Aren't we here to debate ideas and learn from each other???

[Truman01]

***This was an answer I gave which is buried in another thread. I wanted to start a discussion on this topic, not torture but about debating and changing people's minds civilly.****

Have you guys ever thought that you can change someone's mind if you simply state your case without calling people a fucking idiot, or making all sorts of silly personal attacks on them.

I started on this debate, not because I felt passionate about it really, but because I didn't view what was done as torture. My experience is colored by the stories my father and his friends tell. I have an idea of what torture is in my mind and this didn't fit.

I was no less disturbed by what was going on, and have never argued that it shouldn't stop or be severely punished. But many here are so combative they take a good argument and turn it into a school yard brawl.

We are adults, we will disagree and debate opposite sides, why do we have to resort to name calling and personal attacks? Why can't we just debate our point and try to bring people to our way of thinking? You guys have informed me and changed my opinion on this issue, but in the process I've been called all sorts of names and there have been at least 5 posts Deleted for abuse.

It's something to think about. By the way, because I am a lawyer, I sometimes play devil's advocate just to explore an issue. No, I'm not a fucking idiot, and insults just make me shake my head and wonder where the adults are.

Thanks for the discussion, I learned a lot.

TC

[LoZoccolo]

1. I think it's a Maoist thing.

They called it "criticism/self-criticism" or something.

[LoZoccolo]

3. I mean, what they're doing, not what you're doing.

What you're doing is debating. What they're doing is making us look like fascists or authoritarian communists.

People think we shouldn't care about that stuff, but maybe they're not old enough to remember the rise of Rush Limbaugh like 12 or 13 years ago, and how he got people on his side. We wonder why people don't see stuff like how the right-wing uses authoritarian tactics...well, it's because they've succeeded in making us look worse, with our own propaganda at that.

[Zhade]

17. Just how widespread on DU are Maoists, in your mind?

I don't think I've met a single one (and doubt they care to frequent a relatively moderate place like DU).

[LoZoccolo]

21. That was hyperbole.

Still, people adopt their tactics to various degrees.

[Zhade]

24. Understood. Can you offer an example of DUers "adopting" Maoist tactics?

I thank you in advance.

[LoZoccolo]

28. Yes. Repeating assertions ad naseum in service of a specific agenda.

Plus being all rude and shit and giving people headaches. And yelling. See many many threads on GD, especially ones where someone's going "STOP IT! STOP IT! JUST STOP IT!". Like I said, it's a lot like a criticism/self-criticism session. It's like you get surrounded and shrilled half to death with gritting teeth, scrunched foreheads, and wild eyes.



Ba ba ba ba ba ba ba ba um ma mao mao ba ba um mao ma mao.

[bpilgrim]

30. how bout in service of specific FACTS?

thats what was going on in the thread refered to here.

peace

[Zhade]

36. Um, that's not specific to Maoism. That's specific to assholes in general.

It could refer to anyone, from Maoists to DLCers. In fact, I've certainly seen more DLCers engage in that behavior here. Haven't even SEEN a Maoist here once.

[LoZoccolo]

38. I understand, but I'm just using that as a frame of reference.

"Political correctness" is a Maoist concept as well, and you know you see that here too.

[Zhade]

42. Really? Can you show me how "PC" originated as a Maoist concept?

I honestly have NEVER heard that one before!

[LoZoccolo]

43. I'm probably wrong.

I just heard it somewhere. There was actually a Supreme Court decision in 1700-something that used the phrase, actually.

[Zhade]

44. Hey, we all get used to believing things we once heard that are wrong.

The important thing is that we're willing to admit it when we learn they're incorrect, right?

Cheers. :toast:

[manic expression]

2. There's nothing wrong with

having passion. The problem that arises is that once in awhile it goes overboard. People may be frustrated in an argument and that is acceptable to a point. When an argument becomes solely a name-calling contest, the discussion, for all practical purposes, has ceased to be one. Just ignore it (figuratively) and keep the discourse going.
In a nutshell: Don't worry about it.

