RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Sounsyy · **02-22-2015, 09:02 PM**

(02-22-2015, 04:44 PM)Seriphyn Wrote:
1) Should participants in the lore debate shift to a private conversation?

OR

2) Should observers who are uncomfortable tolerate the lore debate?

For me, the key word here in the second option is "uncomfortable."

I am a great believer in discourse, discussion, and that many people outside of the initial debate become more informed when there is a debate on an issue. By Seriphyn and I debating lore (using this example) I believe that a 3rd party may come to learn something from both my point of view and/or Seriphyn's and then come to form their own opinion on the matter by measuring each others' points, just as we, the debaters may come to an agreement where before we differed.

That said, the moment our discussion becomes uncomfortable to the 3rd party viewers, it's time to move that discussion elsewhere because we have stopped being a beneficial influence. One of us has done something to offend the other, and that is not the goal of debate. You earn yourself (or your position on your topic) no favors by being inconsiderate of those around you. Just as you permit your debate opponent the courtesy of his opinion when you debate, you should also be courteous of the opinions of those your argument affects.

In real life, I am a Paramedic. As a medic I have many stories, most of which, would be inconsiderate to tell in a public place where I might easily be overheard. Not everyone is desensitized to horrific stories of vomit, roaches, intubation, drug overdoses, or fatal MVCs. If I'm at a bar with my friends and I get into one of my stories, and the owner comes around and asks that I take the rest of my story outside because I'm making their other patrons uncomfortable... it is sure as hell not my place to tell them to grow a thicker skin and get over it. It is my place to either stop the discussion or leave, because I have done a disservice to my fellow patron. My story, while fun and educational to those involved, was not well received by everyone else. So too must debates follow similar courtesy when in a public setting where others (who have not agreed to this debate) are forced to play bystander. Move to /tells or form a party and continue your debate. Hell, make a LS called "Lore Debates" so that way everyone inside that linkshell has consented to a debate environment.

Verranicus · **02-22-2015, 09:13 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:02 PM)Sounsyy Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 04:44 PM)Seriphyn Wrote:
1) Should participants in the lore debate shift to a private conversation?

OR

2) Should observers who are uncomfortable tolerate the lore debate?

For me, the key word here in the second option is "uncomfortable."

I am a great believer in discourse, discussion, and that many people outside of the initial debate become more informed when there is a debate on an issue. By Seriphyn and I debating lore (using this example) I believe that a 3rd party may come to learn something from both my point of view and/or Seriphyn's and then come to form their own opinion on the matter by measuring each others' points, just as we, the debaters may come to an agreement where before we differed.

That said, the moment our discussion becomes uncomfortable to the 3rd party viewers, it's time to move that discussion elsewhere because we have stopped being a beneficial influence. One of us has done something to offend the other, and that is not the goal of debate. You earn yourself (or your position on your topic) no favors by being inconsiderate of those around you. Just as you permit your debate opponent the courtesy of his opinion when you debate, you should also be courteous of the opinions of those your argument affects.

In real life, I am a Paramedic. As a medic I have many stories, most of which, would be inconsiderate to tell in a public place where I might easily be overheard. Not everyone is desensitized to horrific stories of vomit, roaches, intubation, drug overdoses, or fatal MVCs. If I'm at a bar with my friends and I get into one of my stories, and the owner comes around and asks that I take the rest of my story outside because I'm making their other patrons uncomfortable... it is sure as hell not my place to tell them to grow a thicker skin and get over it. It is my place to either stop the discussion or leave, because I have done a disservice to my fellow patron. My story, while fun and educational to those involved, was not well received by everyone else. So too must debates follow similar courtesy when in a public setting where others (who have not agreed to this debate) are forced to play bystander. Move to /tells or form a party and continue your debate. Hell, make a LS called "Lore Debates" so that way everyone inside that linkshell has consented to a debate environment.

There will be people in the world who are uncomfortable with -everything-. If we were to move any discussion that made anyone uncomfortable out of the public eye nobody would talk ever. People need to get over themselves and realize the world can't always cater to them and they need to toughen up.

Gaspard · **02-22-2015, 09:18 PM**

I think it all boils down to what the actual goal behind the debate is. Often times, debates, especially about lore are entered with an agenda. May that be enforcing your own opinion as the proper one through provided arguments or to have someone else change their perception to something more akin to the oppositions side.

