How often do you feel like you’re just talking out of your ass when arguing online?

[Rivenblade]

In online debates, arguments, and discussions, I often feel like I’m reaching for supporting details and am pulling things from my collective knowledge of things, but really, I end up getting stuck at some point and just end up talking not based on fact, but on generalities. Or a quick Google search.

I fall into lazy thinking. I see this a lot on forums as well, with meme posts and reactions that don’t really respond or offer counter arguments to something someone else has said, and I’ve despised it for a long time while falling prey to it myself from time to time.

How often do you feel like you ACTUALLY have a full understanding and background of whatever it is you’re commenting on or arguing about? And how often do you feel like you’re just treading conversational water just to keep things going and to hope people don’t call you out on your clear lack of knowledge?

And what’s the cause of this? I say there are just too many things to know and to argue about these days, and we are DROWNING in so much information that it’s nearly impossible to be knowledgeable enough about MOST topics. (politics, global warming, philosophy, history, etc.)

 

[Viewt]

I try to avoid posting when I don't have a real take that I've actually given thought to. I probably dump a third of my posts before posting them because I read them over and think, "I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about."

Also, sometimes I realize that my takes aren't really relevant or necessary or contribute to real conversation. So I try to cut those, too.

 

[nsilvias]

i half ass the internet because the reality is that most people arent trying to have a real conversation. most just want someone to reinforce their views. real change happens with experience not yelling at each other (this is what most conversations online are) on the internet.

 

[echoshifting]

I try to avoid posting when I don't have a real take that I've actually given thought to. I probably dump a third of my posts before posting them because I read them over and think, "I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about."

Also, sometimes I realize that my takes aren't really relevant or necessary or contribute to real conversation. So I try to cut those, too.

Click to shrink...

I agree with this...except I dump at least half of them lol. I used to argue straight from the ass a lot but try not to do that anymore.

At least...not TOO often ;p

 

[SABO.]

Back when I was 14-18? (12-8 years ago) Yeah, some of the times. I think a lot of this happened on GAF back in the peak days where we would get in depth NPD sales data.

There's been so many times here where I wanted to respond and argue against someone but have stopped myself because I wasn't sure my knowledge on the subject was 100% and even then, maybe my source is incorrect.

 

[offcast]

Most of the time I start thinking if I really know what I'm posting about and then I never post because I really don't have the time to fully educate myself on the situation and go back to the pics that make me laugh thread.

 

[Mona]

I try not to go places that I don't have somewhat fleshed out views on

 

[Fat4all]

im the sad clown that only knows flamin' hot and photoshop

 

[Deleted member 42]

I dunno

 

[Midramble]

I use google for my career. Why not everything else?

 

[Addie]

I cite sources.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I usually go into an argument knowing the facts, but rarely linking them for others because 9 times out of 10 I get told "FAKE NEWS!"

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Kansas

 

[Thunder Monkey]

I cite sources.

Click to shrink...

I attempt this, but as I said above there's only so many times you can write out a well sourced dissertation only to be told "ROFL! Washington Post? Fake liberal media!"

Here's one such completely incoherent response I got yesterday actually "and people voted Democrats that murder hijack patents commit treason against our country, sell our resources to other countries collude with the terrorists, stir up a bunch of cop killers and cause great division between the people of this country so I don't know about anybody else but I kind of appreciate, and stand tall with our president Donald J Trump"

 

[TissueBox]

Person A: this band is shit
Person B: Well, someone's a real douchebag, PERSON A, screw off!
Person A: nah these guys scummed thousands of people on some lame promo campaign in 2006 and also showed support for a Zionist asshole just cuz he came from their hometown
Person B: Sure but their music isn't bad and that was a long time ago. I suspect people are just looking for reasons to hate on 'em because of their lyrical themes atm which is actually hard hitting and relevant today if you look closely.
Person A: not really if u look at one of their lyrics they show 2 very contradictory ideals, *shows lyric*, it's like they're going a mor moderate stance than taking any stand whatsoever, its not brave it's cowrdly and when they bring up the Scopes trial they throw in a dismissive line about Scopes that seems like concern trolling
Person B: That is true, but their lead guitarist has spoken out on many issues and have expressed a desire to reform for his hang-ups recently, he said he wanted to re-coordinate the band and steer them in a better direction from her on. I think overall they're sincere about wanting to stand up for the little guy.
Person A: dude Jake Dimez left the recording for this album last March cuz of 'creative differences'
Person B: ...yeah you're right, this band is shit

