I’m just wondering where everyone’s mind is as I many times don’t know if a comment is unwelcome.

Now of course without specifics most will say they invite an opposing view but that’s just not usually the case. I guess the only way to ask is for you to think about your last post and if someone came in with a completely different view, do you welcome that or not? Can we calmly discuss hard matters without direct insults or implications? Do you block people or attempt to convince them of your position?

Thanks for indulging me.

I think for the most part, we're all open to discussion, even if viewpoints differ.

There's a lot to be learned from open discussion, including learning who's hardheaded.

To be fair, the questions I ask here far outnumber the contributions I make. Given that, my answer to your question (broadly) is yes. I welcome the dissent, because it's more opportunity for learning.

- - - - -

ETA: I haven't yet blocked anyone, though I've wanted to. I talk myself out of it thinking, if I block them, then there's some learning I'm missing out on. (Even if it's only, "that guy's a hardhead." )

This message has been edited. Last edited by: vthoky,

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:
… including learning who's hardheaded.

It’s me!

If somebody posts an open-ended question I assume dissent is, if not welcome, not strictly unwanted, either.

But if somebody posts something like "I'm interested in how to solve <this>, out of <these> options," and explicitly mentions "I don't want to hear about <whatever> or <whatever>," then it's clear they don't care to entertain dissent.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:
Can we calmly discuss hard matters without direct insults or implications?

There's the rub: What may seem to one to be insults, direct or otherwise, may not seem to be so to another.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:
Do you block people ...

I block people who consistently argue disingenuously or in poor faith, are needlessly hostile or abusive, or insist on top-posting.

quote:

Can we calmly discuss hard matters without direct insults or implications?

Of course. That's why many of us like this place. Insults are not tolerated by management.

quote:

Do you block people or attempt to convince them of your position?

I've never blocked anyone, but I do attempt to argue or convince. If you aren't attempting to persuade, why post an opinion?

Sure, if it's civil, and it's a matter of opinion or they're posting a counterposition and opposing facts for further discussion.

But people who roll into a thread about factual matters with uninformed opinions (especially if they don't bother to even read the OP and the prior replies), or those who are just being hostile and quarrelsome, aren't so welcome.

I don't have anyone blocked, even those members whose posting style or personality I generally dislike. I just usually won't bother engaging with them on most matters, except for in non-contentious threads about stuff like product recommendations or recipes.

Differences of opinions are always welcome.

I can take criticism and have been wrong before.

It depends.

If I’m asking a general question about something or commenting on something that is a global interest, of course, I am looking for a difference of opinion.

If I post a thread about how much I like Metallica or how great I thought the next John Wick movie is going to be, I’m not really interested in someone coming into those threads and telling me why I am wrong.

If I wanted that, I would’ve said, “what do you think about…”

At the end of the day, if you want to shit on someone’s positive thread, go start your own “ why you hate…” thread.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Sure, if it's civil, and it's a matter of opinion or they're posting a counterargument and opposing facts for further discussion.

But people who roll into a thread about facts with uninformed opinions/feelings (especially if they don't bother to even read the OP), or those who are just being hostile and argumentative, aren't so welcome.

^^ THIS ^^

It's supposed to be a QUALITY discussion forum which means discussing things in a productive manner.

I don't block people over differences of opinion (even the depraved people who put beans in their chili ), but I do block people who are perpetual thieves of joy.

Yes, conditionally. It all depends upon the approach.

Agreed; if it's kept civil and reasonably friendly then I think dissenting opinions are a good thing. They have on occasion caused me to rethink my own stand on the issue at hand because they introduced a consideration I hadn't previously thought about. I tend to stop reading a thread when it turns into a "you're an idiot"/"you're a jerk" pissing match, which does happen although thankfully not very often.

I've blocked one member who jumped into one of my threads, which was a somewhat hot-headed rant, and repeatedly told me I was being stupid. Upon later reflection I came to the conclusion that I was only about half right (about the rant) and removed that block.

We have such a wide range of discussion topics here that it's hard to make a blanket statement about how far off the original topic or point of view things should go.
A post about a news article, movie or similar subject where the author/OP only wanted strictly yes type replies wouldn't be much of a discussion.

