Not that I miss it or anything, but doesn't Hatrack seem way less emotionally/politically charged these days? It's actually...sleepy.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Outrage fatigue.
Posted by Trent Destian (Member # 11653) on :
The Other Side was a whole heap of angry the past few days, but it has simmered down again.
Posted by scottneb (Member # 676) on :
It does this.
Hatrack fits into a very nice cyclical existence. I'm sure you could actually map it out if you had the time.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I have noticed the cycle from fluff to anger, but I've never seen it quite so slow as now.
Posted by anti_maven (Member # 9789) on :
Post vacational syndrome. We're all mourning the passing of holiday time, while staring into the grim reality that there are no more public holidays until Christmas (well for me at least).
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Just 'cause you live in a "special world".
Posted by breyerchic04 (Member # 6423) on :
It's been doing this for a year or so.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
It's a pretty extended drought of slow, but, one could reasonably expect it to pick back up again when OSC releases his next book soon.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
Nobody needs to have arguments here anymore. They just say "we've been through this already" and link to 10 old threads. Even the heated discussions about whether we should resurrect old arguments are old and bloodless.
Posted by scottneb (Member # 676) on :
I'm sure if you brought back Thor and if Slash and Dan and a few others started posting again we'd get fireworks again.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: Nobody needs to have arguments here anymore. They just say "we've been through this already" and link to 10 old threads. Even the heated discussions about whether we should resurrect old arguments are old and bloodless.
That, and we have a helpful contingent of people who think it's their job to moderate discussions by simply waiting for small opportunities to make participants look stupid. That in itself is wearisome enough for me.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
I don't think there are that many people who willfully are out to do harm like that Orincoro.
I think the basic breakdown in civility comes when people don't give anyone any leeway in discussions. People become so hyperliteral and pick apart your statements and assign arguments to you that you feel you have to defend, and by the time you're done, you just want to wash your hands of the whole place. I've seen lots of people do it. I've had it done to me, and I may have even done it before, I can't say for sure that I haven't.
I think that's where civilized respectful discussion breaks down, but that's just one half of it. The other half is that often people ask others to clarify and an understanding is reached, and a lot of people here really do give you the benefit of the doubt, and they apologize when they make mistaken assumptions. Also, while on that other side, there is sometimes a tendency to dogpile, I think a lot of the time people know when something is over the line and either stop themselves from saying it, or ask others to refrain from saying it.
I'm a little surprised that the election hasn't heated things up, but 99% of the election discussion has been confined to a single thread, which has certainly limited the splash damage from political discussions in other threads.
Posted by Tstorm (Member # 1871) on :
Yes, and thank goodness. I can enter the Election thread on my own accord without having to sift through a bunch of other political threads. It's nice. I turned my politics brain off today and I think I completely missed even noticing the Election thread. Posted by LargeTuna (Member # 10512) on :
I think the thing that would sum up this time of hatrack is the Dude Cool Peekaboo thread. We're all cool dudes, lets just chill *how i so heart that thread*
Dude LT
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I don't think there are that many people who willfully are out to do harm like that Orincoro.
I think the basic breakdown in civility comes when people don't give anyone any leeway in discussions. People become so hyperliteral and pick apart your statements and assign arguments to you that you feel you have to defend, and by the time you're done, you just want to wash your hands of the whole place. I've seen lots of people do it. I've had it done to me, and I may have even done it before, I can't say for sure that I haven't. s.
You're just about the most model poster imaginable, in my opinion, so what you regularly practice is not necessarily representative, but I agree with you. I think I saw this behavior described recently as "a style of rhetoric similar to the construction of a large and inpenetrable tank, supported by people at a distance with slngshots." I grow very sick of the most commonly difficult and unmanageable form of argument, which is the "Quote-Attack-Quote-Attack" line by line sort of thing that certain people get carried away with.
That sort of thing is highly effective, a la Jon Stewart, if it is done once. Applying a separate reply to every line of someone's argument is just mean. It's kind of like drawing a picture of someone that emphasizes all their worst qualities, but still looks like them. As much as those who do this would then argue: hey, the picture is made of words you wrote! It isn't really true- you write words without spaces for comment, so when they do get picked apart or line-edited for worst effect, you can look stupid no matter how careful you are.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Applying a separate reply to every line of someone's argument is just mean.
Only if the phrase quoted is taken out of context. I often use this form of discussion because there are several thoughts expressed in a single sentence, and each may merit specific attention.
I don't care enough to be mean.
Posted by calaban (Member # 2516) on :
Perhaps, like an aged couple already knowing the outcome of each dispute, we as a whole feel that our many debates predetermined outcome will prove futile.
Or it could just be the quiet before the november storm Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Applying a separate reply to every line of someone's argument is just mean.
quote: Only if the phrase quoted is taken out of discussion
What the heck do you mean by this?
quote: there are several thoughts expressed in a single sentence
That's only true sometimes. Why are you being so broad with your statements. You sir, are an idiot.
quote: I may merit specific attention
Not Likely.
quote:I don't care
Ahah! SEE? What did I say. You are MEAN!
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
You're a jerk Orincoro, way to strike first. What did PSI Teleport do to you?
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:Only if the phrase quoted is taken out of context. I often use this form of discussion because there are several thoughts expressed in a single sentence, and each may merit specific attention.
Excessive quoting is also a problem when it takes the focus away from the larger point the original author was trying to make. After all, most people don't just throw out a bunch of equally weighted assertions in a post. Usually there is some larger point they are making. If you break it down into ten smaller points, and attack each one separately, the larger point tends to get completely lost.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:What the heck do you mean by this?
