in reply to Re^8: What is "aggressive" argument?
in thread What is "aggressive" argument?

And there it is, the message that veers off the path of discourse and heads down the path of insults and flame wars. I didn't actually except to see it happen in this thread, but no matter.

Regarding geography, no I did not notice any hint of irony. That's the problem with writing -- intent is often not clear when it comes to irony and sarcasm. I saw the literal version of what was written -- e.g. that you do not know that much about the Mid-west, and responded in kind.

Regarding Peoria, Illinois, IBM has a campus there, and since it's in the Mid-west, I thought you might be confusing Boca Raton and Poughkeepsie for it. I'm not sure how anyone goes from "Peoria, Illinois" to the sound of barfing, but it is a good example of how you tend to derail threads.

Anyway, sadly, given the direction this thread is headed in, there's little point in continuing it. :-(

Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^10: What is "aggressive" argument?
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Nov 05, 2010 at 22:16 UTC
    I'm not sure how anyone goes from "Peoria, Illinois" to the sound of barfing,

    Ill-y noise. (Indicating that I don't know what "Illinois" is, never mind "Peoria".)(It's called humour!)

    no I did not notice any hint of irony.

    The clues were: a) the direct/indirect people were in the exact opposite to my previous suggestion; b) "Or maybe that's just the way I remember it.".

    Not to mention my explicitly stating that a) I didn't know where the Mid-West was; b) and that, my impressions of the "New Yorker" came from cheesy film stereotypes.

    I was quite clearly making the point that the exact locations mentioned were immaterial to the discussion of cultural differences. And that any deep examination of the accuracy or otherwise of the location references was equally irrelevant.

    and heads down the path of insults and flame wars.

    There are no "insults", nor anything that should lead to "flame wars" in that post. None intended, nor implied. None at all. Really, zip, nada, zilch.

    The entire post is about showing exactly how discourse can be misinterpreted. How offence can be taken, or not, at the whim of the reader, regardless of the writers intent.

    Remember: "But they also apply the American stereotyping of the Brits, to our faces. And we laugh all the louder because it's not personal."

    Please--suspend your disbelief for just 2 minutes--go back read the whole post again in the light that I was not attempting to insult you. That I was simply trying to make my case through that discourse. To show you how easy it is to misinterpret.

    More successfully than I anticipated it seems :(

    Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
    "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
    In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
      Illinois (where the "s" is silent, so the "nois" part rhymes with "boy") is a Midwestern state. It's a tall, fairly narrow state, with Chicago up at the top and then a whole lot of rural land in the rest of the state. There's a small grouping of cities in between Chicago and St. Louis, which is where Peoria is located. I used to hear lots of IBM related stories from a now retired co-worker who worked at that campus (among several places IBM sent him).

      Anyway, for better or worse, your reputation for heated debates precedes you , which in turn affects how others interpret what you write in said debates. So while you may not have any ill intent, if a message can be read multiple ways, the more aggressive interpretation will often prevail, especially the further along in a debate.

      Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks
[reply]
        (It's called humour!)
[reply]

In Section Meditations