General discussion


DISCUSSIONS - comunicating or deaf's talkings?

By voldar ·
Although I am very aware that everybody here has his/her own beliefs and her/his own way of judging things and maters, I would like to ask you about a thing:
- who is the right person to tell you to stop when you obviously went way too much away from the subject of the discussion or with your ?ideas? about a given subject. And are you going to listen ?that person??

I don?t say that I don?t like to have a ?vive? discussion on a subject with anyone, as long as a bit of respect exists, of course. I think the best ?show? is when two people although having different opinions know how to argue and counter-argue on a given subject keeping themselves in, lets say, a ?reasonable perimeter? of their statements.
You all have to agree with me, when nothing ?pops ? up? from time to time in a discussion, we very soon get tired or bored. The monotony of discussions sometimes makes me think why someone really started it. And I am not talking here about the discussions in the TR. I am talking about the day-to-day life discussions also.

I am sure that most of us have at least a minimum self-control, some sort of a ringing bell that sometimes gives us a sign to ?cool down? for a while ? but what if we have not? What if in fact we don?t know how to discuss? In everyday life we talk about the importance of communication. What if we, so much occupied in ?communication? forgot how to communicate? Could be this a real fact or only my bad impression?

We discussed a lot about the fact that the Technical Q&R and the Discussion links in the main page of the TR website would be great to switch places. And yet, they have the same places in the new one. I am not trying to offend someone from TR, but also, I can ask myself if is it anyone in fact listening our suggestions? I was extremely pleased when I saw the last days the ?web-designer? asking us about the new look of the new ?main web page?, and truly he did a great job ? starting asking for opinions. I am looking forward to see how this is going to end. I really hope that it is not going to be a ?discussion for discussion sake?.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

29 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Peer monitored

by TheChas In reply to DISCUSSIONS - comunicatin ...

Both the Technical Q&A and the Discussion Center forums are peer monitored.

TR does not have a moderator for the forums. Nor, can we assume that they read all postings.

TR staff does browse both the Q&A and discussions to look for topics for articles.

If you have a specific question or problem with a peer or a thread, I suggest that you contact the appropriate TR staffer via the email links on the help pages.

Same for suggestions for web site issues.


Collapse -

I know that

by voldar In reply to Peer monitored

Chas, and it was not a discussion I started because of someone in special, just looking to know what do you really think about communication, that's all. And exactly, because there are no moderators, and I like this, I wanted also to know what is driving us to behave. That's all.

Collapse -

Forgotten how to discuss...

by Oldefar In reply to DISCUSSIONS - comunicatin ...

Possibly a very insightful observation.

I think this is a learned trait, and perhaps too many are not learning either in school or in social settings. A side effect of too much TV, too much video game, and too much organized youth sports? Is Jerry Springer now setting the accepted standard of discussion? Are kids losing the chance to practice discussion and disagreement with social boundaries? Are the schoolyard scuffles a critical part of learning social graces and interaction?

Outside of the regular schoolyard sessions, I learned around my grandparents' dining room table during and after Sunday dinner. No topics were off limits, no person was excluded (although Mom and most of my cousins chose not to participate), and the rules were simple.

- any statement was open to challenge.
- challenges were fair game.
- no one hogged the floor. Everyone had a chance to comment on a statement before the rebuttals began.
- statements/positions were challenged, not people.
- prestige was never taken. No one claimed victory for another person's change in postion.
- prestige was sometimes given, with the left hand. "Tim, you might be right on that. ****, stranger things have happened."
- no "sides" were taken. Each stood alone on their position even when all but one held a common perspective.

As for control, if someone began to lose objectivity they would step out for a bit either on their own or with some gentle encouragement from the others. Between in-laws and out-laws, I never did see the heat of the moment lead to violence. In the end, a desire to maintain social integrity won out over all else. Now those sessions ended with hugs and kisses and at worse an acknowledgment that "You're an a**hole, you have always been an a**hole, and you will always be an a**hole, but you're my a**hole and I still love you."

Outside of family, we retreat to the neutral discussions of great beer and music until we find common ground again.

Perhaps we need a timer on TR postings. Only one post on any given discussion in any 60 minute period. A little time for more people to consider a response.

Collapse -


by voldar In reply to Forgotten how to discuss. ...

you are right, and you very well "underlined" the fact that first of all it is an education mater. And, also YES, I agree with you, even sometimes we loose control (and this can happen to anyone), it's good to reconsider the situation after 5 minutes, and to admit the fact that nobody is perfect, and that maybe acting under the "pressure" of the discussion, you went too far with your affirmations, and to apologize for that or end all the "bad" situation with a good joke. Do we lose the sense of humor? I think not!
A good laugh is anytime very welcome thing when discussion falls into something that leads nowhere.

