When Does A Good Debate Become A Flame War?

[Legion]

Because I have trouble distinguishing the two on this forum sometimes.

Somethimes you can go into a thread and it will be called an 'arguement' or a 'debate'. Sometimes, however, people will be shouting 'Flame! Flame!' and a mod will lock it. I was wondering what you think is the boundary between a flame war and a debate, because to me they seem very similar.

I think it just has to do with the topic. If it's about some highly moral thing (euthanasia, underage *whatever*) then it becomes a debate, but if it's about something less interesting then people will decide that it's slowly decended into a flame war. Maybe it's all just about people's perception?

You have to bear in mind that not everyone uses words they understand. A lot of people will say "this will be a flame-war" just because the topic is a little controversial. It allows them to feel smug while not actually contributing to the topic.

Flame War: Opposing sides of a discussion being rude to each other and not showing respect for the other sides opinions.

For example:

Person 1: "God exists, look around and you will see he is everywhere."

Person 2: "Are you kidding, how stupid can you be? I don't need some magic man in the clouds lording me about, prove he exists then, if you can't you are just delusional."

Person 1: "Fuck off, if you don't believe in God then you are going to hell, if you can't figure that out for yourself then you deserve to be in pain for all eternity."

Debate: Two opposing sides who disagree with the others view but show respect for it while arguing their own point.

For example:

Person 1: "God exists, look around and you will see he is everywhere."

Person 2: "Personally that is not enough for me to believe in the existence of God, I need more evidence before I am willing to accept that there is a higher power in the universe, I'm not saying you should need it too but without it I simply can't believe in a God."

Person 1: "That's fair enough, everyone has the right to believe what they want, I am not going to force my beliefs on you because that would be wrong and unfair."

 

[deleted_scifidownbeat]

DELETED

 

[fletch_talon]

Right.... Now.

But seriously I think it generally occurs when one or more parties decide not to give evidence or support to their arguments especially when its their opinion and they're suggesting its a fact.

You can't argue with someone who just says "Halo sux" because you don't know any specific aspects of Halo that they think sucks. Sometimes the only argument that comes to mind in such situations is, "You're an idiot" which ironically doesn't need evidence if you simply quote the offending post.

 

[Motiv_]

A debate is two or more parties sharing their opinions, and those who are open minded enough to discuss it rationally.

A flame war is basically two or more parties arguing that whole heartedly believe that what they think is the truth, nothing but the truth and the whole truth, and will insult the living fuck out of you if you disagree.

2 ways a flame war can start.

1. The OP starts off with a controversial statement, like "Why are Americans so ignorant?" or "Why are Atheists so blind?", and then people begin to argue about defending or flaming the OP. This thread is doomed, and more then likely so is the OP.

2. The thread starts off nicely with a large basis for intelligent discussion, but then the fanboys and religious fanatics come along, with remarks like "The Shitbox 360 sucks, I can't believe you guys are still playing Gaylo 3." or "You Christians are so fucking blind, you'll die, and all there'll be is the cold hard ground waiting for you". These threads can be saved if the report button is utilized, and no one responds to the flamer in question. A flame war is prevented, the flamer gets moderator wrath for his actions, and intelligent discussion may resume. However, if people respond to the flamer with insults of their own, then the thread is doomed, and many people are going to be reported.


Hope I helped.

 

[Nmil-ek]

lol what a bunch of egotistical pricks in this thread, stop acting like none of you have ever started typing out alot of profane bullshit, I swear sometimes I think I'm the only semi-intellegent guy left on earth.

Good thing your ego is well in check anyway.

And that ladies and gentlemen is case in point how a flamewar begins, thank you for your participation.

 

[RootbeerJello]

I think a flame war starts when people stop debating and start saying that their way is the correct one and gets angry about people's differing opinions. Of course, at this point someone is likely to quote it and say something along the lines of "Your mother", and thats when the party really starts.