"This" being the phrase "out of context," I guess.
Context is defined:
quote:the parts of a sentence, paragraph, discourse, etc. immediately next to or surrounding a specified word or passage and determining its exact meaning
To take a phrase out of context means to remove certain parts of the sentence, paragraph discourse, etc and make the original's meaning obscure or into something the originator did not intend.
For example, the rest of your post.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax:
quote:Only if the phrase quoted is taken out of context. I often use this form of discussion because there are several thoughts expressed in a single sentence, and each may merit specific attention.
Excessive quoting is also a problem when it takes the focus away from the larger point the original author was trying to make. After all, most people don't just throw out a bunch of equally weighted assertions in a post. Usually there is some larger point they are making. If you break it down into ten smaller points, and attack each one separately, the larger point tends to get completely lost.
This is true. I'm not sure it's problematic, or indicative of poor behavior.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
Well, OSC posted for the first time in over a year, so that's nice to read.
Posted by brojack17 (Member # 9189) on :
Where did he post? I must have missed that.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
He was all over the OSC side of the forum for a day about a week or so ago. Scroll back through most of the top threads on that side of the river and you'll be able to find his posts.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Rats. I need to check that side more often. I rarely go over there. I blame dude-cool-peekaboo.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Hi PSI teleport. I missed you. I miss me too. But I just don't have a lot of energy for hatrack style discussion lately.
Elsewhere in the real of Hatrack undead, Pat posted on GC today.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: For example, the rest of your post.
Scott, I'm sorry if it wasn't totally clear that I was completely joking. Maybe it wasn't funny... but it was not serious.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Hey Pooka. I completely forgot that GC and sakeriver and those places even exist. Maybe they siphoned off some angry people.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Yes, we're pretty much a boiling kettle of rage over at sakeriver. And don't get me started about GC--I think those people actually have rabies, they're so violently angry.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I think there has been a bit of a brain drain to those places.
Posted by scottneb (Member # 676) on :
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: Yes, we're pretty much a boiling kettle of rage over at sakeriver. And don't get me started about GC--I think those people actually have rabies, they're so violently angry.
You should try Ornery then. It's pretty much all bake sales and kitten snuggling over there.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: Yes, we're pretty much a boiling kettle of rage over at sakeriver. And don't get me started about GC--I think those people actually have rabies, they're so violently angry.
You should try Ornery then. It's pretty much all bake sales and kitten snuggling over there.
:: nods :: I understand they have a special forum over there just for blowing butterfly kisses on babies' stomachs.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
They had to close it down. Apparently too many warm fuzzies can be dangerous to your health.
But they replaced it with a forum just for pictures of polar bear cubs. Apparently being excessively adorable is perfectly safe.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
It works for baby seals!
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
quote:I think there has been a bit of a brain drain to those places.
As evidenced by the Fluffy Kittens and Rainbows thread.
(That sounds like a joke. It isn't. I love it when life is funnier than anything I can make up.)
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: I understand they have a special forum over there just for blowing butterfly kisses on babies' stomachs.
One doesn't blow a butterfly kiss.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Deliver?
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Smooch.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Flutter.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
Whisk.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
quote:Originally posted by PSI Teleport: Hey Pooka. I completely forgot that GC and sakeriver and those places even exist. Maybe they siphoned off some angry people.
People didn't go there because they are angry...
Posted by scottneb (Member # 676) on :
What are you saying?! Of course we go there because we're angry! We mock and hate every new member that happens to even look at those forums.
Be wary, the sake is bitter and the cactus is worse.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Oh, yeah, I forgot.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
To be fair to PSI, she didn't actually say that all of the people at Sakeriver and GC are there because they're angry. Nor did she say that if any angry people migrated there, they did so because they're angry.
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
Hi, PSI, by the way. Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I actually have accounts at those places, but I was without Internet for so long that I forgot about them. I know they WERE the chill places to go, but who knows how they may have changed? Maybe they have their own anger cycles.
How long has it been since anyone played mafia, by the way?
(Hey, saxon. )
Posted by saxon75 (Member # 4589) on :
I can send you your Sakeriver username if you like. I don't have the password, but if you've forgotten it, I can set a temporary one for you.
Posted by eslaine (Member # 5433) on :
You really should at least visit over there, PSI.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
I think I still know it. Hey, eslaine! Cool!
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Nothing interesting ever happens at SR. That's why I never post there.
Posted by Erik Blackheart (Member # 5610) on :
Ye lying scurvey pup!
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Who're you callin' pup, ye great bluthering sack of pustulence?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Scott R: Nothing interesting ever happens at SR. That's why I never post there.
Who the heck is Scott R?
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Who cares?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Good point.
Posted by Tresopax (Member # 1063) on :
quote:
quote:Excessive quoting is also a problem when it takes the focus away from the larger point the original author was trying to make. After all, most people don't just throw out a bunch of equally weighted assertions in a post. Usually there is some larger point they are making. If you break it down into ten smaller points, and attack each one separately, the larger point tends to get completely lost.
This is true. I'm not sure it's problematic, or indicative of poor behavior.
It is a problem if a person attacks someone's position in a thread, but ignores the main point(s) that person is giving to support that position - excessive breaking down of the language of a post is just one way of doing that. It's one thing to go off on a side-tangent; it's another thing to go off on many simultaneous side-tangents, one for each sentence of a post.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
*how i so heart that thread*![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I actually have accounts at those places, but I was without Internet for so long that I forgot about them. I know they WERE the chill places to go, but who knows how they may have changed? Maybe they have their own anger cycles.