Honest Discussion on UseNet? Pt I
Significant Pickle
gets too unmanageable (read: large!)
Tom Fletcher <t...@fletch05.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<76fvsf$9uc$2...@newnews.global.net.uk>...
> >> Significant Pickle wrote: (Part of original post)
> >Your general question: "Why is your (S. Pickle) posting style so damn
> >abrasive?"
> >
> >My simplified answer: Because it gets results.
>
> It does get results, I will admit that, but some people may get slightly
> offended by calling them "lying sacks of shit", even though they KNOW the
> post is not aimed at them personally.
Psychobabble: "Someone secure in the knowledge that he is not (insert
Negative Personality Trait X) will not be offended by the baseless personal
accusation of X. Those not entirely secure (including most people alive)
will be offended and defensive directly in proportion to the degree that
they are insecure".
Extreme examples: Homophobia, Racism, Religious Dogmatic-mindset, etc.
This is one of those 'things' that many people (including myself for some
time) do not want to admit, because it conflicts with our ego. There's an
old cliche to tag on to this: "Truth hurts".
> >I'd like you to elaborate on this.
>
> Okay, "Blind Guardian Sucks? Fight For Quality!!" (and yes, I admit, I
did
> forget about the ?)
>
> Hey, all you people who listen to BG. Their next album is going to be
SHIT!
> And you are going to BUY IT, and hand out your money like a well trained
> animal!
> Quit sitting around on your backsides you lying sacks of shit, and get
some
> music you REALLY enjoy! Hey, don't blame MTV! "I don't see good metal on
> MTV.." Get some music you will enjoy more than the poor quality albums
your
> favourite bands are churning out now!
>
> How would you feel?
Honest question.
The context is slightly off, and I'll explain.
* Blind Guardian is rather obscure (moreso than Maiden), so to "find" it
takes a little more effort in the 'get off your lazy ass and don't let
(outside circumstance) dictate your tates".
* The latest BG album, "Nightfall in Middle-Earth" IS not as high-quality
as the ones before (in terms of composition, yes. But it is "catchier" and
slightly less 'memorable'). Not nearly to the degree of Maiden, but if
(when.....it's almost inevitable in this business) they slide into
mediocrity, I'll have no more of it.
* The "you'll just buy it, you lying-sack-of-shit" comment would have
bothered the FUCK out of me about 6 years ago (or so). Now, not so much,
as I am fully aware (honestly) that I no longer follow this bying-pattern.
Admittedly (with No Prayer for the Dying), I did.
> (Btw, this is NOT an attack to BG. I am using this as an example.)
Obviously.
You shouldn't need to add disclaimers like this. Those who need that sort
of disclaimer in order to respond rationally are obviously more interested
in responding to aesthetics.
Aside: If you >were< honestly attacking the quality of BG's work, I could
think of a few points that you could use that would not be "wrong". No
band is perfect (arrogant: not even the ones >I< like...... ;)
> >Common behaviour amongst humans: it is more difficult to be objective
and
> >understand another's point of view. It is much easier to villify the
ones
> >you disagree with ("Significant Pickle is just a 4-year old with nothing
> >better to do than flame people!!!!!!!"), ("Hitler was a fucking evil
madman
> >who killed Jews") than honestly think and consider their perspective.
>
> The four-year old thing was maybe over the top, I admit.
It was dishonest. Ad hominem (personal insult without backing). Now,
this varies in degrees....the above was an extreme example, but there were
others. Can you find them?
(note: however, you admit it. Always a good sign)
> >However, my initial post "pissed you off" enough to completely overlook
the
> >content within. Not an attack, this comment, but a relevant point that
I
> >want you to think about.
>
> I did not overlook the content within, and because I felt your post WAS a
> little too abrasive, as you admit, you can expect an abrasive reply
(mine)
> which was not intended to personally attack you, or start a flame war.
The
> person who started to carry this on was you.
(note: please consider the honesty of your second-last statement. That's
all I ask)
Yes, I "carried it on".
Yes, I was fucking abrasive. Let's take it one step further. If you had
formed your above reply like:
**I didn't overlook the content, you asshole....your post shows what a jerk
you are. I don't need to personally attack you, I provided backup to all
my fucking points [insert examples with content]. So go fuck yourself**
It would be the same thing content-wise (actually, better, since the
hypothetical example supplies quotes and examples). It'd be up to me to
ignore the aesthetics (ie. not respond to you calling me an asshole....what
would that lead to?), and address the points.
The most awesome difference between UseNet and "real life" is that you
don't HAVE to deal with personality issues directly, for purposes of making
a point. Ever wonder why so many people are "oh so heroically brave" using
this meduim?
> >Context time here: If someone made a blanket statement, "You're all
> >animal-fuckers who fuck your mothers too!" on this newsgroup, you're
> >response would be simply "go away, idiot", or something, right? Why,
> >because you KNOW that it does not apply to you, are secure in the fact
that
> >it does not apply to you, and dismiss the poster as a "flamer".
>
> Some people would be offended by this, even if it does not apply to them
> personally? You use that dreaded word "ALL", as a general assumption. If
I
> sent you a personal e-mail, or a post to the group that said "Dear
> Significant Pickle, you are a total and utter wanker that spends all his
> time blowing goats and fucking horses up the arse" which is a ridiculous
> comment, what would you do?
On a good day, ignore it, and laugh at the idiocy of the poster. On a bad
day, flame the fuck out of him....UNLESS there was content to the post.
(note: You made another mistake, tho. I did not use the word "all" in the
original post when refering to 'sheep'. Many of your counter-points
following hinge on this error-or-dishonesty).
