I'm personally sympathetic to such zeroing in, even if I understand your reasoning. Just as a default, and when I remember how, for example, I've actively put off Home Movies because it's unpleasant for me to look at. And if those one or two issues stay singularly focused, then I'm more inclined to give, for lack of a better term (I'm kind of tired), BOFD.
(Though it's not the zeroing in i'd object to, per se, only that 'it sucks' reads to me like a pronouncement on overall quality which i don't feel you're in a position to make if you haven't actually watched it.)
chaotic, dramatic shouting matches are not fun to be involved in, imo
if i am invested enough to participate, doing so is exhausting, embarrassing and time-consuming, and puts me in a bad mood that can linger for some time afterwards and potentially wreck my day or sour my feelings towards a person or website for a time
so i guess with that in mind i'd be better off facepalming and moving on; that's how you 'win', because any more prolonged engagement is obviously a loss
at least when i care about the thing in question; that's the thing with dismissing something from a position of ignorance, the deck is stacked in your favour, as you're unlikely to be as invested or to take the matter as seriously as whoever feels strongly enough to argue back
well i guess there's the difference between being invested in the argument and treating it as another sideshow
like for example
"utena sucks" "well your opinion is bad and you should feel bad" "well your face is ugly LOLOLOLOL" "YOUR MOTHER WAS A HAMSTER etc." "i'm going to tie you up to a chair and make you watch it 24/7" "MAKE ME" etc.
vs.
"utena sucks" "[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show]" "...[does not know how to respond because that's not what this person was expecting]"
now honestly the best response to "utena sucks" would actually be "[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show and also skillfully insulting the person who said "utena sucks" in the first place]"
now honestly the best response to "utena sucks" would actually be "[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show and also skillfully insulting the person who said "utena sucks" in the first place]"
okay it's past 1 am and i need to be up in less than 6 hours and i should probably go to sleep now so that i avoid further increasing the possibility that i get infected with zika virus and get eaten by an alligator
"x sucks" "[sincere expression of appreciation of x, with reasons given]" "[blatant joke post reiterating that x sucks]" ". . . [does not know how to respond but feels taken aback and slightly hurt at not being seriously engaged with]"
"x sucks" "[sincere expression of appreciation of x, with reasons given]" "[blatant joke post reiterating that x sucks]" ". . . [does not know how to respond but feels taken aback and slightly hurt at not being seriously engaged with]"
i think i've learned not to go near threads like that if they're flaming something i truly love
now honestly the best response to "utena sucks" would actually be "[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show and also skillfully insulting the person who said "utena sucks" in the first place]"
so TL;DR Sredni Vashtar wins this thread
ah, the bants were never my strong suit
So then you and your chum, who's a top lad, a total ledge, and the utter Archbishop of Banterbury, start getting into it over Manchester, right? And then
but that is a lesson i have repeatedly failed to learn, myself
nah actually i probably haven't learned either and instead just jump in when i see stuff, but i'm just more argumentatively prone so i get more of a rush from arguing with others on issues i care about
though these days i really have come to avoid certain topics because i've argued or seen them argued to death and feel that there's nothing worth my time to shift opinion about
now honestly the best response to "utena sucks" would actually be "[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show and also skillfully insulting the person who said "utena sucks" in the first place]"
so TL;DR Sredni Vashtar wins this thread
ah, the bants were never my strong suit
So then you and your chum, who's a top lad, a total ledge, and the utter Archbishop of Banterbury, start getting into it over Manchester, right? And then
> ledge
now i'm picturing @Tachyon and me as the children on the cover of Where The Sidewalk Ends
well it's like when you're out with your mates and you've been having some quality banter and maybe a cheeky pint in your local Spoons and you're feeling a bit peckish and you say 'let's go maccies innit' but then your bruv Ollie, the lad, says 'nah mates let's have a cheeky nandos!' and you're like 'top notch, let's smash it'
Nando's is a chain of restaurants, not like super posh but a step up from fast food, that's mainly known for spicy chicken
'cheeky' is harder to define because it's slang that's very context-dependent, but it's sort of like, it carries the implication that you shouldn't really be doing something? that puts it too strongly tho, like it's not actually bad it's just not what you're meant to do in that situation, but you're doing it anyway because it's going to be a laugh and you want chicken
well it's like when you're out with your mates and you've been having some quality banter and maybe a cheeky pint in your local Spoons and you're feeling a bit peckish and you say 'let's go maccies innit' but then your bruv Ollie, the lad, says 'nah mates let's have a cheeky nandos!' and you're like 'top notch, let's smash it'
well it's like when you're out with your friends and you've been having some quality banter and maybe a beer at your local pub and you're feeling a bit hungry and you say "let's go to Mickey D's" but then your bro Ollie, the dude, he says "nah, y'all, let's go to Nando's" and you're like "sweet, let's do it"
Nando's being a chicken restaurant from South Africa with a large UK presence.