 

[HentMas]

when people stop explaining their oppinions and start to say things like they know the absolute truth not listening to any of the points that show he is not as right as he thinks

 

[LaBambaMan]

The main problem is that when you're having a nice, civilized, debate about something, there's almost always going to be some jerk-ass who'll run in and start trolling to turn it into a flame war.

 

[KarumaK]

The moment it's put on the internet.
From that point the only question is how many posts it will take.
Debates either degenerate into flames, stalemate, or are abandoned.

The last two only being possible in the event the flame wars have already been fought.

 

[Generic_Dave]

Usually around the time that someone feels they're losing an argument and can't come up with a counter argument. Galileo and the Catholic Church about (re)-discovering the world was round...they couldn't make a counter argument and threw him in a cell. The Ultimate STFU.

Though the Church apologised a while back, which is something I've never seen in a flamewar.

Or

[/quote]And that ladies and gentlemen is case in point how a flamewar begins, thank you for your participation.[/quote]

When someone wants to kick one off. All it takes sometimes is a goad.

Though, I have to say, while I'd never participate, it can be amusing to watch the carnage

Edit: Also when proprietary developers decide that there haven't been enough of them in a while and start one themselves see: Naughty Dog and Uncharted 2. Sigh...

 

[StarStruckStrumpets]

Every debate is a forest in a very dry country. Every poster has an endless supply of matches, it's when they try and prove that they're the best that the flames of self-indulgence light up. Then WHOOF. Up goes the forest.

 

[WhiteTiger225]

Because I have trouble distinguishing the two on this forum sometimes.

Somethimes you can go into a thread and it will be called an 'arguement' or a 'debate'. Sometimes, however, people will be shouting 'Flame! Flame!' and a mod will lock it. I was wondering what you think is the boundary between a flame war and a debate, because to me they seem very similar.

I think it just has to do with the topic. If it's about some highly moral thing (euthanasia, underage *whatever*) then it becomes a debate, but if it's about something less interesting then people will decide that it's slowly decended into a flame war. Maybe it's all just about people's perception?

A good debate becomes a flamewar when someone starts spewing well known (And opinion based or just plain wrong) "facts" as facts. For example, someone made an article about a chat area I frequent called second life (It ain't a game like people like to claim about it who never went on it) Well everyone jumped on the pedophile name calling bandwagon (Despite the fact that the said virtual world is 18+ only and that instead WE are the victims of mommy not watching what her 14 year old is doing online) And when I go to correct them on such matters (As well as pointing out comparing secondlife to a MMORPG is nonsense) I get tag teamed and flammed for actually using... *GASP* concrete facts! While said flamers are using opinions disguised as facts with no actual basis for their claims.

 

[Spacelord]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

When this happens.

[/ thread]

[small]I usually hate the term /thread, but it seems appropriate now[/small]

 

[NeutralMunchHotel]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

When this happens.

[/ thread]

[small]I usually hate the term /thread, but it seems appropriate now[/small]

I attempted to read through that, but I'm tired and big Wikipedian words hurt my poor brain.

 

[Spacelord]

Ad
hominem

I attempted to read through that, but I'm tired and big Wikipedian words hurt my poor brain.

An ad hominem argument is one that retorts upon another person's argument by disqualifying it on account of the person making the argument. Example:

"Jesus is probably real, because of X, Y, etc"
"Yeah that's just what I'd expect, coming from a sheep like you" <-- ad hominem.

Yeah, the wikipedia page is awfully complex for such a simple concept XD Anyway. The more you know!

 

[JacOak]

I'd say it's when a person or persons become insulting/ when the topic railroads to something less appropriate.

Every good bedate already is a flame war, it just doesn't realize it yet.

Which is why Oxbridge is full of trolls?

Quite. I've seen many a hair-ed bridge dweller take a stroll in the grounds.

 

[Ironic]

WHEN PEOPLE START MAKING DUMB TOPICS THAT HAVE NO DISCUSSION POWER AND INSULTING EACH OTHER YOU PIECE OF GOOCHE!!!!

[/irony]

Gooche?! Don't you mean perenium? (spelling?)

Gooche sounds way better as an insult. Perenium sounds like a flower. Either way, gooche is better