The permeability of beliefs in the Dakka OT

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Jihadin**

have changed my mind plenty of times, but then, I tend to have longer and more intellectual conversations with people because I am far more pleasant and well mannered than most of you backwards ill-mannered fething dolts.

I can easily picture Matty drinking tea from a saucer and make it look right......

**Monster Rain**

LoneLictor wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:
Someone seems to care a lot.

I ought to clarify. No one thinks the snarker is superior, intelligent or witty. That's what I meant. The only reason people sometimes reply to the snarker is out of annoyance.

Are they held in higher or lower regard than irrationally angry partisan posters?

**BolingbrokeIV**

Ah yes mattyrm. He made me change my position plenty of times. Usually from the chair I'm sitting in to the local pub to reassess my faith in humanity.

Melissia wrote:
As an aside, Ido not have tens of thousands of posts in the off-topic section. Just shy of one third of my posts are made here, about a total of 6500. Meh.

To be honest, if it's an issue to you, I don't think 6500 posts is any healthier than tens of thousands.

**LoneLictor**

Monster Rain wrote:
LoneLictor wrote:
Monster Rain wrote:
Someone seems to care a lot.

I ought to clarify. No one thinks the snarker is superior, intelligent or witty. That's what I meant. The only reason people sometimes reply to the snarker is out of annoyance.

Are they held in higher or lower regard than irrationally angry partisan posters?

Based on the PMs I've received, lower. Four different people messaged me after my original rant about the snarkers.

**Monster Rain**

How about in comparison to people doggedly holding onto opinions on subjects they clearly have little to no knowledge of?

**mattyrm**

Glorioski wrote:
Ah yes mattyrm. He made me change my position plenty of times. Usually from the chair I'm sitting in to the local pub to reassess my faith in humanity.

Considering the I get along fine with the vast majority in both my real and virtual lives, I think you should be looking at yourself in the mirror if you feel you have to reassess your faith in humanity.

I mean, there's paedophiles and rapists roaming about and you have to reassess your faith in humanity because of good humoured Matty with his charm, good looks and lack of criminal convictions? That's some funny priorities you have right there.

I think you have a complex Fuhrer. Why the hate? Do you not think people should be allowed to disagree with you?

**Jihadin**

snarkers

Whats a snarker?

**kronk**

Jihadin wrote:
snarkers

Whats a snarker?

You don't know what a snarker is? Have you been living under a rock? You people are stupid.

/snark

Something like that, only I can't bring myself to do it properly... Posts dripping with sarcasm or hostility, sometimes Passive Aggressive bs.

**Jihadin**

Don't you dare bring that cartoon up.......

**kronk**

Snark, not snarf!

**dogma**

LoneLictor wrote:

I ought to clarify. No one thinks the snarker is superior, intelligent or witty. That's what I meant. The only reason people sometimes reply to the snarker is out of annoyance.

Funnily enough, annoyance is generally the thing motivating snark.

**BolingbrokeIV**

...and 50%(?) of the off topic forum is made up the arguments which follow.

**ShumaGorath**

Ouze wrote:
sebster wrote:
Yeah, I remember that study as well. It explained a lot about dakka, and especially how threads tend to get worse and worse as they go on - the opinions get more strident, especially among whichever side happens to be losing.

So, Sebster made this observation in a different thread. I don't want to offtrack it, so a new one, perhaps, is in order. I was thinking that in many threads here, maybe most, one side states an opinion and maybe some facts that support it, and an opposing team forms and presents their own evidence, or at least, attacks the original idea or supporting evidence. No one really ever seems to get convinced of anything.

And in a way, it kinds of makes me wonder what the point of a discussion forum like the OT even is for, if so few people can be swayed, if any. It's just like... intellectual masturbation, really. And while I suppose there is nothing inherently wrong with that, I wonder if other people feel the same way or if they don't.

Have you ever had your opinion on a matter, news story, or political position changed by a topic we discussed here in the OT? If so, who and what?

I avoid getting into discussions these days. I generally just pop in and give a synopsis of my opinion or point out when people are intensely wrong on something. I find it's better to point out blatant logical flaws in peoples beliefs over pointing out minutae in their arguments. People tend not to care if the finer points of what they believe are bs, but they'll care if what they believe is flagrant nonsense (or they won't but those people are scumtime).

**Mr Nobody**

I find my opinion will stay the same, but if someone writes their point well enough, I'll become more open towards another opinion. I also discuss to better understand other people's mindsets.

**Polonius**

dogma wrote:
Ouze wrote:

Have you ever had your opinion on a matter, news story, or political position changed by a topic we discussed here in the OT? If so, who and what?

I wouldn't say changed outright, but then I don't have many strong opinions anyway so there isn't much to change.

This is pretty much my take on it. There are few areas where my view is absolutist, so shifts in opinion are not very jarring for me. That and a BA in philosophy and a JD have taught me that nobody, even myself, knows anything about anything. We all are taking our best guesses and hoping.

I've definitely gained greater perspective on how different modes of thought tend to manifest, though. I've also reaffirmed one of my only convictions: that hard analysis is always superior to aesthetic analysis.