Collapse -

Good views but..

by Oz_Media In reply to Forgotten how to discuss. ...

I think you are confusing DISCUSSION with DEBATE.

A discussion is usually a much looser forum with less fact from one side being challenged by fact from another.

A discussion is an exchange of ideas, not a fact finding session. If we discuss the weather, it could be based on personal experience for the week and one person feeling the seeing as it is sunny all week, it wil probably be suny next week. The other person(s) in the discussion may say they FEEL that rain is due if it has been sunny for a week.

Neither is right or wrong, they are opinions based on experience and observation, and should be accepted as such.

What I find here is that a discussion will START this way, but within a few posts, someone will say, "You must be stupid, double doppler proves it is going to be cloudy, no rain or sun. What gave you such an insane idea?" THis would be turning discussion into debate.

So, either rename
Discussions to Debates and outline that only factual statements are accepted so you better do your homewrok to resist being lambasted as a moron OR keep it as an open Discussion where people are alowed to exchange ideas and thoughts without being badgered to provide proof to support feelings.

I think the line is fine but easily misunderstood.
These are NOT fact finding missions (in off topics anyway) they are discussions and one should be able to express feeling in a discussion, not just learned or found knowledge.

Collapse -


by voldar In reply to Good views but..

there is a so thin difference between them, and yet so much difference. Anytime a discussion can turn on a debate, but never a debate into a discussion. Why? Because I believe that a debate is already a discussion! When we talk about a subject, is it a debate or a discussion? As for myself, as long as from a discussion or debate, at least someone learn something, it's a good thing, and I don't mind the name I use for this. I don't say that I also agree that discussions or debates can not reach their goals, but what a heck, we can always debate on "that" discussion .

Collapse -

The differences I see

by Oz_Media In reply to Although

A debate is an attempt to prove right from wrong or prove one opinion as being more viable than the oppositions. As politicians have when runnig for office.

A discussion is an open sharing of thoughts and ideas, not really facts. As you would have over a beer or cup of coffee with friends. You can DISCUSS whether or not someone's red shoes suit their jacket well, it is an open subject for opinion without fact.

However, to have a DEBATE on the same subject would require one person to say WHY red shoes match the jacket and show fact to support it, after stating their case, the firest speaker waits while the second shows facts and supoprting arguments to prove that the red shoes do not match the jacket.

What we see too often on TR is friendly OPEN discussions being turned into DEBATES by someone refusing to accept an opinion and demanding fact to support ideas. Thus changing it from a DISCUSSION to a DEBATE.

As for a DEBATE to become a discussion, BOTH parties would need to step down from the podium and agree that neither is correct and that it is just a sharing of opinion and any opinion is accepted. Obviously this is not possible as the debator would lose credibility instantly, it just isn't possible.

On TR, we constantly have discussions turned into debates by those who insist on any statement being factual and supoprted, not just supported though, but supoprted by an agreeable source. This is also impossible as the person is SEEKING conflict of opinion in this case.

If techs knew how to talk to each other instead of trying to out do one another, Discussiona would remain intact and debates wuold be left for the politicians.

Collapse -

Speaking of politicians

by Oz_Media In reply to The differences I see

The morning radio show today was talking about a recent poll that shows (I assume in Canada, though it wasn't specified)that out of a list of the most shady people or people you could not trust. Used car salesmen got 2nd place with 16% of the vote and politicians were the number one mistrusted occupation at a whopping 54%! That's a BIG gap between first and second and second was a USED CAR SLAESMAN!!
No wonder we laugh at our own government, nobody believes a damn word they say!

Collapse -

But what if. . . .

by maxwell edison In reply to The differences I see

...they aren't wearing red shoes?

(See my "splitting hairs" message.)

Collapse -

Sorry Max

by Oz_Media In reply to But what if. . . .

I assume your are referring to another thread.

If it is relevant, just post a link to it.


(Note: Without seeing your splitting hairs message, my retort to your comments would be, the color of the shoes is not relevant at all in such a discussion. Both the people see them as red and simply DISCUSS what would look better with them, not WHY, PROVE IT and YOU'RE NOT A DESIGNER HOW CAN YOU OFFER SUCH AN OPINION?.

Back to Community Forum
29 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums