Skip to main content

View Diary: The Daily Kos Rec Community (262 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Small edit , (9+ / 0-)

    vast potential intention for misinterpretation online.
    If people can read a comment two ways , they will pick the worst one .

    "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. H.

    by indycam on Thu Sep 05, 2013 at 07:34:36 PM PDT

    •  Hi indycam! (8+ / 0-)

      Can you elaborate? I feel that "vast potential for misinterpretation" doesn't ascribe motive for misinterpretation, but "vast intention for misinterpretation" assumes malicious motives.

      •  I see it over and over , (12+ / 0-)

        people pick the worst , they choose to pick the worst .
        I had someone go at me over and over and over , they choose to attack over minor things that didn't need to be attacked over , they maliciously did so , they admitted later , they misinterpreted purposely .  
        Its just a game some play .

        I've tested it by writing things in a way that could be seen as A or B or just leaving the meaning vague .  

        "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. H.

        by indycam on Thu Sep 05, 2013 at 07:50:09 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I definitely agree that (8+ / 0-)

          deliberate misinterpretation can be very frustrating. My preferred approach is to respond with clarification, and disengage ASAP when it becomes obvious that the misinterpretation is deliberate. I consider that semantic resistance.

          •  Bingo! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            erratic

            Disengage when you've elaborated and the other party seems bent on the same interpretation.  Once, you get the sense that you are not being addressed honestly - disengage.  It won't hurt - even if you are wrong about it.

            "You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity"

            by newfie on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 09:45:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I think a lot of that though depends on past (0+ / 0-)

          interactions.

          I know that there are people here that if given alternative possible interactions I will go with the worst one or the best one depending on past interactions. I think that's just the nature of the beast so to speak. People do that all the time whether it's online or off.

        •  This is probably true (2+ / 0-)

          of the perpetual Pastry Wars, but I've been ignoring them for the most part. In other potentially interesting topical diaries, I generally leave as soon as the comments reach the right margin. Just not worth it to keep scrolling and scrolling to see if there's any worthwhile discussion down below.

          Of course, that is why disruptors do their disrupting at the top. I don't see how anybody can believe that's not purposeful for driving people away. And that's clearly trollish behavior.

          But don't fall into the trap of thinking it's all about the rox/sux perpetual conflict, applied liberally to whatever the issue of the day may be. That's just the most obvious game-playing. It also happens in topical diaries about diverse subjects that aren't at the top of the Daily Concern list. A lot of my diary coverage is about technical/scientific subjects, particularly things nuclear. I often encounter commenters whose UIDs indicate they've been around for years, but are entirely new to my diaries. Coming in swinging as if horrified that DKos allows the existence of positions like mine, using tactics so familiar that it's almost like meeting ghosts of trolls past.

          And the most frustrating part is that in technical subjects, the obfuscations and misinformation can be couched in technical terms regular readers won't understand well enough to judge on merits. This requires often lengthy just-as-technical replies that need to be as clear and simple as they can be made to be with considerable effort. Indiscrimate lobbing of HRs or terse and pithy blow-offs don't teach anybody anything, and are usually only about self-aggrandizement between the warring parties. It's all about THEM, not about the topic. Narcissism, basically. In the hands of junior high level digital game-players.

          The Pastry Wars come and go in cycles, are always childish, and quickly become so overburdened with the narcissistic self-assertions of people who apparently have no real life lives. Sometimes I even feel sorry for the warriors for the emptiness of their worldviews expressed by such self-centered pursuits.

    •  Maybe some do, (5+ / 0-)

      but I have seen others who don't seem to have evil intent - they're just so locked into their own POV that they can't envision or accept another one.

      Yes, there are some who are 'shit-stirrers', but I feel like more are just so locked into their own world-view that none other can penetrate.

      I am not religious, and did NOT say I enjoyed sects.

      by trumpeter on Fri Sep 06, 2013 at 09:14:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site