Opening Statement: I don’t like it when my friends fight and I will try to stop them.
Reply #1: What gives you the right to interfere?
Me: Nothing, but I don’t care. I simply don’t like it when my friends fight and will interfere in order to stop them.
Reply #2: So, you think you can just boss people around?
Me: No. I flatter myself thinking that I can post a cogent argument that a reasonable person might read and agree with. Barring that I will use humor or sarcasm to deflect the discussion and give them time to think.
Reply #3: What is it about you that makes you the Lord God Almighty Stopper of Arguments?
Me: That is the sort of generalization ad absurdum that often comes up here and I choose not to fall for it. As for fights between two people I don’t like I couldn’t care less if they killed each other. As for fights between my friends I stand by my opening statement.
Reply #4: You have also interfered when newbies are flamed. Since you do not know the newbies, how do you explain this inconsistency?
Me: First, some people here demand consistency in all posts when a degree of flexibility is more appropriate. I am a believer in situational consistency and see strict adherence as a shelter for people too limited in their outlook to think and rethink.
Second, newbies are not the subject of this discussion. However, I believe we should assume newbies are friends until they demonstrate they are not and have passed through a grace period in which they learn the lay of the land. I do not believe in flaming them as trolls until they have proven they are. I do not believe in belittling them as insignificant. However, if they start it…
Come on–you’re the Debate Club! Surely you can find holes you could drive a truck through and I’m POSITIVE I didn’t cover all possible objections you’d make. In fact, I thought of one Satan has used on me TWICE a while ago, but I’m waiting for somebody else to find it.
Reply #5: When do you decide it’s a “fight” and not merely a heated disagreement? When they come to blows? When they raise their voices? When they start calling each other names, chowder-head?
Since I usually get into heated disagreements in the Pit and normally don’t venture into this land of people smarter and more serious than I, let’s assume it’s a fight and nobody calls anybody “chowderhead.”
Really, this is a semi-serious thread. I am not good with the fine points of debating and chose a topic on which I feel strongly, but hope I can argue semi-rationally. (Reply #1, with its “because I do, that’s why” attitude is an exception.) You folks are good at this stuff and usually cut me to ribbons, so I’m asking for help.
If I may, I’ll speculate on your motives, and you can correct me if I’m wrong.
Goal 1: To prevent hurt feelings on the part of people you care about, or feel like you will probably care about in the future (newbies)
Goal 2: To prevent the obscuring of a valuable discussion or debate by the hostility which inevitably follows the start of a fight.
Those are the goals I’m sensing; you might not aim for both of them, or either of them, or there might be some that I’m missing. In any case, I’d have to say those are noble goals. I don’t think intervening to stop a fight, either on- or off-line, constitutes “sticking your nose where it don’t belong”, at least not usually. I mean, a fight that occurs on a message board is fair game for anybody. An argument that occurs within earshot is your business unless you’re listening at a keyhole. It really makes no sense to have a talk in a public place and expect nobody to overhear. The more hostility you show, the more uncomfortable people around you will become, and not all of them are going to shink meekly away.
So, what I’m saying in a nutshell, is, there’s nothing wrong here. You have chosen a role because it is meaningful to you and it almost certainly does more good than harm.
If, on the other hand, I’ve misunderstood you, then maybe this is not the case. If, for example, you tried to stop any debate from occurring, just because you found disagreement inherently irksome, whether or not any hostility was displayed, well then I think the problem would be your own. It could be really bothersome if somebody went around trying to make everybody agree on everything. I have no reason to believe that, though - there’s enough honest-to-goodness insults and hostility thrown around here that you’d have drowned long ago if you started in on the polite stuff.
I don’t like pointless and excessive hostility but have learned to not waste my breath in the Pit, but I like debate since I agree AND disagree with everybody. That’s where I get called on for my inconsistency. Sometimes you can see too many sides of an issue.
This thread was originally intended for the Pit because of some unpleasantness going on there between two friends of mine. It was a knock-down-drag-out catfight that had grown to involve more people. I was angry both because they are my friends and because the whole thing was so stupid. Neither was innocent and I’m no good at (gracefully) telling people to shut up because they are both wrong. I thought about it and figured it would be a waste and I’d get the same lousy answers and trigger stupid fighting as always if I posted there. I thought of this place. Many of you don’t know me and the rest switch their brains back on before posting here.
However, as I prepared this for GD I tried to reframe it in statement and reply form so that I could get advice on methods and style. I figure that you guys could poke holes in my logic and I would be forced to either reevaluate my position or think through an effective reply. Like an exercise for my brain. The “debate” I posted could be about anything. It just happens to be about something that angered me.
I suppose it probably belongs in IMHO, if anywhere, but I thought I’d give it a shot. But I agree wholeheartedly with your first two goals.
A question for you: Do you think that sometimes, it’s necessary for people to fight, just to get everything out?
Personal example time: A couple weeks ago, a friend and I were messaging each other over ICQ, and she said something I thought was offensive, inappropriate, and flat-out wrong. Rather than ignore her remark, I chose to call her out on it. I asked her what she meant by it, and if she had meant it the way I took it, then WTF? A lengthy and unpleasant exchange followed. We duked it out for a while, but nothing was settled. We both went to bed that night pissed at the other.
In the morning, I found an apology waiting for me. She also conceded that what she’d said was inappropriate. I accepted her apology, and happily, things are back to good between us.
Now, had a friend witnessed this argument and stepped in and told us to quit it, I’m not sure she and I would have made amends. See, I had to confront her about her comment. I could not have just let it go. I seldom carry grudges, but what she said was offensive enough to me that I would have held onto a lot of negative emotions for some time had they not been worked out in our fight.
Don’t get me wrong, I would have appreciated an intervening friend’s concern and desire for peace. I understand how a friend (such as yourself in this situation) couldn’t stand to see two friends of his fighting. However, I do think that in some cases, the best thing that such a friend can do is step back, not choose sides, and quietly stay put until the debris settles.