[Truman01]

4. I do ignore it and I agree with you totally. I'm just ...

pointing this out to see if people here will see what we do and not get so hot so quickly. It's not that I'm offended. I actually changed my mind about the topic we were discussing. But many people would have been so focused on the personal attacks that they would have never given the argument much consideration.

TC

[Lucky Luciano]

5. i agree and i don't do the name calling, but

the reason it happens is due to the frustration of not having direct communication. On a message board, you have to wait for people to respond, whereas in a conversation, you can say all your points and get rrsponses instantly so you can communicate quickly. On a message board it can be a pain in the ass to type EVERYTHING, so things can be abbreviated and when you lose patience with typing, it becomes a flame war.

[forgethell]

14. I don't know.

My experience has been that face-to-face interaction can get out-of-hand more quickly. At least with typing, you have time to consider your words before sending. Also, without physical contact, the possibility of physical violence is somewhat diminished, although I assume a real asshole could still kick his dog, or wife (or husband).

[JanMichael]

6. "Debate ideas"? Yes and No. it's a political message board.

A big one at that but nothing more or less than a message board.

Robert's Rules are not enforced nor should they be. Sure some people get a little aggressive but what do you expect from an open (To Dems/Libs/Progs) board? It gets late, people crack open a bottle of wine, or beer, or something else and voila! Someone gets their feelings hurt.

They're just words on a monitor. Accept the ones you like, ignore the ones that you do not.

[jody]

7. Use the "Ignore" feature to purge your screen from those who aren't

worth considering.
The feature is very effective

[IStriker]

15. Thank you! I didn't know what it was for...

I try to remain civil; no, I do remain civil. I lurked here for a long time and was put off by the name-calling and nasty remarks to anybody who dares to suggest a different idea than the majority have on any subject. After the election, I felt the need to join to talk to others and risked the hammering that I thought I would probably get where my thoughts are outside the mainstream of DU. So far, it has not been as bad as I expected with a couple of exceptions. I will now use the "zz" feature to take care of them.

[noamnety]

8. I'm still struggling a bit to understand

It's puzzling to me that you are a lawyer and were debating what did or didn't qualify as torture, without you knowing how torture was legally defined. I was (and am still) a bit speechless at that. I'm not a lawyer, but that's a fairly basic thing, if you want to argue about if something meets a set of criteria, you start by researching the criteria. If I were going to argue in court that I didn't break the speed limit, the first thing I'd do is find out what the speed limit was, you know?

That probably didn't help your credibility much, and may have contributed to some attacks.

[Truman01]

10. I would agree with that. I never professed to be an expert on

everything. I have never researched torture, I was simply stating an opinion from personal understandings. I'm sure you don't research everything before you make a comment on it.

From reading many posts about legal matters I do know off the top of my head it is not unusual to see people posting about things they know nothing about. I didn't know much in detail about this issue, I learned a great deal this morning talking to other DU'ers.

TC

[Solon]

29. I would go further than that...

usually if I have a working knowledge on something, I will form an opinion and then if I post it and get slammed by FACTS, then I will change my mind. For example, when the prison "abuse" photos came out from Abu Graib, the first thing I did was look up the Exact words from the Geneva Convention, the UN Declaration of Human rights, and US law. Then, using that knowledge, I argued against the use of those tactics as torture, as well as knowing the shortfalls of using it practically. In other words, worthless as an intelligence tool, regardless of what others think. That is how we mature and GROW, by being flexible enough to be strong in convictions, with facts on our side, that is the reason why I'm a liberal, and I hope you see the same thing.