Is it me or are we really hard on Glenn, like come on this thread is almost painful for me to read
This is more or less how I felt about this thread, or at least the first part of it, but I was worried about saying anything. I think it's generally better to just not post if you don't think a thread's topic is worth engaging with, rather than posting what amounts to eye rolling.
Granted, I'm not really into etymology, so I may just be missing the point a bit, I guess.
In seriousness, when someone makes what looks like a factual pronouncement, and it looks like it's a mistake, i don't consider it hostile or rude to say so.
Like to me providing more accurate information seems like the most productive response
Comments
if i am invested enough to participate, doing so is exhausting, embarrassing and time-consuming, and puts me in a bad mood that can linger for some time afterwards and potentially wreck my day or sour my feelings towards a person or website for a time
so i guess with that in mind i'd be better off facepalming and moving on; that's how you 'win', because any more prolonged engagement is obviously a loss
at least when i care about the thing in question; that's the thing with dismissing something from a position of ignorance, the deck is stacked in your favour, as you're unlikely to be as invested or to take the matter as seriously as whoever feels strongly enough to argue back
like for example
"utena sucks"
"well your opinion is bad and you should feel bad"
"well your face is ugly LOLOLOLOL"
"YOUR MOTHER WAS A HAMSTER etc."
"i'm going to tie you up to a chair and make you watch it 24/7"
"MAKE ME"
etc.
vs.
"utena sucks"
"[long, detailed post about why utena is a praiseworthy show]"
"...[does not know how to respond because that's not what this person was expecting]"
There's more than two options. :T
so TL;DR Sredni Vashtar wins this thread
the way Star Fox 64 used "forever" as an adjective in "The Forever Train"
it's a slightly archaic/poetic form, i think
"x sucks"
"[sincere expression of appreciation of x, with reasons given]"
"[blatant joke post reiterating that x sucks]"
". . . [does not know how to respond but feels taken aback and slightly hurt at not being seriously engaged with]"
though these days i really have come to avoid certain topics because i've argued or seen them argued to death and feel that there's nothing worth my time to shift opinion about > ledge
now i'm picturing @Tachyon and me as the children on the cover of Where The Sidewalk Ends
also it turns out 'chum' is actually 1680s slang
yeah i remember when that was a meme, that was pretty funny to me
your mate (probs called Gaz)
Nando's is a chain of restaurants, not like super posh but a step up from fast food, that's mainly known for spicy chicken
'cheeky' is harder to define because it's slang that's very context-dependent, but it's sort of like, it carries the implication that you shouldn't really be doing something? that puts it too strongly tho, like it's not actually bad it's just not what you're meant to do in that situation, but you're doing it anyway because it's going to be a laugh and you want chicken
Granted, I'm not really into etymology, so I may just be missing the point a bit, I guess.
Like to me providing more accurate information seems like the most productive response