Letting Friends Disagree

delicious_cocktail

See, even in that situation it can be difficult. Sometimes it isn't obvious who is being ****ty to whom. There are circumstances where there is mockery that is over the top and unwarranted, but then there are other circumstances where someone says one off-hand remark that is blown out of proportion. What happens when everyone and his brother feels the need to defend the friend who is perceived as being wronged, not because of obligation but because they don't want to be left out of what is now an offense and not a defense? At what point does the belief that one is defending a friend become a feeding frenzy because there's one drop of blood in the water?

On the internet, this is generally the way things go.

And on sitcoms.
I think the phenomenon you're describing occurs in many human societies when norms are violated, including online. The villagers in Frankenstein were not a flash mob coordinated via twitter

Ah, but were the villagers right to chase him with pitchforks? Didn't you cry at the end of the book at the tragedy of his demise?

Well yes they were, because he was an undead creature stitched together from cadavers by a mad scientist. I am against that proposition. And he just floated around on an ice floe looking for vengeance on his maker, right? I don't really recall the ending.

But in general I am unsupportive of mobs; merely observing they're a human phenomenon that is a defining characteristic of our social behavior.

EvgeniZyntx

I prefer to both grind and wield my own axes, and would almost universally prefer friends stay out of my disagreements -- unless they were somehow already party.

I feel a sense of duty to stand beside -- or in opposition -- to friends if circumstances merit.

Beach if you could clarify; I think I understand that you are saying the circumstances here seldom warrant. However in general if by my inaction I endorse the actions of another, and in my tacit endorsement stand to lose a friend, I feel I ought act. It's an undeniably evocative comparison, but if I stand there while one friend physically attacks another friend unprovoked, am I not already forced to choose a side?

Is it better to privately denounce despite public silence? Or not to denounce at all even when your feelings are unambiguous?

Yes, I am saying that on here circumstances seldom warrant action. What I often see are very minor disagreements over inconsequential subjects being spun out of control by people getting involved (or asking others to get involved) and making it more than it is. I would no more compare the events on MFP to physical attacks than I would such events to bullying.

If I think one of my friends is treating another of my friends in a ****ty manner, I feel a responsibility to say something about it.

My example was not intended to equate these things. The initial caveat was not "evocative" but "overstated". It just didn't really fit semantically.

Sure, I think sometimes if someone is being an *kitten* it's worthwhile saying "hey, you're being an *kitten*." Then again, it's often wise to let two people realize for themselves that they're bickering over something inconsequential and let them figure it out and come to their senses. It avoids escalation. But hey, if there's jello (or, creme brulee I suppose) in the room, by all means.

I realize based on this response and re-reading the title of the thread (letting friends disagree) that I was misunderstanding the core point. Because disagree all you want, just don't be an *kitten*, and not to one of my firiends. Type thing.

I disagree a bit on the "it's only virtual" aspect (edit: mentioned in another post) - people meet, interact in real life, and make, in some cases, long term links of great personal value. Some of the information or events we share are sometimes interwoven with deep personal meaning and it's not all just cat gifs. And all that is fine, the Little Prince and all that.

I expect disagreement to occur, but I expect them to be managed reasonably, not only without being asked to draw sides, but without escalation tactics and to be concluded and closed "reasonably" fast. My own attention span, and "life" on line and off is too short to deal with that for too long. I can't quit my own kids if they throw a tantrum at the mall (but I can certainly laugh at them when they do) but I'm not going to spend time to adopt new kids on-line.

Here, when things drag on for too long on-line, I walk away.

DavPul

All due respect, I think the "virtual" part is key. Altho I consider many people in this site as actual friends, most of the catty arguments that I see go down on this site wouldn't take place IRL.

Internet conversations aren't like real conversations. They resemble turn based strategy games more than IRL conversation. IRL, there's inflection, and physical cues and even a throat punch if someone takes a line of dialogue down the wrong path. Here, stuff is all blowed up before anyone realizes it wuz just jokes. IRL, when I'm having a serious conversation and I start crossing a line, I can usually see it on the other person's face and back down ***before I finish my sentence***. Here, all my ignorance is on full display for everyone to see forever (until Ninja mod edits, anyway).