In itself, it isn't wrong as such. After all, Cohesion is a must for many in regards to Roleplay. And trying to get everyone on a similar page is quite beneficial aswell.

Usually, the difference between a debate and an argument lies in the tonality, and whether it has a moving agenda, and the degree of respect for the other person and the ability to not take the debate personally.

People can get defensive fast, and can presume a slight against a certain liberty with Canon lore to be akin to criticism to them, therein a prompt for them to not do it. Especially when it comes to lore, many people don't simply debate lore to find out what's right, they do it to be able to tell others that they should get their wrongs fixed.

In the end, it largely Â depends on who you surround yourself with and how open the individuals you are with are to discussion. I personally come from communities where we'd argue and debate things to the death until a unified conclusion was achieved, and no one was upset or insulted by anyone participating in kind. However, there 'are' more frail minds out there, and to simply say 'they need to toughen' up is pretty redundant. They need to toughen up as much as you need to shut up, fact is, either consideration goes both ways or none. Â This however only counts for Public channels and Linkshells.

If there's a thread titled "Discussing BLM in FFXIV", and you actively get into that topic trying to derail it with your sensitivities, and your 'personal hurt' in regards to what's said that, stay out of it. It is not a public channel, it is a discussion created for those willing to discuss it.

Cato · **02-22-2015, 09:18 PM**

I hold the firm belief that there's a time and a place for everything but I'm not too sure a debate regarding role-play is anywhere near the same level as a discussion involving horrific injuries and accidents. As unfortunate as it may be for some having a reasonably thick skin is pretty much a necessity when it comes to online interaction. There's some pretty solid reasons as to why online interaction isn't really taken into account when giving a game such as this an age rating and not every last little detail or individual can be micro-managed. Nor is the real world that way in many scenarios either.

Gone. · **02-22-2015, 09:24 PM**

(02-22-2015, 08:03 PM)Mamushi Wrote: If its that intrusive for you, just temporarily black list them or turn the channel off for a while.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour?

This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks.

Kellach Woods · **02-22-2015, 09:25 PM**

but if i have consideration for other players

who will have consideration for ME

Gaspard · **02-22-2015, 09:30 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:25 PM)Kellach Woods Wrote: but if i have consideration for other players

who will have consideration for ME

One up for sarcasm

Cato · **02-22-2015, 09:31 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:24 PM)hauntmedoitagain Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 08:03 PM)Mamushi Wrote: If its that intrusive for you, just temporarily black list them or turn the channel off for a while.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour?

This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks.

In all fairness, consideration goes both ways not just one. More often than not you'll see one person branded as confrontational in a heated debate when the reality is multiple people usually get involved and egg it on from both sides.

Besides, quite a lot of people in the community are more than willing to compromise or agree to disagree. The main issue is that they're so rarely given the benefit of the doubt or even approached for dialogue because the common reaction from many is to gossip and brand someone eager for debate as a bit of a prick. Which doesn't help anybody.

Now, I've said this before but I think it's well worth repeating again: just because someone happens to be pretty blunt and direct it doesn't make them a bad person. Some of the more direct posters on this very site have turned out to be incredibly friendly and wonderful people whilst those who desperately lace their every word with sugar and claim to be friendly and approachable are, in fact, some of the most vile and manipulative individuals I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Sweeping judgements are rather silly, in other words.

Verranicus · **02-22-2015, 09:40 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:24 PM)hauntmedoitagain Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 08:03 PM)Mamushi Wrote: If its that intrusive for you, just temporarily black list them or turn the channel off for a while.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour?

This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks.

If you're the only one offended over something 2-3 people are discussing wouldn't it make more sense for you to blist them or leave bing a single person instead of expecting a group of people minding their own business to cater to you?

Gaspard · **02-22-2015, 09:52 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:31 PM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 09:24 PM)hauntmedoitagain Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 08:03 PM)Mamushi Wrote: If its that intrusive for you, just temporarily black list them or turn the channel off for a while.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour?

This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks.

In all fairness, consideration goes both ways not just one. More often than not you'll see one person branded as confrontational in a heated debate when the reality is multiple people usually get involved and egg it on from both sides.