In any situation it depends on the intent of the poster or response. A completely opposite view that is well reasoned in a sincere post is fine. That's how we all learn and can sometimes be persuaded to modify or change our viewpoint.

When someone steps in with a road-rage type attitude I simply don't respond to them. I've never felt a need to block anybody.
On the few occasions when I've seen that happen, the powers that be usually step in and take care of business.

quote:

Sure, if it's civil

I think that is key. When it is obvious there is hard disagreement, I don't like going back and forth to try to convince someone to change their minds.

Best to agree to disagree.

Depends.

If it's an open question such as, "I have a maximum budget of $25,000 to spend on a Tacoma or Ridgeline. Which one should I go with? Why?" that's open to dissent as people pitch why they would choose one.

But there's always that guy or guys that are like, "get a Tundra. It's $60,000 but that's what I went with." Thanks for a bunch of worthwhile input, genius."

Yes, I always expect contrary stuff. We are a contrary group of curmudgeons, and we generally have strong opinions and believe ourselves to be correct.

However, it's possible to disagree without being an asshole, and that is what gets missed in a few cases.

Sometimes, it's because typing on the internet doesn't permit the observational cues that face to face interaction gives, which let's the listener know that the speaker's intentions are good, even if their words are abrupt.

Sometimes it's because an asshole can hide behind internet anonymity. Those guys get the ignore list, or banned.

quote:

Originally posted by Edmond:
But there's always that guy or guys that are like, "get a Tundra. It's $60,000 but that's what I went with." Thanks for a bunch of worthwhile input, genius."

That's an excellent example of what I meant in my reply above.

But... A member might be forgiven for suggesting an alternative the OP might not have considered.

Example: When I was looking for a mid-size SUV with which to replace my 2007 Chevy TrailBlazer: Every review of every thing I was considering stated something like "If you're considering this, you should also consider a Jeep Grand Cherokee." I didn't want a Jeep. If I'd wanted a Jeep I'd have been researching Jeeps. It was becoming annoying.

When I finally ran out of other things to look at, and saw that suggestion again, I was "!#$~$!! OK, I'll look at the @#$!!@ Jeep Grand Cherokee."

I ended-up buying a Jeep Grand Cherokee

Some back and forth concise comments are fine and even expected if I post something. What is not fine is failing to agree to disagree and going on and on in the hope your opponent will bend to your will.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
Example: When I was looking for a mid-size SUV with which to replace my 2007 Chevy TrailBlazer: Every review of every thing I was considering stated something like "If you're considering this, you should also consider a Jeep Grand Cherokee." I didn't want a Jeep. If I'd wanted a Jeep I'd have been researching Jeeps. It was becoming annoying.

When I finally ran out of other things to look at, and saw that suggestion again, I was "!#$~$!! OK, I'll look at the @#$!!@ Jeep Grand Cherokee."

I ended-up buying a Jeep Grand Cherokee

Which helps illustrate an OP's responsibility when it comes to welcoming dissent: Even if you've already mostly sure about something, it helps to remain open to alternative suggestions, or to the possibility that you're wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by mark123:
I’m just wondering where everyone’s mind is as I many times don’t know if a comment is unwelcome.

Now of course without specifics most will say they invite an opposing view but that’s just not usually the case. I guess the only way to ask is for you to think about your last post and if someone came in with a completely different view, do you welcome that or not? Can we calmly discuss hard matters without direct insults or implications? Do you block people or attempt to convince them of your position?

Thanks for indulging me.

I'm of the mindset that your views are your own and just because it's different than mine doesn't make it wrong or right. It's simply your view on a subject.
As for blocking, no. I don't take anything that personal to block anyone.

I think a lot to do with responses is in how the post is worded and the tone it sets. I don't discourage and even encourage opposing views. That's what makes a discussion.

What I don't like is occasionally you'll see a member interject something that does absolutely nothing to add constructively to the dialog and seems like they just want to seem smart.

Example. I post something either a question or comment about an Apple product. Along comes an Android aficionado suggesting that if I had an Android the world would be right, and Apple, the company and their products are crap.