Why I write so much (or "why I try to avoid being unspecific")

[ThorBuildingLegos]

A lot of people have been telling me lately that some of my posts are just too long. I tend to agree with this. Like Shakespear said "brevity is the soul of wit". But it is also the source of much confusion and ignorance.

 

Today I replied to a token online media site discussing a rather controversial subject (a man sentenced to prison for 14 years for having induced abortion in his ex-girlfriend). Now I can understand that this will cause outrage. But after reading the article I found that this was yet another gloriously glib troll feeder. It spoke of the case, yes, but it also omitted things like motive, how far in to labour the woman actually was. Yet the comment section was filled to the brim with adversaries. The concerned Christians, the outraged secularists and the casual sarcastibombs that blow up willy nilly.

 

You don't have to look far for this kind of web-site. They survive on the basis of people not applying scrutiny and skepticism to what they read. But it's besides the point I'm trying to make. These articles are usually VERY short, and if not it's usually all just ideological dispositions without any fact, a source of reference, explanation or letting the reader know in a round-about way that this is your subjective opinion ("I think", "I believe", "I surmise", etc). There is a lot of use of constants without any reference points what so ever ("she said", "he said", "the judge concluded", etc... it's very important to be semantic. Be as specific as possible. It's mui importante and if you forget something edit it in, apologize for the miss-edit and move on. OR someone could pick at straws by going in to semantics about your language. Like this guy on reddit the other day when I refered to NeXTSTEP as NeXT, which is the desktop environment and the company that developed it (in that order) and he completely missed the point of my argument and started to throw sarcasm, vitriol and all sorts of crap at me without actually taking apart my argument (you can probably guess what the discussion was about).

 

I also try to stay neutral in most cases (unless you start to flame against unionization, public hospitals, public schools, vaccines and that sort of thing because it will lead me to raising hell and high water to make sure everyone in the near vicinity knows you as a dunce with no historical perspective). My stance backfires 50% of the time though. I will say I have been guilty of making facetious and glib comments on the internet regarding serious discussions (haven't we all) and I concede that I may not have been as objective as I should have been. I try to avoid this by writing away all the irritation and trying to find a new angle on my own perspective. More often than not discard the post after having written to it, unless... I'm brief.

 

And that's why I think writing more is better than writing less... got any similar experiences to share, with people online? Sure you do. Therapy is in session. Facebook, karma-whores, tabloids, "news outlet" and every link-baiting web-site out there is now in your crosshairs.

[TheMissxu]

There is a dude on Tek Syndicate's forums, whose name is Zoltan... He's amazing and writes walls of texts often.

[helping]

tl;dr

its ok, I get called out on some of my papers for being "too wordy" whatever the fuck that means, pretty often.

mostly peer review though, most of my professors have loved my papers and only told me that one or two times.

[Kamina]

I could write walls of text too but then barely anyone would read it. It's fun having debates and discussions, but a few bad apples ruin that fun for us and tend to go off topic and talk about irrelevant stuff because they are so narrow minded.

[brownninja97]

As long as you stay on topic its great to write a lot, unelss you are like me which tangents off into an abyss and will likely never return(human at least). Regarding the pregnant thing i think its fine that he is put in jail, not sure what article it is but i understand that other a certain point you cannot have an abortion and shortly after in many countries it is illegal to forcefully end the child, of course that is very late in the cycle. I tend to add humour to a lot of what i talk about but it sometimes doesnt go down well. I mean if i couldnt be myself on this forum i would have left a long time ago and im sure you would have.

[brownninja97]

I could write walls of text too but then barely anyone would read it. It's fun having debates and discussions, but a few bad apples ruin that fun for us and tend to go off topic and talk about irrelevant stuff when they are so narrow minded.

Im not really sure why but your avatar just seems off to me, it like two ends of the spectrum i cant  take it seriously.

[Kamina]

Im not really sure why but your avatar just seems off to me, it like two ends of the spectrum i cant  take it seriously.

I'm half weeb, half gangsta.

[Vindola]

This is why I like to convey my ideas online throught GIFs and images.