[kitkatrose]

47. Well, yeah,

people w/ no clue what they are talking about post--that's the nature of the internet. But if you claim yourself as an authority, like you said you were a lawyer, then it's reasonable to expect you to know, or at least look up the legalese of what you're talking about. For example, when we had the evolution debates a while back, those who said they were biologists were expected to know what evolution is. Of course, this being the internet, anyone can think you are full of shit and lying so still take it with a grain of salt. :)

I read that thread and while there was one person that I can remember acting a bit silly, there were posts that gave evidence that you ignored, at least at the time I was reading it. So some people were bound to get pissed off.

[Journeyman]

9. Use the "Ignore Button" Liberally. . .

It'll help make your experience here less aggravating and ultimately far more beneficial. . .

[crispini]

12. I can't stand the "ignore" button because I am always far too

curious about what people are saying.

Instead I keep a mental "jackass" list. Those posters mentally get ignored. :evilgrin: I suppose one could use the "Buddy" list for the same thing, since it actually doesn't DO anything.

[Dem2theMax]

22. Oh how I agree. I couldn't live without that ignore button. lol.

:)

[satori]

11. I agree

I took a basic logic course in college, and they would say that one of the first ways to not win in a debate is start personally insulting the person you’re debating.

I think most of them watch the media and think well if it works for Limbaugh on the right to just personally insult or insult the debater it will work for those on the left. But they fail to see that Limbaugh is not actually debating an issue. He carefully has no opposition he imagines the opposition to be something that it is not. Plus TV is not reality, a debate on TV has different rules then a debate in the real world.

It confuses me why the Dems don't simply use simple logic with Limbaugh. Such as when he says the liberals are this and that. Well the Dems should say, well you are wrong the liberals are actually this or that, and the Dems would win every time.

If Limbaugh ever had to go and debate on TV like say how people do in their everyday lives he would never win the debate.

[forgethell]

13. I've also noticed that

there are people who take any criticism, not just of their position, but of their facts, or even the reasoning processes by which they arrived at their conclusions, to be personal insults to their intelligence, integrity, or whatever.

Listen folks, not all people who worship "facts and logic" always have facts or logic on their side. Not even if they have somehow arrived at the correct conclusion, anyway. Not even me. That's why we have these discussions: not all opinions are equal. But how do you correct either your position, or the other fellow's without a civil discourse.

[cags]

16. I agree, but there are reasonable people here to debate with, who

show respect, and they have kept me here. Don't let the bad apples spoil the bunch, just throw them out and forget about them

[bpilgrim]

18. did it change your mind?

i hope so, but i will admit to be angry with your condescending, know it all attitude in that thread with out knowing all the facts.

now, if you want to play devils advocate fine, say so, but if you think you can come in and defend TORTURE and NOT get raked over the coals, you aren't being realistic.

glad you appreciated the articles :toast:

peace

[Truman01]

25. I did change my mind, and nowhere did I defend what was going on..

I simply said I didn't see it as torture. However, after looking at it I see what you mean.

I wasn't being condencending, at least I didn't mean to be. Thanks for the info.

TC

[bpilgrim]

31. good

but you came off as not only defending the actions (devils advocate) but also belittling folks who were pointing out that it WAS torture.

now, after knowing what you know now i truly HOPE you help educate your colleagues and friends about what is REALLY going on and has been now for YEARS.

i hope you can appreciate the frustration of those of us who have known for years about these HORRIFIC crimes.

we are behaving just like IMPERIAL JAPAN during WWII and it must be STOPPED before it's too late.

PNAC == GEACPS

peace

[Skittles]

19. no, I come here to get away from f***ing morons

I'll do my "debating" outside of DU, thank you very much.

[Truman01]

26. So you want me to just agree with you?

Whether I do or don't. mmmmm

TC

[Skittles]

32. I WANT DEMOCRATS WITH PROGRESSIVE IDEAS HERE

THAT'S WHAT THIS BOARD IS FOR. I do NOT want to debate republican CRAP here. I can turn on radio, read the newspaper, listen to the TV, talk to my conservative coworkers if I want to hear NON-STOP CRAP. PERIOD.