> >Why do you suppose, then, that so many people vehemently made a point to
> >say: "I AM NOT A SHEEP YOU ASSHOLE/MORON/FUCKER/6-YEAR
OLD!!!1!!!!!!1111!"
> >to my blanket statement?
>
> Maybe so you know that we are all not sheep? You DID use the word "all"
in
> your original post "You are all going to BUY it!"
[www.dejanews.com] Read the original post again, please.
> Agreed, you did not reply to anyone "your a sheep anyway", but again you
> come up with a general conclusion that we buy the material. Your choice
of
> words here too is rather provoking. "You fucking buy it" is asking for a
> flaming reply.
(freebie hint)
That was the intent! To point out "defensiveness".
There is a madness to my method, you know ;)
> It was an attack on the newsgroup, and has been defended against, but
what
> was the original need to attack the newsgroup? Yeah, it creates response
by
> provoking people, but later on if you stay at this NG, people will
probably
> just flame you for anything is you attack the whole NG.
>
> >However, note that I do not "believe" that this applies to >everyone<
(or
> >make that even, >most< of us).
>
> Then why state "And your all going to BUY it!!"?
> >> This is an attack on Maidens recent works. Some people actually like
> >these.
> >
> >It is an attack on the >quality< (relative term, I explained this) of
> >Maiden's recent works. No-one has debated against this point thus far.
>
> I speak for myself here. Even though I do not like the music that Maiden
> produce now, I think there is some quality there. It is nothing like
their
> old material, but how many metal bands do you know that can keep the same
> style and consistency for nearly 25 years?
That's known as "apologism" (making an excuse for a circumstance based on
the actions of others). Example: "You say America is a bad place to
live, and we should fight for something better. Yeah, well there are
hardly any better places to live!"
To respond (I hate responding to apologism, btw): Yes, there are hardly
any bands that can keep up the quality of their peak years. My post said
that quality is worth fighting for. How is your apologism relevant?
> >> Are we all like this? Do you have the evidence that proves ANY ONE OF
US
> >a
> >> "sheep", or a blind consumer, whatever words you wish to use?I think
you
> >are
> >> wrong to suggest that most people believe"as long as it's Maiden it's
> >good"
> >
> >What sort of proof would you like, that is possible to generate on
UseNet?
> >Be fair, and note the context of the responses to this thread.
You missed (purposely or otherwise) this part of the post.
> I was only concerned about your "next piece of shit Maiden album"
comment.
> This is a personal comment, and if people reply to your post saying they
> like this new Maiden music by choice, there is nothing anyone can do.
Sure there is. You are reading examples of it daily.
> Btw, I have a lot of other important things in my life apart from music,
> Maiden, and this NG, so I think I can safely say that I enjoy my life to
its
> full extent. Your personal comment about. "However, I will bet that I
> >enjoy< life more than the average
> person" (which you do state is a subjective comment) is not needed. How
do
> you class an average person? Am I an average person? What makes you
> "above-average"?
Extreme tangential example: Ask someone who does a shitty job working 50
hours per week if they HONESTLY can say they're happy with their life.
Based on hundreds of examples in my experience, most will say "yes", mostly
just to shut you up.....thinking about it is 'bad'.
Do you see how this relates to your question?
> >Take that thought one step farther. Media is a metaphor for "outside
> >forces" of any kind.
> >
> >(note: I can see why many would view this as a personal attack. See
> >above--"defensiveness")
>
> I'm glad you see that this could be viewed as a personal attack.
I've always known this. The point was to point out WHY it could be viewed
as a personal attack (see above: 'security and defensiveness').
(hint: why I keep "carrying this on" is because what I am trying to do
requires more than just one post. It's complicated, and cannot be
explained quickly).
> >I didn't call that statement dishonest, now, did I? That was your
honest
> >"analysis" of my posting style.
>
> Yes, it was honest, and no you did not reply to this post.
Yes I did, just not directly. I used it as an example in another.
My only reply to your "Pickle, you've come into this newsgroup with the
wrong attitude" would be:
"That's your problem".
So, no real point in responding, non?
> I was simply
> asking if you felt that I was being dishonest in my comment. This was not
to
> mock you. Maybe if I had phrased it :
>
> "This is my opinion on you (S.P.) Do you think this comment that was made
is
> unreasonable?"
Not unreasonable (neither was your original). You stated you don't like my
attitude. Fair enough. It just wasn't worth responding to.
(To be continued.......)
E.
--
******
"We die and are reborn with each breath,
And for each death; the shedding of a lie,
A truth is born."
--Foundation, "Morning"
Tokus
Significant Pickle heeft geschreven in bericht
<01be34ef$8cb12400$4c8d94d1@vanguard>...
>I'm going to break half of this post off into another thread, or this one
>gets too unmanageable (read: large!)
good for you, but take it elsewhere because it has nothing to do with Maiden
anymore.
cu
Tonnie
Significant Pickle
<76glej$b0n$1...@news2.xs4all.nl>...
>
> Significant Pickle heeft geschreven in bericht
> <01be34ef$8cb12400$4c8d94d1@vanguard>...
one
> >gets too unmanageable (read: large!)
>
Maiden
> anymore.
That's up to you, but here's the easier solution: you don't like what I
post, killfile me.
Pretty simple, methinks.
Tokus
Significant Pickle heeft geschreven in bericht
>> good for you, but take it elsewhere because it has nothing to do with
>Maiden
>> anymore.
>
>That's up to you, but here's the easier solution: you don't like what I
>post, killfile me.
Yes, I could do that, but do you think that it is a coincidence that this is
called alt.rock-n-roll.metal.IRONMAIDEN? To talk about Maiden and Maiden
related things. It's ok if it gets off topic, but not too long. and since
your posts were waaaaaay off-topic, itshould be taken elsewhere.
cu
Tonnie