Back when I posted more in the OT (I have 2000 posts in OT somehow), I enjoyed writing, not so much for my "opponent," but to explain my points to anybody else reading. You generally can't persuade those sure of themselves. But thinking and writing about my opinions, and trying to find support for them, is a useful skill.

**Melissia**

Jihadin wrote:
snarkers

Whats a snarker?

Snark comes from Snide Remark.

**Orlanth**

Da Boss wrote:
It's like he has atheist tourrettes.

You earned an exalt, that was funny.

**daedalus-templarius**

Melissia wrote:
Sadly, even The Economist seems to be suffering from this at times; a certain writer on there, for example keeps misrepresenting Romney and Ryan's budget proposals so that they can claim that they "tackle the deficit" and that no one else has a plan to do so.

Even though they don't... and they're not even complete proposals, missing a lot of specifics that the president's budget did not miss as it was intended as a working budget, not a purely political move that they knew would never pass. Numerous comments have pointed this out, providing dozens of links and hundreds of arguments, but I don't think this particular writer reads them (many writers at TE actually DO read the comments section, and even respond to some, especially posts that point out factual errors), or perhaps, just doesn't care.

This is probably a clear example of "repeat something enough times, people will eventually think it is true"

As for changing my opinion, I'm a pretty pragmatic person, and have a pretty vehement dislike for ideologues for the most part. If a someones opinion or statement is valid and reasonable, I will certainly take it to heart when considering it against my own held belief. I always try to look at things from another point of view, or in someone else's shoes, or try to imagine 'what if this was happening to me'.

So I'd say that OT discussion (not necessarily just Dakka OT) has led me to think about things differently.

**Morathi's Darkest Sin**

I have possibly had more laugh out moments here than anywhere else on the forums.

I also seem to remember more of those who post in OT thanks to the many detailed and interesting posts when a debate is going full on.

I generally attempt to stay out of the more serious ones however, as my views in general are not something I'd live or die by, and I find its a bit of a disconnect between UK and US thinking, due to the fact both US political parties are so much more right wing than our own.
Although saying that thanks to US TV, I have a bit of a fascination about the US, but I am sure I would have issues with some of the things considered the 'norm' over there when you look at the political side of things.

Oh and I'd also say some of the biggest Dakka personalities in my mind, hail mainly from OT.

**cptbravo**

Imma agree with Morathi and say that you definitely see a lot more of people's personality here in OT. I mean I lurked here for like 2 years before I actually signed up, and so many of these people here seem so much more animated and entertaining than some of the other sections.

**Frazzled**

Thats because this forum is fuelled by Wiener Dog Power!

**BolingbrokeIV**

It's because the rest of the site aren't using the forums as a social tool.

**ShumaGorath**

Glorioski wrote:
It's because the rest of the site aren't using the forums as a social tool.

It's also harder to have a personality or viewset come across in most of the threads. 40k discussion is very binary. It's typically "I love that model!" or "That model sucks" or similar for opinions on GW. Topic and subculture specific discussion groups that cater to fans are usually like that since their topic is based on specific and focused subject matter. Off topic discussions will range and you get a bigger set of personalities and responses because there are more answers to a given discussion than y/n.

**Melissia**

The background discussion section has a lot of chances to express personalities.

Tadashi's rabid hatred of the Ecclesiarchy (to the point of being in denial of some basic facts of lore) comes to mind.

**Albatross**

Melissia wrote:
Jihadin wrote:
snarkers

Whats a snarker?
Snark comes from Snide Remark.

Well, I just learned something!

Incidentally, this thread is so 'meta'.

**Asherian Command**

I think I have changed, I once against abortion. Now I am not.

I also respect women alot more than I used to.

Though 40k debates..... are worse than off-topics.

Just saying.

On Offtopic offtopicness I think we are quite tamed compared to some websites i have seen.

**Easy E**

You have to remember, the point of an internet debate is not to change the mind of the person you are posting "against" perse. Their mind is set.

The purpose is to change the thinking and thought process of other people reading the thread and who aren't entrenched yet.

**nomsheep**

this site is one of the few I frequent that keeps it's off-topic, in the off-topic.

**mattyrm**

nomsheep wrote:
this site is one of the few I frequent that keeps it's off-topic, in the off-topic.

It seems to me that gak loads of people on the dakka OT dont actually have anything to do with 40k!

I mean, at least I post the occasional figure, and check the occasional bet-rep or tactics or something.. I only do 90% of my posting in here.

But some of this lot seems like they could happily be doing this arguing on the Fox forums or something!

**nomsheep**

mattyrm wrote:
nomsheep wrote:
this site is one of the few I frequent that keeps it's off-topic, in the off-topic.

It seems to me that gak loads of people on the dakka OT dont actually have anything to do with 40k!

I mean, at least I post the occasional figure, and check the occasional bet-rep or tactics or something.. I only do 90% of my posting in here.

But some of this lot seems like they could happily be doing this arguing on the Fox forums or something!

As it is atm, I don't play 40k.

so 99.9% of my posts are in here XD

i just use dakka to keep up with my 40k news until I get a job and can afford to start it up again.

so you're right XD