Critiquing and Policing

[Flavus Aquila]

Haha, Thumbs down for proposing true free speech. I think it is censorship to suggest that we shouldn't be allowed to share our opinions in common because it is dangerous for several people to agree on something. I'm arguing that people can say what they want but then people should be allowed to respond to the post.

If people were simply responding to posts, I don't think there would be an issue.

Attacking the poster in response to his/her post is not a response to the post.

 

[Free]

Nobody is trying to shame you. That is making it personal. You are telling us that if several of us disagree with you then our opinions should be dismissed as collectivism and jumping on the bandwagon of consensus. You don't understand much about INFJs if you think jumping on the bandwagon is something that we do. If anything, we are usually wanting to stay away from the bandwagon. You come on an INFJ forum to post your opinion and then complain when we all agree on a position that happens to be the opposite view of your position on a matter. What do you expect? On the other hand, if you read what others who are 'collectively' disagreeing with you at times you will realize that we often disagree with each other as well. We are not going around on threads and deciding what the majority's position is and deciding that we're just going to agree with everybody else's position. No, we go on there and we make comments that we feel like making and if there happens to be several people with a differing opinion than you then so be it. I wouldn't want to censor people just because too many of them disagree with you.

I don't want to censor you, but I am getting the impression that you want to censor some of us.

How does being on an INFJ forum have any bearing with this? Because we "collectively" think alike and therefore would have the same opinions regarding this? Please, speak only for yourself. As an INFJ and a member of this forum, I do not wish to be a part of this sort of "collective" mentality that you are suggesting exists here. There are many different types here, even every INFJ is different from the next, and we all bring something unique to this forum. Insinuating that because the member isn't an INFJ so therefore can't understand them, and even implying that he asked for this kind of backlash because he knowingly became a member of an INFJ forum being of another type... is this not another example of a personal attack? Or just your own personal opinion?

 

[La Sagna]

I think it is weird that people get so riled up about this. I comment on some posts on the forum as a form of diversion. Why do people get so worked up about people disagreeing with them? It would be really boring if everybody on here agreed about everything. We sometimes agree, sometimes disagree and debate the disagreements. I find that fun. I don't take it as a personal attack if someone disagrees with me, I'll just answer them back and share my personal thoughts. It's just a forum. I don't think there's anything dangerous about our opinions, and if people are so sensitive as to be personally hurt by differing opinions then I would suggest that this is probably not a good place for them to come. I mean that in the gentlest, kindest way, as I don't think people should come on here if it harms them in some way.
This isn't serious, it's just people sitting behind a computer sharing thoughts and ideas, it shouldn't be taken too seriously. At least, I don't think so.

 

[Free]

I think people get riled up about it because...

If people were simply responding to posts, I don't think there would be an issue.

Attacking the poster in response to his/her post is not a response to the post.

 

[La Sagna]

If people were simply responding to posts, I don't think there would be an issue.

Attacking the poster in response to his/her post is not a response to the post.

Maybe I missed something that someone else has said to attack someone in particular, but I don't feel that any of my posts were personal attacks. I generally critiqued the people on the thread for not watching the video and only commenting on the title of the video, which I think is a valid critique, not an attack. The other 'personal attack' was in response to the poster dismissing my opinion and so I told him that he was not making a logical argument and just spouting opinion. I think that is a valid critique of someone dismissing my post as having no value.

 

[La Sagna]

How does being on an INFJ forum have any bearing with this? Because we "collectively" think alike and therefore would have the same opinions regarding this? Please, speak only for yourself. As an INFJ and a member of this forum, I do not wish to be a part of this sort of "collective" mentality that you are suggesting exists here. There are many different types here, even every INFJ is different from the next, and we all bring something unique to this forum. Insinuating that because the member isn't an INFJ so therefore can't understand them, and even implying that he asked for this kind of backlash because he knowingly became a member of an INFJ forum being of another type... is this not another example of a personal attack? Or just your own personal opinion?

The misunderstandings keep multiplying. If you read the whole post you will see that I am saying that we don't always agree and that I am saying that it is dismissing us to suggest that we all jump on the bandwagon. I was simply stating that to come on here and be upset because many people have an opposing view to him and tell us that we're not allowed to all agree to disagree with him as it is dangerous, is telling us what we should and shouldn't be allowed to say.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Maybe I missed something that someone else has said to attack someone in particular, but I don't feel that any of my posts were personal attacks. I generally critiqued the people on the thread for not watching the video and only commenting on the title of the video, which I think is a valid critique, not an attack. The other 'personal attack' was in response to the poster dismissing my opinion and so I told him that he was not making a logical argument and just spouting opinion. I think that is a valid critique of someone dismissing my post as having no value.

Sigh.

 

[La Sagna]

Sigh.

So he can dismiss my post as having no value and I am not allowed to answer him as it is a personal attack? He was not being logical and was spouting a personal opinion. That was an observation.

 

[Free]

The misunderstandings keep multiplying. If you read the whole post you will see that I am saying that we don't always agree and that I am saying that it is dismissing us to suggest that we all jump on the bandwagon. I was simply stating that to come on here and be upset because many people have an opposing view to him and tell us that we're not allowed to all agree to disagree with him as it is dangerous, is telling us what we should and shouldn't be allowed to say.

I did read the post in its entirety. And though you did state we don't like to jump on bandwagons, it was also clearly stated that he's on an INFJ forum, so what did he expect... That is what I was responding to, not the bandwagon bit. I don't think this is about agreeing or disagreeing when an opinion is stated by any member, but how we personally react to said opinion and how our reactions dictate our responses to the posters themselves, and not the posted opinion.