[Truman01]

46. Even progressive ideals can be debated. We are the party

of tollerance and ideals. Even progressives don't agree on everything. We tend to beat on anyone who doesn't tow the line to the nth degree. So I would disagree with you. A party that doesn't challenge their own way of thinking ever so often is DEAD.

TC

[Solly Mack]

20. I don't come here to change anyone's mind about anything

[bobthedrummer]

23. I had the maturity to refrain from posting to you in "that other thread"

:nopity:

[Truman01]

27. If you couldn't do it civilly I appreciate it. But I also appreciated

those who took the time to do so and show me what I was missing. Most did it politely, but sometimes we just flame.

TC

[Bridget Burke]

33. DU is not primarily a debating society.

Although lively discussions do occur.

If someone wants to start a thread in a specific "debate" format--wouldn't that mean they'd done some preparation? You know, references, details, specifics. All that legal-type stuff? Basing a thread on one's own "feelings" is not the same.

[DoYouEverWonder]

34. Sometimes it's not what you say

it's how you say it.

I have the impression that you like to stir up controversy and push people's buttons? You sure managed to push mine, but the whole torture issue brings up lot's of bad memories for me and you had no way to know that it would, so I am not faulting you for that.

May I make a suggestion? You say you are a lawyer. That means that you have knowledge and expertise that could be very helpful to those of us who are not so well versed in this area. For example, I posted a thread earlier about Rove and the Hatch Act. I would love to have a legal mind give me an opinion on whether or not charging Rove with violations of this act would be a worthwhile avenue to pursue? I've read the act and to me it seems he is clearing in violation of it but I'm not a lawyer so I really don't know.

Here's the thread I'm referring to:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=219472&mesg_id=219472

Don't get me wrong, I love a good discussion and constructive criticism, but positive input is usually easier to accept, then someone trying to bash me over the head, especially when that person starts off with the assumption that I don't know what I'm talking about.

I think you mean well and if people are really going off on the wrong track, it is beneficial to have someone who is willing to prove them wrong but you might consider balancing that out by offering your expertise in a positive way as well. That when you agree with someone you might suggest what legal means they can pursue or what rules apply, that sort of thing.

These are just a few suggestions. Please do with them as you wish. They are just my opinion based on some of your posts that I've read in other threads, but you know what they say about opinions.

[Skittles]

35. he claims "we" latch onto stuff that "makes America look bad"

and "embarrasses" GWB. Where the f*** have we heard THIS shit before???????? Someone PLEASE TURN ON THE BRIGHT LIGHTS.

[Taxloss]

37. Earlier today I was called "ignorant" and "a Freeper"

Based on what was either a misunderstanding or a deliberate misrepresentation of what I wrote. I didn't alert, but the offending post was deleted by a moderator. I'd like to thank the mod, and anyone else who alerted, if they did.

(It was this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2894393 )

That's the first time that's happened to me, but I feel that I see more and more deleted messages at the moment. That is very saddening. Don't insult the person, argue the point.

[bpilgrim]

39. people who argue to minimize what's going on today, especially TORTURE

are gonna get insulted, if they post on DU that is.

:hi:

peace

[Taxloss]

40. I did no such thing!

[bpilgrim]

41. no one said you did

but if you do, you will be insulted :hi:

peace

[Floydian Slip]

45. We are adults

Well, maybe half are.

[txaslftist]

48. One thing to keep in mind

is that Freepers and Rush and Hannity's assistants and the NYT and a bunch of other people with hidden agendas are reading the things on DU. In one sense that's good, because they may actually get marginally educated as to our issues. On the other hand, some care should be exercised in what one posts. One good example of what I'm talking about is the current thread 'they're talking about us again' from some wacko's post about the GOP causing the tsunami. That one made national news apparently, as an example of how wacky we all are here.

I'm not saying we need to be civil all the time, but on the other hand, we do need to think about how our posts will be perceived.