Besides, quite a lot of people in the community are more than willing to compromise or agree to disagree. The main issue is that they're so rarely given the benefit of the doubt or even approached for dialogue because the common reaction from many is to gossip and brand someone eager for debate as a bit of a prick. Which doesn't help anybody.

Now, I've said this before but I think it's well worth repeating again: just because someone happens to be pretty blunt and direct it doesn't make them a bad person. Some of the more direct posters on this very site have turned out to be incredibly friendly and wonderful people whilst those who desperately lace their every word with sugar and claim to be friendly and approachable are, in fact, some of the most vile and manipulative individuals I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Sweeping judgements are rather silly, in other words.

Please don't take this too seriously but, this is essentially what popped into my mind reading that;Â

People like me are cool, and I like people like me. But some people think we're dicks.

that makes them even biggers dicks.

Faye · **02-22-2015, 10:05 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:52 PM)Gaspard Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 09:31 PM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 09:24 PM)hauntmedoitagain Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 08:03 PM)Mamushi Wrote: If its that intrusive for you, just temporarily black list them or turn the channel off for a while.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour?

This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks.

In all fairness, consideration goes both ways not just one. More often than not you'll see one person branded as confrontational in a heated debate when the reality is multiple people usually get involved and egg it on from both sides.

Besides, quite a lot of people in the community are more than willing to compromise or agree to disagree. The main issue is that they're so rarely given the benefit of the doubt or even approached for dialogue because the common reaction from many is to gossip and brand someone eager for debate as a bit of a prick. Which doesn't help anybody.

Now, I've said this before but I think it's well worth repeating again: just because someone happens to be pretty blunt and direct it doesn't make them a bad person. Some of the more direct posters on this very site have turned out to be incredibly friendly and wonderful people whilst those who desperately lace their every word with sugar and claim to be friendly and approachable are, in fact, some of the most vile and manipulative individuals I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Sweeping judgements are rather silly, in other words.

Please don't take this too seriously but, this is essentially what popped into my mind reading that;Â

People like me are cool, and I like people like me. But some people think we're dicks.

that makes them even biggers dicks.

I like to debate. Some people think that makes me a bitch.

I think it makes me productive.

Seriously, though. Discussion and differences of opinion need to stop being labelled as this evil, nasty thing.

Sounsyy · **02-22-2015, 10:08 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:13 PM)Verranicus Wrote: There will be people in the world who are uncomfortable with -everything-. If we were to move any discussion that made anyone uncomfortable out of the public eye nobody would talk ever. People need to get over themselves and realize the world can't always cater to them and they need to toughen up.

The subject is irrelevant. It could be a debate on religion, lore, or a gruesome tale of medical traumas. What matters is that you've offended someone. Are there people who are more sensitive to certain issues that others? Yes, certainly, this varies by individual. Which is precisely why debaters must be aware and conscientious of their audiences. Everyone has a topic that they are uncomfortable with. Be that religion, or rape, or white magic, or blood, sex, or guts. It is not your place to decide what other people are comfortable being subjected to. It is well within their rights as unwilling, third parties to make known that they are uncomfortable either with the topic at hand or, more likely, how the debate has been handled between the two participants.

You would not want certain topics to be discussed around your kid, for instance. It is well within the parent's right to ask the debaters to take their conversation elsewhere. Would you tell the kid to grow up and get a thicker skin? He'll learn it eventually. Or would you respect that parent's wishes? You have absolutely no reason not to, other than to demonstrate being a dick right? The same could be said to any public LS discussion. You do not know who is on the other side of that computer and what tolerances or triggers they may have.

You have absolutely nothing to lose by moving your discussion elsewhere and being courteous to the other party, even if you believe they are being prudish. Your brazen reply demonstrates a severe lack of tact or empathy towards a bystander who disagrees with your personal stance. And if you show that little care for a third party who is offended by your discussion, what does that show of your ability to respect the differing opinion of your debate opponent.

Debates can be fun, but what separates a debate from an argument is the amount of respect afforded the other participants.

Cato · **02-22-2015, 10:13 PM**

I think it's worth noting that in the present day it's well worth taking a step back and looking to see if someone is being genuine or too sensitive when they claim to be offended by something related to an online debate involving fictional characters.