 

[La Sagna]

I did read the post in its entirety. And though you did state we don't like to jump on bandwagons, it was also clearly stated that he's on an INFJ forum, so what did he expect... That is what I was responding to, not the bandwagon bit. I don't think this is about agreeing or disagreeing when an opinion is stated by any member, but how we personally react to said opinion and how our reactions dictate our responses to the posters themselves, and not the posted opinion.

Yes, I understand that. I just wanted to clarify that I wasn't saying that we should or all have a consensus because we're INFJs, more that as a general rule we tend to have a pretty strong social conscious and if you come on here and are critiquing people who are in support of social programs and helping the poor and disadvantaged in the world then you are likely to have many people disagreeing with you. Not that every INFJ will agree, but that there are likely to be more proponents of social programs on an INFJ forum than on an INTJ one, although I am in no way saying that INTJs can't also be proponents of social programs.

I was simply stating that I don't believe that it is surprising or dangerous to have a consensus amongst a group of people with similar personalities.

 

[Xroads]

I did read the post in its entirety. And though you did state we don't like to jump on bandwagons, it was also clearly stated that he's on an INFJ forum, so what did he expect... That is what I was responding to, not the bandwagon bit. I don't think this is about agreeing or disagreeing when an opinion is stated by any member, but how we personally react to said opinion and how our reactions dictate our responses to the posters themselves, and not the posted opinion.

For me it's about how things are said.

All things being equal, nobody here is a debate or opinion commodity. I don't have to go on with an individual in particular when I can most likely debate the same topic and probably get identical views from anyone else who doesn't make me want to stab their face off.

Without a sweetened deal I have no incentive to even bear a discussion which I could have anywhere else without the trouble.

How things are said? As in what language is used, the tone set, etc etc?

 

[JJJA]

The tone and attitude in which they approach others.

I wasn't approaching anyone. I was making a general comment which was slashed as 'spouting opinion'. I will spout my opinion without anyone's permission (but with their interruption it seems).

 

[JJJA]

Who said I was talking about you?

My mistake. I am not replying directly to you, just using your comment to propel my point.

 

[Free]

The tone and attitude in which they approach others.

I wonder though, if we, the readers, are contributing to the tone based on preconceived notions in our mind as we read? For example, I usually will read a post from ruji with this snarky and playful tone attached to it, even if it was a completely serious post.

 

[Xroads]

I wonder though, if we, the readers, are contributing to the tone based on preconceived notions in our mind as we read? For example, I usually will read a post from ruji with this snarky and playful tone attached to it, even if it was a completely serious post.

Interesting theory. I do think that because we are only reading text that we can often project our own tone to a comment or post. That's the trouble with not being able hear to each other's voices. And also perhaps a blessing. LOL.

 

[La Sagna]

I wasn't approaching anyone. I was making a general comment which was slashed as 'spouting opinion'. I will spout my opinion without anyone's permission (but with their interruption it seems).

I have to think that there has to have been something more insulting said to you by people on here somewhere, because I can't imagine that being told that you are 'spouting opinion' is really something that is so egregious as to leave you feeling 'attacked'. You spout opinions, I spout opinions, we all spout opinions on this forum... none of us are experts, the best we can do is share our opinion on matters and if we can and are inclined to we can share some information to back up or opinions, or we can just let them stand as is...and then people can then go on to share their opinion of our opinion.

 

[La Sagna]

I wonder though, if we, the readers, are contributing to the tone based on preconceived notions in our mind as we read? For example, I usually will read a post from ruji with this snarky and playful tone attached to it, even if it was a completely serious post.

Definitely! I know different people read my posts totally differently and I'm assuming it's because of their personal opinion about me and assumptions about what I think. People read between the lines and put their own interpretation on what I say. I can only assume that I may at times be doing the same, although I try to be conscious of it and not read anything that is not stated, but I may fail on this at times. If I am wrong about any interpretation of a post comment then I am always open to being corrected.

Edit: In person, I always have a friendly, upbeat, diplomatic tone, even when discussing serious topics, and that's how I read my posts on here, but that is obviously not necessarily coming through when my posts are read. Yes, I think people put a 'voice' to posts in their head and it changes the interpretation.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

So he can dismiss my post as having no value and I am not allowed to answer him as it is a personal attack? He was not being logical and was spouting a personal opinion. That was an observation.

Being accurate does not excuse from civility. What is worse is when one is neither accurate, nor civil in one's "observations" about persons.

The dismissal of a viewpoint is not the same thing as the lampooning of the person expressing that viewpoint.

 

[La Sagna]

Being accurate does not excuse from civility. What is worse is when one is neither accurate, nor civil in one's "observations" about persons.

The problem is that people have differing opinions as to what is accurate or not, and what is civil or not. I would argue that, unless it is very obviously inappropriate, people should be left to make little harmless digs at each other without making a big fuss about it. I can take the digs I would just like to be able to dig back. I see it as harmless, but people can obviously disagree with me on this.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

The problem is that people have differing opinions as to what is accurate or not, and what is civil or not. I would argue that, unless it is very obviously inappropriate, people should be left to make little harmless digs at each other without making a big fuss about it. I can take the digs I would just like to be able to dig back. I see it as harmless, but people can obviously disagree with me on this.

This puts me in mind of "The Golden Rule": treat others as you would have them treat you. However, I would rather say in this instance: treat others as they would like to be treated.

Besides, there is a general forum rule that ad hominem is not acceptable. Ie. Saying that someone is illogical and spouts is not in good form.