 

But no seriously, I the read first paragraph and glanced at the rest. I gathered you're the type of person who has online "debates" with other people. Yeah I used to do that, then I realized that it's pointless since after the end of the debate, online no matter how good and true your points are, the other party will most likley act like this no matter what:

 

http://youtu.be/UXV-x2YSnpk?t=31s

 

So really I stopped giving a damn to people's opinions online. My faith in civil discussions remains only in those I have in real-life.

 

I don't mind whatsoever reading into non-subjective articles: news, discoveries, poetry... but when I see an online "debate" between a bunch of keyboard warriors, I just steer clear from them. No matter how obviously stupid and wrong their opinions are, most people online seem to clinge on thier opinions no matter what.

 

My advice? Your efforts to debate people online are almost always gonna endup in vain.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

As long as you stay on topic its great to write a lot, unelss you are like me which tangents off into an abyss and will likely never return(human at least). Regarding the pregnant thing i think its fine that he is put in jail, not sure what article it is but i understand that other a certain point you cannot have an abortion and shortly after in many countries it is illegal to forcefully end the child, of course that is very late in the cycle. I tend to add humour to a lot of what i talk about but it sometimes doesnt go down well. I mean if i couldnt be myself on this forum i would have left a long time ago and im sure you would have.

 

Here's the article about the abortion. Read the comments downwards... the reddit post is... just horrible. We do not need to even enter in to that here as there is enough of that kind of conflict on the forums already - we don't need an extra one by proxy. But it's still baffling how so many people rabidly and ferociously attack each other without even having all the facts to back up their opinions.

 

And I'm way to serious a guy. THere are times sarcasm flies me by. It's not that I don't understand sarcasm... but in the heat of passion, of frustration and so forth I only see a joke as an insult rather than a mood-reliever. Candy me, right?

[ThorBuildingLegos]

This is why I like to convey my ideas online throught GIFs and images.

 

But no seriously, I the read first paragraph and glanced at the rest. I gathered you're the type of person who has online "debates" with other people. Yeah I used to do, then I realized that it's pointless since after the end of the debate, online no matter how good and true your points are, the other party will most likley act like this no matter what:

 

http://youtu.be/UXV-x2YSnpk?t=31s

 

So really I stopped giving a damn to people's opinions online. My faith in civil discussions remains only in those I have in real-life.

 

I don't mind whatsoever reading into non-subjective articles: news, discoveries, poetry... but when I see an online "debate" between a bunch of keyboard warriors, I just steer clear from them. No matter how obviously stupid and wrong their opinions are, most people online seem to clinge on thier opinions no matter what.

 

My advice? Your efforts to debate people online are almost always gonna endup in vain.

 

I wouldn't say so. I think my deductive abilities have benefited largely from me being put down by people who were right (both in real life and on the internet - and I will emphasise that when I say "put down" I mean that there was some tension, words were said, people weren't exactly objective). But I still took it in to account. I listened and have had several open minded and interesting conversation that has lead to me becoming wiser. So I disagree in that it's not comparable to say the Sisyphus analogy. True, it's largely ineffective and in most cases it will be nothing but a fleeting moment of emotional outburst; but if I can have one discussion, with 1 out of a 1000, that agrees, applies it to his and hers life, or their surrounding, and I will have by proxy or by my own awesomeness helped someone to see things a little bit clearer.

 

And I think that is rewarding when you actually get to know that what you said had some effect. I'd say that if I only get to have that feel once out of a 1000.. I'm game! Though I wish it weren't so...

[Vindola]

I wouldn't say so. I think my deductive abilities have benefited largely from me being put down by people who were right (both in real life and on the internet - and I will emphasise that when I say "put down" I mean that there was some tension, words were said, people weren't exactly objective). But I still took it in to account. I listened and have had several open minded and interesting conversation that has lead to me becoming wiser. So I disagree in that it's not comparable to say the Sisyphus analogy. True, it's largely ineffective and in most cases it will be nothing but a fleeting moment of emotional outburst; but if I can have one discussion, with 1 out of a 1000, that agrees, applies it to his and hers life, or their surrounding, and I will have by proxy or by my own awesomeness helped someone to see things a little bit clearer.

 

And I think that is rewarding when you actually get to know that what you said had some effect. I'd say that if I only get to have that feel once out of a 1000.. I'm game! Though I wish it weren't so...

 

Honestly, life is too short to waste on morons who are gonna ridicule you and insult you online even when you're right and they are completely wrong. The human mind gets screwed upside-down when people hide under the cover of internet anonymity. 

 

So really if you like debating with people, it's best to do it with friends, colleagues, or in some sort of debate class if you go to high school or college; in person. Online debating is far more pointless and stupid than real-life debating.

[Nineshadow]

That feeling when you write 10 A4 pages about something other people write in 1.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Honestly, life is too short to waste on morons who are gonna ridicule you and insult you online even when you're right and they are completely wrong. The human mind gets screwed upside-down when people hide under the cover of internet anonymity. 

 

So really if you like debating with people, it's best to do it with friends, colleagues, or in some sort of debate class if you go to high school or college; in person. Online debating is far more pointless and stupid than real-life debating.

 

Mmm again: I have to disagree. I feel sort of obligated to defend the idiocy since I'm an individualist. I don't think that we should be reclusive or to localized, that we should extend beyond our "initial family" (we're talking social anthropology here) to improve our world in general. It's how the world became smaller when we went from foraging to agriculture, or when religion was adopted. The human "family" grew and I believe it has to continue to grow. That's why I see the importance of not being brief or being concise and specific. So that we all learn from our mistakes (the good, the bad, the right, the ugly) and the curve of progress continues to steadily grow upwards.

 

And, also... isn't it a bit ironic debating against online debating on an online debating platform?

[ThorBuildingLegos]

That feeling when you write 10 A4 pages about something other people write in 1.

 

That's... not exactly what I meant. I do encourage brevity, but sometimes... it's just not an option.

 

But yepp; there are people who are so INCREDIBLY efficient at structuring sentences and paragraphs that it makes some professional writers look like complete chumps.

But again; not the case I was making ^^; But yeah, I know that feel too...

[Nineshadow]

That's... not exactly what I meant. I do encourage brevity, but sometimes... it's just not an option.

 

But yepp; there are people who are so INCREDIBLY efficient at structuring sentences and paragraphs that it makes some professional writers look like complete chumps.

But again; not the case I was making ^^; But yeah, I know that feel too...

Efficiency is not the case here.I can write efficiently,but I don't because I want to talk about as many things as possible.

[SirReallySam]

I'm half weeb, half gangsta.

The gangsta that will pierce the heavens!!!!!

[Vindola]

Mmm again: I have to disagree. I feel sort of obligated to defend the idiocy since I'm an individualist. I don't think that we should be reclusive or to localized, that we should extend beyond our "initial family" (we're talking social anthropology here) to improve our world in general. It's how the world became smaller when we went from foraging to agriculture, or when religion was adopted. The human "family" grew and I believe it has to continue to grow. That's why I see the importance of not being brief or being concise and specific. So that we all learn from our mistakes (the good, the bad, the right, the ugly) and the curve of progress continues to steadily grow upwards.

 

And, also... isn't it a bit ironic debating against online debating on an online debating platform?

 

Well none of that got anything to do whatsoever with debating online vs debating in real-life, and the fact that debating online is retarded in most cases (compared to debating in person which I think is a good idea) since it's extremely rare that people change their opinions online.

 

And we're not really debating anything, since there isn't a specific topic. Or are we debating about debating?

 

Oh no, are we now debating about debating about debating?

 

*mind blown*

 

Oh well, I don't want to be that which I despise. See ya around buddy.

[ThorBuildingLegos]

Well none of that got anything to do whatsoever with debating online vs debating in real-life, and the fact that debating online is retarded in most cases (compared to debating in person which I think is a good idea) since it's extremely rare that people change their opinions online.

 

And we're not really debating anything, since there isn't a specific topic. Or are we debating about debating?

 

Oh no, are we now debating about debating about debating?

 

*mind blown*

 

Oh well, I don't want to be that which I despise. See ya around buddy.

 

Well, take this in to account: I feel I do get through and that people can get through to me. But you don't. It really says more about us as individuals. That we have had different experiences with the same medium. Take with that what you will...

 

As for this being a place about debating: have you read any forums lately? No: since the dawn of the internet. I defy you to sum up most posts on any forum and not see that the majorities are actually debates. Go on. There are at least... 57,038,408 forums to summarize! WE NEED TO BE CONCLUSIVE!

[Ertman]

Well I have noticed short and to the point, with explicit detail is also ineffective. People on the internet are generally more antagonistic and are unlikely to be convinced as they are stuck in their position.

