# Is it ever possible to win an online argument? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [April 9, 2003, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452 "2003-04-09T00:53:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Otto)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/1 "2003-04-09T00:53:56Z")
Short of the other person specifically saying “you win” or words to that effect, is it possible to honestly believe one has won an online argument? I tend to think no, because it’s never really possible even to know that the person you’re arguing with has even seen your final devastating argument demolishing their position. or maybe they saw it and considered it to be so worthless as to be unworthy of comment. Or that it’s not worth their time to keep bothering with you even though they are thoroughly unconvinced. So what do you think? ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/2 "2003-04-09T01:00:39Z")
Someone said, somewhere that most of the time _both_ ‘parties’ of arguments in the SDMB leave the argument believing they’ve won. There are little arguments where someone states some statistic or fact, someone else corrects them, and then they say something along the lines of “I stand corrected”. You could say those arguments have a definate winner and definate loser. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/3 "2003-04-09T01:16:23Z")
It’s impossible. The beauty of in-person debating is, you have the option of resolving the issue by killing someone. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/4 "2003-04-09T01:18:35Z")
Usually, no. I’ve been engaged in a few debates(not here), where it usally devolved into ‘‘you’re gay!’’ 'no, you’re an idiot"! or just endlessly beating the crap out of the dead horse of a subject, likely by using semantics and mistakes to continue it further. That’s what a portion of pit threads devolve into flame wars after 3 or 4 pages of heated disussion. As **Lobsang** said, chances are if the question is indeed factual in nature it will be answered and their would be no real discussion after that point. Only that would settle it, forever. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/5 "2003-04-09T01:24:28Z")
Possible, yes. Probable, no. There are several factors involved of course. These include the nature of the argument, how strong each side feels, the evidence presented, how open-minded the two arguers are, and how ‘hot’ the argument is. If the argument is over two deeply seated beliefs, then I’d say no amount of logic, evidence, or rhetoric is going to diswayed the other party. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/6 "2003-04-09T01:26:34Z")
Some subjects are just so complex that it’s almost impossible to address every single aspect to the satisfaction of the other party. Some subjects, especially involving religion, cannot be conclusively “proved” to someone who has already entered the debate with firm, unshakable beliefs. Threads like these are excersises in futility. I have yet to see a person from either side say that their mnds have been changed. It also greatly depends on with whom you are debating. Some people will never admit they’re wrong, even if piles of evidence stare them in the face. It’s never possible to “win” an argument with such a person. ---
**Author:** ![Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ecd19e/32.png) [@Aslan\_of\_Narnia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aslan_of_Narnia)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/7 "2003-04-09T01:27:15Z")
Example: Is abortion right?, Is their a god, How did the universe really start? etc. ---
**Author:** ![TVeblen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/4bbf92/32.png) [@TVeblen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TVeblen)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/8 "2003-04-09T01:48:11Z")
I’d say it depends on how the parties approach it in the first place. People who go into discussions all hellbent they _know_ what’s right and are by-gum, by-golly gonna wear down anybody who disagrees won’t ever achieve much beyond, well, lots of shouting. Might provide some aggressive jollies for them but that’s about it. If changing minds can qualify as “winning”, then yeah, I KNOW it happens, and it’s happened here. Don’t have the time to do the searching right now, but there’ve been threads about things Dopers have changed their minds about because of discussions. I think it takes an open mind and mutual respect to pull it off though. Veb ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/9 "2003-04-09T02:48:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by TVeblen \* > \*\*If changing minds can qualify as “winning”, then yeah, I KNOW it happens, and it’s happened here. Don’t have the time to do the searching right now, but there’ve been threads about things Dopers have changed their minds about because of discussions. I think it takes an open mind and mutual respect to pull it off though. > > Veb \*\* I know I’ve changed my mind on a few things here. None of my beliefs are so etched in stone that a convincing argument and reliable supporting evidence can’t change them. ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/10 "2003-04-09T02:54:33Z")
This reminds me of that old Monty Python scetch with the argument room. Is it ever possible to win an online argument? No, It isn’t. Yes it is. No it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/11 "2003-04-09T02:56:00Z")
Yep, I have to agree with **Lissa** here. I’ve changed my mind on a few issues while here, but almost never in a single thread. I’d say it’s really hard to win a single debate online in terms of bringing someone over to your point of view, but over the course of time you certainly can. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/12 "2003-04-09T02:59:28Z")
You’ve usually won the argument when the other guy shuts up. It doesn’t happen often, though. One time I remember was when someone was arguing that “Gone With the Wind” should have had an indication about the white on white violence in the ante-bellum South as put forth in a scholarly book on the subject. I pointed out that the book he was referring to was written in the 1950s, long after both the book and movie versions of GWTW were put out. ---
**Author:** ![Bill\_H](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a5b964/32.png) [@Bill\_H](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bill_H)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/13 "2003-04-09T07:43:47Z")
In GQ, usually In GD, never Which is why I’m never seen in the latter. ---
**Author:** ![ElwoodCuse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/edb3f5/32.png) [@ElwoodCuse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElwoodCuse)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/14 "2003-04-09T07:46:02Z")
Arguing on the internet is like running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you’re still retarded. I know, I know, but I figured it would get said sooner or later. ---
**Author:** ![VunderBob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/839c29/32.png) [@VunderBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VunderBob)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/15 "2003-04-09T12:02:15Z")
You can’t win. You can’t break even. You can’t quit the game. ---
**Author:** ![DMark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@DMark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMark)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/16 "2003-04-09T16:45:56Z")
Actually, all a moderater would have to do is say, “Yes” and then lock the thread. Then he wins. But for us mere mortals, winning can often come simply by reading the pathetic rants that follow a solid argument. ---
**Author:** ![CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crankyasanoldman/32/11670_2.png) [@CrankyAsAnOldMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrankyAsAnOldMan)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/17 "2003-04-09T17:04:16Z")
I’ve certainly had my mind changed by facts which have been presented. Generally, though, I think it is very hard to effectively argue online. I currently pulled a moron move and actually started spouting off my mommy-inspired pacifist blather in the Pit. For god’s sake someone shoot me now. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/18 "2003-04-09T17:16:28Z")
From _the Jargon File_: > [@](#): > > Godwin’s Law prov. [Usenet] “As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.” There is a tradition in many groups that, once this occurs, that thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. So if your opponent compares you to Hitler, you have won. Q.E.D. ---
**Author:** ![akennett](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee59a6/32.png) [@akennett](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/akennett)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2003, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ever-possible-to-win-an-online-argument/167452/19 "2003-04-09T17:34:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RealityChuck \* > You’ve usually won the argument when the other guy shuts up. It doesn’t happen often, though. Interesting, I view my shutting up in a thread more the result of the argument degrading into a cyclical re-statement of views, rants, or ill-concieved and poorly stated questions (usually of dubious relevance to the topic). When it becomes clear that nothing further of any consequence is going to be discussed, I’m out of there. I hate to think now that others view my leaving as proof that they won the argument.