For my money, most of the drama here stems from the virtuality of the place.

Galatea_Stone

See, even in that situation it can be difficult. Sometimes it isn't obvious who is being ****ty to whom. There are circumstances where there is mockery that is over the top and unwarranted, but then there are other circumstances where someone says one off-hand remark that is blown out of proportion. What happens when everyone and his brother feels the need to defend the friend who is perceived as being wronged, not because of obligation but because they don't want to be left out of what is now an offense and not a defense? At what point does the belief that one is defending a friend become a feeding frenzy because there's one drop of blood in the water?

On the internet, this is generally the way things go.

And on sitcoms.
I think the phenomenon you're describing occurs in many human societies when norms are violated, including online. The villagers in Frankenstein were not a flash mob coordinated via twitter

Ah, but were the villagers right to chase him with pitchforks? Didn't you cry at the end of the book at the tragedy of his demise?

Well yes they were, because he was an undead creature stitched together from cadavers by a mad scientist. I am against that proposition. And he just floated around on an ice floe looking for vengeance on his maker, right? I don't really recall the ending.

But in general I am unsupportive of mobs; merely observing they're a human phenomenon that is a defining characteristic of our social behavior.

He dies alone, in the cold north, mourning the loss of his creator even though his creator was the reason for the unwarranted torment that was his life. But then you also mourn Victor and the loss of his loved ones at the hands of the monster, who never would have killed had Victor not created him.

The villagers should have minded their own business and let Victor and the monster work out their differences. Maybe if they had, Elizabeth wouldn't have had to die.

SunofaBeach14

All due respect, I think the "virtual" part is key. Altho I consider many people in this site an actual friends, most of the catty arguments that I see go down on this site wouldn't take place IRL.

Internet conversations aren't like real conversations. They resemble turn based strategy games more than IRL conversation. IRL, there's inflection, and physical cues and even a throat punch if someone takes a line of dialogue down the wrong path. Here, stuff is all blowed up before anyone realizes it wuz just jokes. IRL, when I'm having a serious conversation and I start crossing a line, I can usually see it on the other person's face and back down ***before I finish my sentence***. Here, all my ignorance is on full display for everyone to see forever (until Ninja mod edits, anyway).

For my money, most of the drama here stems from the virtuality of the place.

Edited. TL:DR to simply say "I agree."

EvgeniZyntx

All due respect, I think the "virtual" part is key. Altho I consider many people in this site an actual friends, most of the catty arguments that I see go down on this site wouldn't take place IRL.

Internet conversations aren't like real conversations. They resemble turn based strategy games more than IRL conversation. IRL, there's inflection, and physical cues and even a throat punch if someone takes a line of dialogue down the wrong path. Here, stuff is all blowed up before anyone realizes it wuz just jokes. IRL, when I'm having a serious conversation and I start crossing a line, I can usually see it on the other person's face and back down ***before I finish my sentence***. Here, all my ignorance is on full display for everyone to see forever (until Ninja mod edits, anyway).

For my money, most of the drama here stems from the virtuality of the place.

Edited. TL:DL to simply say "I agree."

+1. I think my "virtual" isn't so virtual comment needed Dave's caveat.

jayliospecky

I do not like jello.

I do, however, like marshmallows. But probably not for wrestling.

BinaryPulsar

All due respect, I think the "virtual" part is key. Altho I consider many people in this site as actual friends, most of the catty arguments that I see go down on this site wouldn't take place IRL.

Internet conversations aren't like real conversations. They resemble turn based strategy games more than IRL conversation. IRL, there's inflection, and physical cues and even a throat punch if someone takes a line of dialogue down the wrong path. Here, stuff is all blowed up before anyone realizes it wuz just jokes. IRL, when I'm having a serious conversation and I start crossing a line, I can usually see it on the other person's face and back down ***before I finish my sentence***. Here, all my ignorance is on full display for everyone to see forever (until Ninja mod edits, anyway).

