JackSkeptic wrote:@Steersman
I noticed that recently your posts have actually become readable and, gasp, interesting. If you are trying to be as succinct as possible due to the twitter praise you got please keep it up.
Thanks chief. :-) Not sure of the Twitter reference, but I’ve certainly found that there’s some necessity to be as concise and as succinct as possible there, and that it requires some effort to do so. Which maybe pays dividends elsewhere.
But, to kill two birds with one stone, and at the risk of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, my recent comment (as Steppenwolf) over on
Zvan’s latest. Although it is, of course, still “awaiting moderationâ€; I wonder whether she ever gives any thought to how badly that reflects on FTB in general and her in particular. In any case:
Steersman/Steppenwolf wrote:Quite a good post, most of which I largely agree with. And I will readily agree that there’s no shortage of cheap shots and gratuitous nastiness all over the field of Internet discussions and social media.
However, as an SMBC cartoon put it,
Internet Fighting can quite reasonably be characterized as two groups, one [subgroup] on each side of virtually any issue, and each of which is “some percent crazy assholes†who tend to compound the problems associated with the issue. Seems it would greatly help if more people recognized that, and weren’t so quick, as seems frequently the case, to rely on the “principle†of “my tribe, right or wrongâ€.
In addition, while I can at least sympathize with those promoting the idea of trigger warnings, and giving a bit of a break to various “marginalized groupsâ€, one might argue that at least some in those groups have wrapped themselves in their various flags and have clearly gone off the deep end. Particularly in the claims by some therein that their “feelings†somehow trump reason and logic and facts.