It might be worthwhile to research "non-violent communication" (NVC). There is some misinformation out there that it means not speaking clearly, but it's actual

It might be worthwhile to research "non-violent communication" (NVC). There is some misinformation out there that it means not speaking clearly, but it's actually entirely compatible with full and complete communication and understanding the viewpoint of another. It's valuable to understand different viewpoints, and also to share your own arguments - it helps people learn from each other and discover shared truths. So I don't think it's the arguing that is necessarily the problem. Arguments are simply the reasoning behind conclusions. The ugly parts of argumentation are more about style and irresponsible rhetoric. (I'd also suggest that the common online format incentivizes boorishness. Most comment threads don't make it convenient to have a full respectful sharing of views. You're probably incentivized to lead with your provocative counterargument to "cut to the chase", to minimize the chance of your counterpart getting distracted and moving on to other things.)