simple test is as follows.
A) Determine the target of criticism/ agression/ attack:
If 1) it is an argument or a point of view, you are witnessing a lively debate.
If 2) it is a person or group of people, you are witnessing a flame war.
However part B should be noted. The above distinction is not concrete:
B) Determine the level of justification given for people's points of view.
If 1) it is thought out and reinforced/ reinforceable, you have a debate.
If 2) it is very simple and essentially the shouting of a base belief without justification or it has large amounts of unreasonable agression, get a bucket of water because you're looking at flames.
A) Determine the target of criticism/ agression/ attack:
If 1) it is an argument or a point of view, you are witnessing a lively debate.
If 2) it is a person or group of people, you are witnessing a flame war.
However part B should be noted. The above distinction is not concrete:
B) Determine the level of justification given for people's points of view.
If 1) it is thought out and reinforced/ reinforceable, you have a debate.
If 2) it is very simple and essentially the shouting of a base belief without justification or it has large amounts of unreasonable agression, get a bucket of water because you're looking at flames.
when somebody outright says one is better than the other, Starts to give about a 9 on the sarcasm usage meter, or brings up something off topic eg: talking about which version of batman arham asylum is better and someone brings up the red ring of death.
(spelling?)
Needless to say, I hope everyone reading will take heed of which example is the preffered one.Gilbert Munch said:
I was about to sayDrunkWithPower said:
"RIGHT TEH FUX N0W B1ZNATCH"
you beat me to it lol.
Some people just jump on and try to break everyone elses concentration on the topic at hand by saying something stupid, then a few people feel the need to retaliate.
Generally, at about the time someone decides to post a debate topic in an online forum, +/- 5 posts.
I don't think I've ever seen a debate sans flame. It's just what happens. The only time there's no flame involved is real-life debates (but pretend ones, like in a debating society) where neither side really cares. But on the Internet it is SO important that someone on the other side of the country, who you will never meet, hears your point of view and agrees that you are right. (She says, as if she has never done this).
Er... The BNP are very anti-euthenasia to the best of my knowledge. Correct me if I'm wrong (with a relevant article) and I'll humbly step aside. But I'm quite sure...Diga1994 said:Well if the newspapers are to be believed the BNP are "taking over", then again believing newspapers is like believing a person who's...umm...errr... a liar.
EDIT: Actually they don't lie, just over exaggerate most stuff.
when some one brings up halo
i think it becomes a flame war when its just people yelling completely irrelivent things at each other just because they can
i think it becomes a flame war when its just people yelling completely irrelivent things at each other just because they can
