6 ms·
People getting mad at things on internet are a greater mystery to me then the origin of universe.
by KON_Air 10y ago
People getting mad at things on internet are a greater mystery to me then the origin of universe.
- gwright 10y agoI find your comment a mystery. The fact that something is communicated via the Internet doesn't magically make it dismissible. Ideas that make people mad can be communicated in all sorts of ways, the medium is irrelevant. So I read your comment as dismissing the concept that words actually have meaning. It seems like a very nihilistic point of view.
- nradov 10y agoThe point is that everyone knows (or should know) that Internet communications contain at least 10× more trolling than any other common medium, and thus people should have sufficient emotional self control to avoid getting mad at least until they have definitively determined whether a particular idea is intended to be serious.
- rosser 10y agoThe point is that everyone knows (or should know) that dark alleys are at least 10x more dangerous than lighted streets, and thus people should have sufficient situational awareness to avoid getting mugged, blah, blah, blah... Yeah. Uh huh. Exactly. If I could roll my eyes any harder, they'd fall out the back of my head.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- nradov 10y agoI'm not sure what you're trying to say. Of course people should avoid high crime areas when practical and maintain situational awareness when out in public. This is simple common sense, and although not 100% effective those steps will drastically reduce the risk of getting mugged. Ask any police officer.
- rosser 10y agoA mugging is always the mugger's fault. Full stop. I could walk down the street wearing clothes made from $100 bills and gold thread, and it's the person who attacks me that is to blame for that attack. They initiated the use of force and violence, contrary to law, custom, and human decency. Any claim to the contrary is, unambiguously, "Well, if she hadn't been wearing that dress..."
- nradov 10y agoYou're completely missing the point. First, getting mad about someone trolling on the Internet has nothing to do with sexual assault. Second, I never stated anything about blaming the victim. But that doesn't make it smart to walk down a dark alley flashing $100 bills. The mugger is to blame but that won't keep you safe in the real world where some people will always be vicious predators. In fact through your intentional misunderstanding and inflammatory rhetoric about unrelated topics I now suspect you have successfully trolled me in a discussion about trolling. Well played, sir!
- rosser 10y ago> ...but that won't keep you safe in the real world where some people will always be vicious predators. And I'm saying the troll is the predator. He views his entertainment as more important than his "victim's" emotional state, and justifies it with arguments like, "Well, it's the internet, maaaan!" or "It's only a joke, lighten up," or "Serves them right for being so sensitive." I flatly repudiate that kind of self-serving rationalization. If you fuck with people's emotions for your own amusement, you are a predator. Doesn't matter how "easy" it is. Doesn't matter how "sensitive" they are. You (that is, the party trolling someone) are in the wrong. Does it change the fact that there are predators in the world? Of course not. But that still doesn't justify predation. And if you say it does, the same logic applies to muggings and sexual assault. That's the parallel.
- mreiland 10y agoI think comparing an internet troll with a mugger or rapist is ridiculous.
- KON_Air 10y agoIt is not formal or face to face communication, even if it were, there is no obligation to participate or oblige someone trying to get a rise out of someone else. On top if it people have more then enough tools to completely remove themselves or the offending party from conversation. Thus medium is relevant. But if you mean an e-ego has to be defended and proven superior to others in order to maintain e-streetcred... yeah, sure it will amount to nothing but entertainment for someone else.
- gwright 10y agoWhat does 'formal' or 'face-to-face' have to do with anything? Words and ideas have meaning whether the situation is trivial or earth-shattering, whether the communication is face-to-face, online. To view otherwise is to reject meaning at all levels, to be nihilistic.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- psyc 10y agoWell, I find text on the internet extremely dismissible, which is why I conclude that it's the reader's choice to some extent.
- gwright 10y agoThe breadth and depth of information on the "internet" is such that any attempt to characterize it in the aggregate is nonsensical.