Much like the term 'racist', 'troll' and various other buzzwords 'offended' has become commonly misused. Does a line need to be drawn somewhere? Sure! Yet I'm confident in suggesting that it's a dangerous road to go down if we're going to stifle any debate the moment someone claims to be offended. It's a pretty direct route to misuse.

That's not to suggest that a line shouldn't be drawn somewhere, but...context is important. Describing a horrific accident in detail is just on a whole other level to engaging in a passionate debate regarding role-play.

Faye · **02-22-2015, 10:14 PM**

(02-22-2015, 10:08 PM)Sounsyy Wrote:
(02-22-2015, 09:13 PM)Verranicus Wrote: There will be people in the world who are uncomfortable with -everything-. If we were to move any discussion that made anyone uncomfortable out of the public eye nobody would talk ever. People need to get over themselves and realize the world can't always cater to them and they need to toughen up.

The subject is irrelevant. It could be a debate on religion, lore, or a gruesome tale of medical traumas. What matters is that you've offended someone. Are there people who are more sensitive to certain issues that others? Yes, certainly, this varies by individual. Which is precisely why debaters must be aware and conscientious of their audiences. Everyone has a topic that they are uncomfortable with. Be that religion, or rape, or white magic, or blood, sex, or guts. It is not your place to decide what other people are comfortable being subjected to. It is well within their rights as unwilling, third parties to make known that they are uncomfortable either with the topic at hand or, more likely, how the debate has been handled between the two participants.

You would not want certain topics to be discussed around your kid, for instance. It is well within the parent's right to ask the debaters to take their conversation elsewhere. Would you tell the kid to grow up and get a thicker skin? He'll learn it eventually. Or would you respect that parent's wishes? You have absolutely no reason not to, other than to demonstrate being a dick right? The same could be said to any public LS discussion. You do not know who is on the other side of that computer and what tolerances or triggers they may have.

You have absolutely nothing to lose by moving your discussion elsewhere and being courteous to the other party, even if you believe they are being prudish. Your brazen reply demonstrates a severe lack of tact or empathy towards a bystander who disagrees with your personal stance. And if you show that little care for a third party who is offended by your discussion, what does that show of your ability to respect the differing opinion of your debate opponent.

Debates can be fun, but what separates a debate from an argument is the amount of respect afforded the other participants.

If "are white mages lore friendly IC?" is a trigger for someone, they should probably reconsider their choice of MMO, or maybe just not join any RP related communities. People shouldn't have to censor themselves from having a tame discussion about something relevant and important to the game itself. The topic does indeed matter.

Gone. · **02-22-2015, 10:25 PM**

(02-22-2015, 09:40 PM)Verranicus Wrote: If you're the only one offended over something 2-3 people are discussing wouldn't it make more sense for you to blist them or leave bing a single person instead of expecting a group of people minding their own business to cater to you?

What if you're not the only one? Silence says a lot more than words at times.

(02-22-2015, 09:31 PM)Graeham Ridgefield Wrote: In all fairness, consideration goes both ways not just one. More often than not you'll see one person branded as confrontational in a heated debate when the reality is multiple people usually get involved and egg it on from both sides.

Besides, quite a lot of people in the community are more than willing to compromise or agree to disagree. The main issue is that they're so rarely given the benefit of the doubt or even approached for dialogue because the common reaction from many is to gossip and brand someone eager for debate as a bit of a prick. Which doesn't help anybody.

Now, I've said this before but I think it's well worth repeating again: just because someone happens to be pretty blunt and direct it doesn't make them a bad person. Some of the more direct posters on this very site have turned out to be incredibly friendly and wonderful people whilst those who desperately lace their every word with sugar and claim to be friendly and approachable are, in fact, some of the most vile and manipulative individuals I've ever had the displeasure of encountering.

Sweeping judgements are rather silly, in other words.

I'm pretty sure consideration for both parties was implied right from the get-go.

For the record, I don't think everyone with a debate-centric mind is a confrontational, self-centered jerk. I will say, however, that my experience has found this to be true more often than not.

Poll: Read the following, and choose an option You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
Answer 1	17.50%	7	17.50%
Answer 2	37.50%	15	37.50%
A compromise between the two	45.00%	18	45.00%
Total		40 vote(s)	100%

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Pages (6): « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

Debates are not arguments

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes