If you disagree but can’t succinctly explain, I would suggest doing one of these things:
Write a long comment explaining your disagreement
Write a short comment stating your specific points of disagreement, with a disclaimer that you don’t have time to fully justify your beliefs
Your comment is being downvoted (I suspect) because it does neither of these, instead it indirectly insults the author without providing any information as to why you disagree. IMO this sort of comment doesn’t really contribute anything—all I know is that you disagree, I have no idea what’s going on inside your head, so I’m not learning anything from it.
I should have done the second; I was mistaken that clicking “Read More” in the commenting guidelines would not reward me with sufficient clarity about Duncan’s elaborate standards; I apologize for my rude behavior.
Explain, please? I affirm the importance of charitability and I am interested in greater specificity about what you have identified as ‘aggressiveness’. I see aggressiveness as sometimes justified.
Note to other readers: LVSN will not be able to reply further. On top of the already extant sarcasm in this thread, their response to my private message began “Sabien. You messaged me directly. It’s a miracle.”
(Oh, I had neither upvoted nor downvoted because I hadn’t caught the sarcasm, because it hadn’t explicitly occurred to me that someone would be that much of a dick. Going back to add my own downvotes now. Not deleting because there’s now useful content underneath.)
IMO this sort of comment doesn’t really contribute anything—all I know is that you disagree, I have no idea what’s going on inside your head, so I’m not learning anything from it.
Just pointing out that this also applies to upvotes and downvotes. That’s the mechanism for expressing disagreement or agreement when you really don’t feel like stating your reasons explicitly.
If you disagree but can’t succinctly explain, I would suggest doing one of these things:
Write a long comment explaining your disagreement
Write a short comment stating your specific points of disagreement, with a disclaimer that you don’t have time to fully justify your beliefs
Your comment is being downvoted (I suspect) because it does neither of these, instead it indirectly insults the author without providing any information as to why you disagree. IMO this sort of comment doesn’t really contribute anything—all I know is that you disagree, I have no idea what’s going on inside your head, so I’m not learning anything from it.
I should have done the second; I was mistaken that clicking “Read More” in the commenting guidelines would not reward me with sufficient clarity about Duncan’s elaborate standards; I apologize for my rude behavior.
I do not believe this apology is genuine, since LVSN has continued to be actively aggressive and uncharitable subsequent to it.
Explain, please? I affirm the importance of charitability and I am interested in greater specificity about what you have identified as ‘aggressiveness’. I see aggressiveness as sometimes justified.
Note to other readers: LVSN will not be able to reply further. On top of the already extant sarcasm in this thread, their response to my private message began “Sabien. You messaged me directly. It’s a miracle.”
(Oh, I had neither upvoted nor downvoted because I hadn’t caught the sarcasm, because it hadn’t explicitly occurred to me that someone would be that much of a dick. Going back to add my own downvotes now. Not deleting because there’s now useful content underneath.)
Just pointing out that this also applies to upvotes and downvotes. That’s the mechanism for expressing disagreement or agreement when you really don’t feel like stating your reasons explicitly.