I would have the biggest laugh of the year.
As for the OP, I can separate the two because I realize that on this board, we tend to dwell on the 10-20% that differentiates us and go on mind-numbing rampages while the other 80-90% that we tend to agree on as civilized folk are minimally expressed on this board. If we met up somewhere, I would bring up the 80-90% agreeable stuff (beer, food, games, jokes, sports, geography of your hometown, college background, etc.) so, we wouldn’t succumb to Public Pitting.
Like Grant, I too have a hockey background and most kids that I coached/managed learned to separate the stuff that happens on the ice and what is expected of them off-ice. This philosophy is almost required for such a potentially violent sport. Some parents “get it” and act accordingly as well, although I feel it doesn’t happen enough compared to their own kids ability to separate the issues. Adult players do realize that it is paramount to separate the two, otherwise they will find it quite hard to get in to work the next morning (due to injury or arrest for taking it “outside”).
I have also learned over the course of 40 years, to forgive AND forget and that is really for MY OWN well-being. I do this with my wife, my kids, my relatives, my friends, my employees, my business associates and my acquaintances. I virtually have no enemies when I adhere to this philosophy. I do have one exception however, but I am working on improving the situation. We don’t have to love each other, but just tolerate each other’s existence.
Eve could explain better than I, but it’s essentially seeing right through someone as if he didn’t exist. You do not in any way acknowledge that person if he tips his hat or attempts to speak to you.
Oooh, I can explain this. It’s the Ettiquitte (sp?) of Snubbing, old-fashioned style.
In polite society, one is expected to acknowledge known acquaintences in a mannerly way, despite how much you would really rather shove them over a cliff.
A Cut Indirect is to fail to notice them (and therefore not be held accountable for not acknowledging them), so that it can’t quite be said whether or not you were deliberately avoiding them.
A Cut Direct is to notice them (and maybe even look directly at them), and then fail to acknowledge them, which is the worst kind of snubbing you can give. In other words, they don’t exist to you even if you’re standing on their toe.
I agree with Miller - with the exception of the annonymous bone-heads mentioned in the OP, I can’t imagine not giving someone the benefit of the doubt IRL.
I think I come accross as far bitchier in the Pit than I do IRL, and if I insult someone I generally try to do it in a jokey manner. However, I recognize that it can be hard to convey “jokeyness” in print - I would hope that upon meeting me IRL people would try to give me the benefit of the doubt and realize that I don’t actually think they’re a bonobo’s butt, or something. I would try to do likewise.
I certainly don’t have a problem with people disagree with me online. I like to debate, and many of my friends and I hold diametrically opposed positions on important issues. But if we have a disagreement, and you fly off the handle and behave like a) a frothing lunatic, b) a total bastard, c) a raging drama queen, or d) all of the above, then sorry, we aren’t going to be buds. I don’t mean to say that I won’t accept an apology and give someone a second chance (and heaven knows if no one accepted my apologies, I’d be one lonely human being) but I expect to be treated respectfully, and I always try to do the same in return.
The above paragraph applies to face-to-face conversations, telephone calls, message board threads, IM chats, e-mail debates, messages sent by carrier pigeon, or any other sort of interaction.
Whether it be in the Pit or IRL, I don’t need to embrace your politics, your religion, or anything else personal for us to be friends. Respect for the right to hold different views on a myriad of topics is, IMHO essential to being a friend.
Except, the Pit isn’t for arguments. Great Debates is for arguments…the Pit is for insults. Two people who disagree about politics or religion or whatever can still be friends, whether the disagreement is on the boards or in real life.
But it seems to me, if you start a Pit thread about somebody, that’s something different. If you insult somebody or condemn them, or whatever, whether its on the boards or real life, that’s got to affect your relationship with them somehow. If I were to say to the friends that I disagree with in real life, “Why don’t you fuck off? How the hell can you support Bush/Kerry (for example), when he wants to take away our rights/leave us vulnerable to terrorism, and support/oppose the war in Iraq? You’re just a fascist/unamerican who wants to oppress the Iraqis/would rather have Sadaam still in power!”
If I say something like that to a friend of mine, it’s going to affect our relationship, not because he and I disagree, but because I’m being rude and insulting. Likewise, if I’m rude and insulting in the Pit, that will affect my relationship with other posters.
Well I don’t know if I even have any “enemies” b/c of the boards. Oh wait - I forgot about Uekte, the guy that really really hated old people. I’m pretty sure I’d hate him in real life, since he was a raving looney who said he was going to track me down and kick my ass. And of course the aforementioned gruesome twosome displayed the most dispicable behavior I’d ever witnessed.
But I sincerely hope that those of you who have met at Dopefests and have been at extreme opposite sides of debates and insults would not behave that way IRL. Like World Eater, I’d hope that “Doper comraderie” would transcend any pettiness.
Heck, I’ve been plenty angered at all the silly M$ threads that accuse my employer of being pure evil and me of being an idiot for working for them, but I wouldn’t hold that against anyone IRL.
There’s a difference between disagreeing with someone and being at their throat, imo. You can argue calmly, or heatedly, but still be polite and respectful to one another. Most people are willing to let that sort of thing ride in other areas of interaction. When the argument becomes vicious, dismissive, comtemptuous or insulting, it gets a lot harder, and rightly so. I tend to judge people by the whole personality, not by how they conduct themselves in one spot or another. Your conduct on the boards is a facet of your whole personality, and you’re going to get dinged IRL for consistently being a total ass online.