 

I find that length has its place, but it is generally not worthwhile on the internet.

[Theo]

Out of 10 times that i write something long, 7 of them ill just get completely ignored in the thread, even if i covered everything, which makes me want to facepalm and question the intelligence of some members

[LAwLz]

Just a little warning, you sound very pretentious. Not saying that I disagree with your post though (I don't fill agree with you either).

I think it's better to keep messages short without leaving out important info, than to make drawn out posts nobody can be bothered to read.

[mr moose]

I'm of the opinion that if you can't substantiate or qualify your opinion adequately then you should probably keep your opinion to your self.  So often I see dumb comments that are only a few words and basically only serve to point out the author has no knowledge about what he is commenting on.  If you want to have an opinion on a topic that is or has become contentious then either articulate your position (this requires that you accept others will have a different opinion), post supporting evidence (this requires that you understand what the evidence is and if it is legit) or shut up.

 

 

 than to make drawn out posts nobody can be bothered to read.

 

I would add that if people are unwilling to take the time to understand what others are saying and scrutinize the evidence then they should keep their mouths shut.

[capta1n_beans]

A lot of people have been telling me lately that some of my posts are just too long. I tend to agree with this. Like Shakespear said "brevity is the soul of wit". But it is also the source of much confusion and ignorance.

 

Today I replied to a token online media site discussing a rather controversial subject (a man sentenced to prison for 14 years for having induced abortion in his ex-girlfriend). Now I can understand that this will cause outrage. But after reading the article I found that this was yet another gloriously glib troll feeder. It spoke of the case, yes, but it also omitted things like motive, how far in to labour the woman actually was. Yet the comment section was filled to the brim with adversaries. The concerned Christians, the outraged secularists and the casual sarcastibombs that blow up willy nilly.

 

You don't have to look far for this kind of web-site. They survive on the basis of people not applying scrutiny and skepticism to what they read. But it's besides the point I'm trying to make. These articles are usually VERY short, and if not it's usually all just ideological dispositions without any fact, a source of reference, explanation or letting the reader know in a round-about way that this is your subjective opinion ("I think", "I believe", "I surmise", etc). There is a lot of use of constants without any reference points what so ever ("she said", "he said", "the judge concluded", etc... it's very important to be semantic. Be as specific as possible. It's mui importante and if you forget something edit it in, apologize for the miss-edit and move on. OR someone could pick at straws by going in to semantics about your language. Like this guy on reddit the other day when I refered to NeXTSTEP as NeXT, which is the desktop environment and the company that developed it (in that order) and he completely missed the point of my argument and started to throw sarcasm, vitriol and all sorts of crap at me without actually taking apart my argument (you can probably guess what the discussion was about).

 

I also try to stay neutral in most cases (unless you start to flame against unionization, public hospitals, public schools, vaccines and that sort of thing because it will lead me to raising hell and high water to make sure everyone in the near vicinity knows you as a dunce with no historical perspective). My stance backfires 50% of the time though. I will say I have been guilty of making facetious and glib comments on the internet regarding serious discussions (haven't we all) and I concede that I may not have been as objective as I should have been. I try to avoid this by writing away all the irritation and trying to find a new angle on my own perspective. More often than not discard the post after having written to it, unless... I'm brief.

 

And that's why I think writing more is better than writing less... got any similar experiences to share, with people online? Sure you do. Therapy is in session. Facebook, karma-whores, tabloids, "news outlet" and every link-baiting web-site out there is now in your crosshairs.

I agree with you, doing less writing can be rather annoying after some time and it is good to see someone making an effort(or not) to make their post pleasing to read. Making a post informative should not be limited to a determined number of words or sentences, but to what the person writing the article considers acceptable to cover the topic entirely and informatively

[Hikaru12]

Sometimes you can get by and get your point across while saying less. If the person is interested in having more background information then provide them with a link and give them a little annotation as to what it's about, the author, etc.

[Almercenary]

I love long explained opinions, thy way I can have a decent argument against a decent person, not someone who has failed to learn all sorts of language an sticks to words used to crudely describe homosexuals. Short answers also have there place, but so do long walls of text, both are have there places, but short answers are weaving there way into places they really shouldn't be.