4 ms·
I am not agreeable to following the "be civil" guideline. The times when I have been uncivil, I've generally been downvoted, which I think is perfectly fair.
by araneae 17y ago
I am not agreeable to following the "be civil" guideline.
The times when I have been uncivil, I've generally been downvoted, which I think is perfectly fair. However, there are some times when I've been rather rude, and the comments ended up positive; but they were negative initially by quite a few points.
I really do think that "being civil" has its place, but to be civil all the time requires a certain dishonesty; perhaps not in literal meaning, but certainly in emotional meaning.
- tokenadult 17y agoWell, then I'll politely express my disagreement (as others have in other replies) to say that I think civility is ALWAYS a good idea in online discussion, and there can never be too much of it. I think it is possible, as I hope is happening here, to be civil while being very firm in one's factual position.
- sofal 17y agoCivility does not require dishonesty. You can make firm, bold, blunt, and even emotionally powerful statements while remaining perfectly civil. Civility is not a weakness. It is a strength. Being civil is always more effective for persuading people to your side. The only thing you can accomplish by being uncivil is rallying people who already agree with you (free upvotes), widening the divide between us and them.
- araneae 17y agoSometimes you want to widen the divide.