If somebody can argue something they’re passionate about by saying, “you’re wrong, because of x, y, and z” or “I believe this because of that, and as such I think you’re wrong” that’s fine. That’s great, we can agree to disagree. If somebody argues that “I believe this, and you’re an ignorant twat for disagreeing with me” we cannot be friends. I have zero interest in or regard for people who treat me with so little respect.
I can absolutely separate the two - in most instances. However, if someone posts something that is completely counter to my beliefs and strongly believes that I’m wrong for not agreeing, then we are probably not going to be friends. Likewise if I read something particularly heinous that they’ve written in their LJ.
For instance, if someone were to tell me that abortion is wrong, and I’m stupid for not agreeing with them, they can go to hell.
I have a lot of friends in the MADs. Some of them are completely different from me in their personal and political beliefs. What we think is not important for those few hours that we’re together socializing. Opal doesn’t tell me I can’t eat meat, av8rmike and Scuba Ben don’t tell me I have to follow Kosher laws, Olentzero doesn’t tell me I’m wrong to not be Communist. gobear doesn’t tell me I have to be gay. See how that all works?
There are (counting on my fingers) three current Dopers whom I simply will not speak to—yes, The Cut Direct. (Nothing like The Director’s Cut). There are others—oh, Lib, Vanilla, come to mind offhand—with whom I disagree on many topics, but they have never stepped over the line.
Only three current Posters come to mind who have said things to me that cannot be forgiven—so if they ask me something or address me, I just quietly pop out (oooh, that doesn’t sound right).
First, your attempt at martyrdom is pathetic, a defenseless picked on schoolchild you are not. Your attempt to portray yourself as such is laughable.
As to the OP, I can argue politics with anyone and not take it personally. I might find 10% of the populace that shares my political views and that is a mighty thin slice of humanity to befriend. One’s politcal or religious beliefs say nothing of the more important traits of loyalty, shared interests and shared world views in other areas.
I would differentiate between people who hold views I disagree with, and people whose general character and demeanor I find distasteful on a message board. I would have no problem with cordial real life encounters with a group of comitted Marxists or Young Republicans. There are a very few posters whose manner of argument is so distasteful that I would be wary, though not outwardly hostile. Naming names is not necessary, nor do I suspect those people would care what I think. Furthermore, if their real world demeanor was different from their message board demeanor, I would like to think all would be forgiven.
Can one remain friendly with someone else IRL after sniping at one another in the Pit?
Maybe. There’s sniping, and then there’s all-out flaming. Most of us snipe from time to time. There are some, though (just a handful, really), that regularly flame, and they don’t know when to quit. They LIVE to flame and it’s almost like they try to see how hateful they can be. Those are the people that, I’m convinced, are truly just Bad People, and I’d have no desire to even be in the same room with them, much less put on airs and pretend to be friendly.
Is it hypocrisy or being adult to not carry over board disagreements into everyday interactions?
Mostly it’s being an adult. Unless we’re talking about dealing with a Bad Person, then I think it’d be stupid to pretend to be nicey nice. Yes, this is a message board. Yes, we’re semi-anonymous and most of us say things on here that we’d never say IRL. However, if you’ve gone out of your way to be as hateful as possible to someone in the Pit, don’t expect to be treated well at an IRL gathering. When you flame, there is someone on the other end of the screen. I’ve seen some flamers talk to those they were flaming as if they weren’t even human. People like that have no business to expect anything but an icy stare at a Dopefest, IMHO, and they’re lucky that assault is illegal. I’ve seen a few flame threads in which the OP truly deserved a punch in the nose for their shittiness. Sometimes you can go too far, ya know?
No, I am not advocating violence. I’m sure ya’ll get what I’m saying.
I’d have a hard time separating it. What you see on the board is me: sometimes silly, deep, patient, raving, stupid, bright or a combination of any of those. But ALWAYS me. I do tend to believe that the poster is the person. Mind you, I’m not saying that if I met someone in real life I didn’t care for from here that I couldn’t be socially polite to them, I’d just wind up at the other end of the bar talking to someone else.
I do think that the social forms that IRL enable one to smile, shake hands and then subtly wind up at the other end of the bar are eroded here. It’s difficult to maintain a vision of all these phosphor dots as a real person. I’m not exempting myself from this criticism; I’m as bad as the next person. But not keeping that vision makes it much easier to say things that one would never imagine saying to someone’s face, now matter how severe the disagreement.
You know who instantly springs to mind is Joe Cool. I met he and his wife at a Dopefest a couple of years ago, and I thought they were delightful in person. Then I learned who they were, and I didn’t want anything to do with them.
Sure. I snark at people that I like all the time. But I don’t tend to get caught up in some of the on-board and off-board psychodrama, so perhaps I just need time.
I don’t see that in the thread you linked to. What I saw was Weirddave come into the thread and attempt to poison the well regarding Olentzero’s posts in that thread.
The whole post, #126 is an example of this.
Then I saw Olentzero responding angrily, but making a good point. Rather than say how ungrounded Olentzero is, why not contribute to the thread with cites refuting him?
Weirddave responded with:
I realize he also noted he has asked Olentzero questions that were never answered in the past. However, I think Olentzero had a point. Why not leave it up to FinnAgain to decide if the debate was a waste of time?
Later, you come in and tell Olentzero to chill. Understandable, he seemed pretty darn angry, and if he were my friend, I might suggest he tone things down a bit.
Olentzero then brings up the topic of ad hominem attacks, “loony left”, etc. Then you post this part, which sounds a lot like what you are stating in this thread as well:
To which Olentzero responded in that thread, quoting the above, you misunderstood him.
When you state:
And he clarifies:
I think he makes another good point. I don’t think the situation is about disagreeing politically. I think it’s about the tactics used, and the lack of respect possibly involved by poisioning the well.