Subject: Of course he's free to disagree. But at the same time...
Author:
Posted on: 2013-07-31 14:23:00 UTC

...it doesn't change the fact that half of the post in question wasn't exactly the most polite thing in the world. The points themselves weren't delivered passive-aggressively (and I'm pretty sure I didn't attack the points he made in the actual post I made; rather, I tried to engage him on 'em), but the fact that there were rude comments peppered in throughout needs to be addressed. As far as I'm concerned, you can still be impolitely dissenting even without that whole "YOUR ALL FRAMING IDOTS JUST GELOUS" thing.

"And if I stepped into a forum I believed to be hostile and told them I disagreed with what they did, I'd expect typical "HEY SHUT UP YOU'RE THE JERK" responses immediately."

Except that he didn't really have to say that he was expecting it in the manner that he did. Which is my whole point: for being "polite" dissent, at least half the post is needlessly worded in a mean-spirited way. The points themselves were worded fine: it was the stuff around those points that could've used polit-ifying. Which isn't a word, but still.

Reply Return to messages