For my money, most of the drama here stems from the virtuality of the place.

:flowerforyou:

PikaKnight

I do not like jello.

I do, however, like marshmallows. But probably not for wrestling.

ZoeLifts

I feel strongly that men shouldn't be wrestling in the jello.

I think they need a separate wrestling area filled with either whipped cream or pudding. Marshmallow optional.

I agree that men should not wrestle in jello.

I'm not sure about the whipped cream or pudding, though, so we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

I'm with BP on the marshmallow idea. Has anybody brought up cotton candy?

PikaKnight

I feel strongly that men shouldn't be wrestling in the jello.

I think they need a separate wrestling area filled with either whipped cream or pudding. Marshmallow optional.

I agree that men should not wrestle in jello.

I'm not sure about the whipped cream or pudding, though, so we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

I'm with BP on the Marshmallow idea. Has anybody brought up cotton candy?

I've got this weird apprehension at that idea...like maybe they'd not wrestle and just eat themselves.

SaintGiff

And, to avoid being accused of getting on my high horse, I'm not. I've certainly crossed the line and played the *kitten* on occasion. I deeply regret it. No good ever came of it. There are plenty of good people on here, and frankly, there isn't a single person on this site for whom I've developed any sort of deep personal dislike. It's the interwebs. Try to fight fair and treat it all with a grain of salt. Just my humble two cents. You're certainly entitled to yours.

I really feel like you haven't taken the time to get to know me well enough.

riirii93_

is playful wrestling allowed?

ZoeLifts

I feel strongly that men shouldn't be wrestling in the jello.

I think they need a separate wrestling area filled with either whipped cream or pudding. Marshmallow optional.

I agree that men should not wrestle in jello.

I'm not sure about the whipped cream or pudding, though, so we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

I'm with BP on the Marshmallow idea. Has anybody brought up cotton candy?

I've got this weird apprehension at that idea...like maybe they'd not wrestle and just eat themselves.

Hmm, but not so with the whipped cram or pudding?

I'm down with the whipped cream, I think, the more I think on it. Not pudding for some reason.

What about mashed potatoes?

SaintGiff

is playful wrestling allowed?

You are someone else who needs to get to know me better.

BinaryPulsar

I'm liking the whipped cream idea!!

DavPul

I'm liking the whipped cream idea!!

Lead by example

BinaryPulsar

I'm liking the whipped cream idea!!

Lead by example

I just might do that!

jayliospecky

I feel strongly that men shouldn't be wrestling in the jello.

I think they need a separate wrestling area filled with either whipped cream or pudding. Marshmallow optional.

I agree that men should not wrestle in jello.

I'm not sure about the whipped cream or pudding, though, so we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

I'm with BP on the Marshmallow idea. Has anybody brought up cotton candy?

I've got this weird apprehension at that idea...like maybe they'd not wrestle and just eat themselves.

Hmm, but not so with the whipped cram or pudding?

I'm down with the whipped cream, I think, the more I think on it. Not pudding for some reason.

What about mashed potatoes?

Agreed.

Whipped cream > pudding

Mashed potatoes? Ew.

ZoeLifts

I feel strongly that men shouldn't be wrestling in the jello.

I think they need a separate wrestling area filled with either whipped cream or pudding. Marshmallow optional.

I agree that men should not wrestle in jello.

I'm not sure about the whipped cream or pudding, though, so we may have to agree to disagree on this point.

I'm with BP on the Marshmallow idea. Has anybody brought up cotton candy?

I've got this weird apprehension at that idea...like maybe they'd not wrestle and just eat themselves.

Hmm, but not so with the whipped cram or pudding?

I'm down with the whipped cream, I think, the more I think on it. Not pudding for some reason.

What about mashed potatoes?

Agreed.

Whipped cream > pudding

Mashed potatoes? Ew.

I will compromise and propose butter.