 

[Deleted member 48897]

A full understanding is difficult to Guage but I'm not the sort of person to get my jollies shooting my mouth off online. Even my dumb jokes come from attempts to deeply grapple with the issues at hand. Anyone can be dumb, but it takes lot of work to be dumb in a smart way.

 

[Midramble]

Kansas

Click to shrink...

Me too sometimes

 

[Van Bur3n]

A little bit from column A, a little bit from Colombian B.

 

[Addie]

I attempt this, but as I said above there's only so many times you can write out a well sourced dissertation only to be told "ROFL! Washington Post? Fake liberal media!"

Click to shrink...

I just limit myself to topics related to law, the military, or national security. I think by now everyone knows that I don’t talk out of my ass on those things.

For politics? I’ll comment, but I’m not attempting to persuade anyone.

 

[27 Burritos]

Halfway through, I start asking myself what am I doing wasting my time. What am I accomplishing? Then I realize I ahve nothing better to do. haha

 

[Seesaw15]

Almost never. I only post when I have something out of fear of getting got.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Then I realize I ahve nothing better to do. haha

Click to shrink...

Me for about four hours last night lol.

 

[Alwayscrazybacon]

Arguing (not discussing) online is a waste of damn time. 99.9% of the time the other party wont change thier position.

 

[jb1234]

I don’t argue on the internet.
Accomplished nothing.

 

[Strangelove_77]

I post a lot here and on other places when I’m bored so I don’t care too much. Not to mention that I don’t like talking about hard facts, only opinions interest me.

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Arguing (not discussing) online is a waste of damn time. 99.9% of the time the other party wont change thier position.

Click to shrink...

It can be very fun and cathartic though.

 

[TaterTots]

I post in a lot of threads I do not know much about so I can learn and get different opinions. No sense in pretending I'm some know it all. For me, the whole point of a forum is to have a discussion and learn.

 

[marvelharvey]

I'll quite happily argue with my wife, family, work colleagues and friends, but arguing with strangers on the internet seems like such a waste of time.

 

[Chrno]

50% of the posts I write I don't post.

 

[Melkezadek]

I've stopped engaging in arguments online because they never feel like honest debates. Most of the time it seems like a war of "who can pull Google up faster" to find articles argue their points for them. It's a competition of false intellect and we are all guilty of it at times.

It also makes us poor debators in real life because we have no real knowledge of our own to present when put on the spot. I suspect it whenever I read posts where a user will ask if this source is legit before he links it to his conservative friends. Or how people love to dog pile shitty forum comments but can't find the nerve to call out their friends and family when they are being a racist/sexist/fuck.

 

[Stranger Things]

i try not to argue with people online, especially on forums like era. nothing wrong with some back and forth friendly discussion, but as soon as i start sensing some hostility/attitude in their replies...it's over. I just back off and forgot that convo even happened. sure, sometimes we all speak on things we know little about, but try to keep your responses clear and concise. even then, ppl tend to interpret things their own way, and that's when things get messy.... especially when googling / using article references. it's helpful, but sometimes data and information is outdated, and that hurts the discussion/argument even more.

 

[Francesco]

Of course everyone is a peer reviewed authority.

 

[Ashlette]

"Alt-right" idiots don't respect my time. Why should they expect anything well-researched from me?

 

[Andrew Korenchkin]

I'm always often unmedicated when I'm online, which means I'm mostly relying on these I know really well. Honestly, I feel I write stupid shit and I feel stupid, which is why I need to get off the internet and get outside a bit more.

 

[night814]

I try to avoid posting when I don't have a real take that I've actually given thought to. I probably dump a third of my posts before posting them because I read them over and think, "I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about."

