Yeah, it is quite clear that is how you’re treating this. Text, conveying awful evil ideas from a faceless enemy without feelings or a soul. I gotta go.
Yeah, I’m not here to discuss politics from the point of “How does the other person feel about my criticism of a third party whose behavior influences more people than you or I will ever even speak to?” but “Is this correct or incorrect? Is this moral or immoral? Is this a valid argument, or invalid?”
I honestly used to believe humanity had a chance. Between the trump era and seeing people behave poorly all the time, I just don’t have that hope anymore. I don’t know how to explain it, and it doesn’t seem like you’d care in any case, but this conversation is a not small part of increasing that hopelessness. For a year I’ve been reading your posts and comments and largely agreeing and feeling a sense of alignment. But the second there isn’t agreement, boom, a feeling of instant enemies.
You aren’t here to care about feelings… alright. Generally though I think society benefits if more people think humanity has a shot.
But the second there isn’t agreement, boom, a feeling of instant enemies.
I’m sorry you feel that way. I don’t regard you as an enemy, and I can show receipts on the kind of vitriol I shower on people whom I actively dislike - it’s not like this. This was just a heated argument over an issue two people feel strongly about. They happen.
I appreciate you taking this feedback somewhat well. The way you wrote is like how I would write to a full on fascist. I would suggest reconsidering your tone in situations like this.
Well, I apologize. It’s not the first time my aggressive tone has been… more hostile than it’s meant. I like to hammer points hard to ensure there’s no ‘way out’ of the counter-argument that could be brushed off, like ambiguity or a lack of severity, but the bitterness and sarcasm employed sometimes makes it sound accusatory towards the arguer and not the point, though that’s not how it’s meant.
I mean, more hostile than it’s meant towards someone I’m not trying to be hostile towards. Obviously I cut the brakes when I want to be hostile because I’m dealing with a fascist or like cretin.
Man, if you feel I’m being vitriolic towards you, I can assure you, I don’t feel like you’re a bad person for holding the view that you do. You aren’t coming from a position of “Fascism is good, so Snowden is good”, you’re just denying what I see as a fairly plain interpretation of the events. I don’t think you’re a dipshit or a fascist like I think of some other people who’ve put forth bad arguments. I think you just hold a bad viewpoint on this particular issue. We all do sometimes.
I think that the issue of Snowden is a relatively important one. I do hold plenty of vitriol for Snowden, but he’s not here, in this conversation, so his feelings are a nonissue here even if you think they’re important. He’s not likely to be on Lemmy browsing neck-deep in a comment thread. He’ll live.
Yeah, it is quite clear that is how you’re treating this. Text, conveying awful evil ideas from a faceless enemy without feelings or a soul. I gotta go.
Yeah, I’m not here to discuss politics from the point of “How does the other person feel about my criticism of a third party whose behavior influences more people than you or I will ever even speak to?” but “Is this correct or incorrect? Is this moral or immoral? Is this a valid argument, or invalid?”
I honestly used to believe humanity had a chance. Between the trump era and seeing people behave poorly all the time, I just don’t have that hope anymore. I don’t know how to explain it, and it doesn’t seem like you’d care in any case, but this conversation is a not small part of increasing that hopelessness. For a year I’ve been reading your posts and comments and largely agreeing and feeling a sense of alignment. But the second there isn’t agreement, boom, a feeling of instant enemies.
You aren’t here to care about feelings… alright. Generally though I think society benefits if more people think humanity has a shot.
I’m sorry you feel that way. I don’t regard you as an enemy, and I can show receipts on the kind of vitriol I shower on people whom I actively dislike - it’s not like this. This was just a heated argument over an issue two people feel strongly about. They happen.
I appreciate you taking this feedback somewhat well. The way you wrote is like how I would write to a full on fascist. I would suggest reconsidering your tone in situations like this.
Well, I apologize. It’s not the first time my aggressive tone has been… more hostile than it’s meant. I like to hammer points hard to ensure there’s no ‘way out’ of the counter-argument that could be brushed off, like ambiguity or a lack of severity, but the bitterness and sarcasm employed sometimes makes it sound accusatory towards the arguer and not the point, though that’s not how it’s meant.
I mean, more hostile than it’s meant towards someone I’m not trying to be hostile towards. Obviously I cut the brakes when I want to be hostile because I’m dealing with a fascist or like cretin.
I appreciate the apology and the willingness to reflect. See you around.
You should save the vitriol for people who literally are your enemy
Man, if you feel I’m being vitriolic towards you, I can assure you, I don’t feel like you’re a bad person for holding the view that you do. You aren’t coming from a position of “Fascism is good, so Snowden is good”, you’re just denying what I see as a fairly plain interpretation of the events. I don’t think you’re a dipshit or a fascist like I think of some other people who’ve put forth bad arguments. I think you just hold a bad viewpoint on this particular issue. We all do sometimes.
I think that the issue of Snowden is a relatively important one. I do hold plenty of vitriol for Snowden, but he’s not here, in this conversation, so his feelings are a nonissue here even if you think they’re important. He’s not likely to be on Lemmy browsing neck-deep in a comment thread. He’ll live.