> ...er...yes? I mean, that's why social media sites are popular. They don't have time to think about how that person thinks, but they do have time to search s

> ...er...yes? I mean, that's why social media sites are popular. They don't have time to think about how that person thinks, but they do have time to search social media sites. > Should society just acclimate itself to be less reactionary to social media quips? I don't know? I am not sure what you mean by 'reactionary'. > Social media networks are so strong because they can cause such emotional reaction for such little energy input. I find that social networks require a moderate amount of energy input to maintain a position I do not find disagreeable, but additionally find somewhat insightful or valuable to offer (and here I must make some assumptions about any reader, so I apologize). > You and I want both the same thing: patience and empathy in civic discourse. Yes. I just think discourse is very complicated. > But you have more faith than I do that it can/should happen even when the scales are so lopsided: It's not so much faith, as it is questioning inwardly. > physically, it gets easier and easier to make and disseminate our thoughts but our ability to physically process such information does not scale as well. I can't say I experience this position either. In the past I may have agreed with you, so I am sure there is truth to your sentiment.