Also, sometimes I realize that my takes aren't really relevant or necessary or contribute to real conversation. So I try to cut those, too.

Click to shrink...

I always try to proof read what I write and a lot of times I end up just deleting everything I wrote and closing the tab lol.

Sometimes the stuff I write just doesn't make a lot of sense and I'll just disregard the thought myself.

 

[Oaklight]

I usually go out of my way to avoid arguing with people online. I don't like it when people are mad at me lol. Most of my posts are just me giving my generic 2 cents on an issue or topic that are usually tailored to be so simplistic that most people don't feel the need to argue with me.

 

[Puck Beaverton]

I prefer going in as stupid as possible

 

[Shy]

 

[FaceHugger]

On this forum I try to only debate when I am confident I know what I am talking about. If I don't I do my best to qualify my statements with, essentially, "hey I'm kind of a dumbass in this department, correct me if I'm wrong".

On other forums more prone to shit posting and lax moderation I'll just let it all hang out.

 

[applejuice]

Even if I am certain I know what I am talking about, it feels fruitless. People aren't here or anywhere to have their minds changed. If you start then give up, they think they won and are thus correct because you decided to value your time. There are so many people online whose entire personality is 'contrarian and pedantic' and they take joy in wasting your time.

 

[_Karooo]

I don’t participate in online arguments where I know I do not have the full facts or am not knowledgeable enough. I do make an effort to learn from those who do though.

 

[Tetrinski]

You wouldn't believe how often I start writing a post and realize it's going to take too much effort to explain my point and just give up and go do something else with my life. Often I will also give up on a post halfway if I think it'll be controversial or draw too much attention because I don't feel like dealing with condescending or smartass replies. Particularly certain topics create this feeling in me: veganism, animal cruelty, global warming... There are a number of topics that I love to read and talk about that I'll often avoid just because they attract the wrong kind of attention and I'll rather not deal with it. The people in threads like the one about why women criticize sexualized female characters amaze me with their patience (edit: I mean the people explaining why women criticize them, not the people who argue with them).

 

[Tetrinski]

Even if I am certain I know what I am talking about, it feels fruitless. People aren't here or anywhere to have their minds changed. If you start then give up, they think they won and are thus correct because you decided to value your time. There are so many people online whose entire personality is 'contrarian and pedantic' and they take joy in wasting your time.

Click to shrink...

So much truth in this.

 

[JeTmAn]

I make points I think are cogent and considered, then later realize I was wrong about half the time

 

[applejuice]

So much truth in this.

Click to shrink...

My (least) favorite is when they ask 'but why? but why??' like a toddler.

 

[Tetrinski]

My (least) favorite is when they ask 'but why? but why??' like a toddler.

Click to shrink...

Mine is "but how about this tiny, unique example that has been explained a million times and contradicts an otherwise perfect, well documented and studied pattern?" Lol

I guess that's what the ignore button is for, but they keep coming, adopting new forms, disguising themselves as one of us until we let our guard down and respond to the wrong message without realizing it's a deadly trap.

 

[just a slowpoke]

i make silly jokes about topics i have the knowledge to speak authoritatively about to try and bait Master Debaters into engaging with me

they always go for the low hanging fruit, so why not pretend to be one?

 

[Freakzilla]

I usually just say the first thing that comes to me. Then I think it through after getting dogged on. Sometimes I just admit defeat and other times In try to walk it back.

 

[Red Liquorice]

I try to avoid posting when I don't have a real take that I've actually given thought to. I probably dump a third of my posts before posting them because I read them over and think, "I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about."

Also, sometimes I realize that my takes aren't really relevant or necessary or contribute to real conversation. So I try to cut those, too.

Click to shrink...

Yep this is me. I also dump a lot of posts because I start over-explaining points. As I'm typing I'm thinking of how what I've said will be pulled apart by people, so you try to account for that, but just end up making overly long explanations (hello!) when a short sentence would've sufficed, and who cares if it gets pulled apart, it's just a forum post, it's part of the discussion.

 

[Forerunner]

I rarely engage in an argument on this site and when I do I make sure it's something I'm a subject expert on.