twooffour said:
Bingowings said:
When I read twooffour I read him as a self important, obsessive person who will pick any post to pieces even if it doesn't need to be.
Sometimes that's a good thing and it pretty much describes a large number of the people posting here, including myself.
It's my perception of his posting style and nine times out of ten I moderate my reaction based on that subjective reading of his style (which may not be anything to do with the actual person typing the words).
I think this sums it up pretty accurately.
A problem I've had is that you often fail to offer a argument to support your dismissiveness. After much back and forth, I tease out that it is just so totally obvious to you that OP (whoever OP happens to be at the time) is wrong that you feel you don't really need to make an argument. You will make contrary assertions along with personal insults and expect them to stand on their own. And you hammer away, usually with more personal insults. And it's usually on a topic that is not entirely factual or provable. But you want people to concede you are right about such non-factual and non-provable topics...
In most cases, people will rather listen to arguments said in a nice tone, because condescension and asperity are likely to activate defense mechanisms, and agreeing or complying begin to seem to come at a higher price.
"Defense mechanisms" is one of your catch phrases, a means of dismissing those who just aren't smart enough to come to terms with your correctness (yes, that is sarcasm). But this is where I think CP3S has something of a point with his colorful analogy. On its own, the above statement has merit. People are more reluctant to admit error when it feels like someone they don't like is "winning." But as I wrote above, the problem is that you often don't make an argument. You make a contrary assertion. You expect people to just see how it's better or more reasonable or something.
And ultimately, many/most just don't agree with you. Not necessarily because they don't want to but because you haven't convinced them. It is pure arrogance to think they do so only out of pettiness.
But that's really all I do - I easily get annoyed by stupid arguments, especially in the context of argument or sweeping statements, and I mostly just tend to spout it out without any filtering.
Yes, you often rant. Stupid is in the eye of the beholder, as you've experienced. Bingowings expresses that he moderates himself based on a certain open-mindedness and consciousness of the nature of internet debates. At the very least, perhaps you could learn something from that.