I've found, in general, that tone online is 60% interpretive to the reader. There are many times that someone types something in a positive way, and the responder reads it in a negative way. Indeed, I would posit that such interactions are how most conversations here start. We're got some passionate, opinionated people on hubski, myself included. However, when interactions seem heated, it's best to assume that the other person isn't yelling at you over the computer, and just because someone is telling you "you're wrong and here's why", it doesn't mean they are judging you actively as a person and finding you lacking. The above sentiment, I think, is part of the "weird tone" of hubski. Compared to somewhere like reddit, where everyone's an expert and all views pass muster, Hubski has lots of passionate people who can and will peer review your shit. I found it a nice change, but I can see why it can be off-putting. Before I post an opinion here, i usually go "Where do I know that from?" and check my sources. I treat hubski like a peer-reviewed journal, because I want people to be able to trust what I say.
Isn't demanding proof or sources for an opinion insulting? You can't peer-review an opinion and you shouldn't need to do so. You're saying that all views need to be accepted by the community before being discussed? I disagree with that completely. At any rate, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the effect the tone of conversation on Hubski has on the image of the website as a whole.
Demanding isn't polite; but if you can't provide a solid basis for your opinion, there's not much reason for other people to find it of value. Often I am wondering if my own opinions are well founded. Understanding the basis for those that differ from mine helps me to challenge my own, and often to modify them.Isn't demanding proof or sources for an opinion insulting?
I know. What i'm saying is that the tone of the text is mostly in the mental voice of the reader. If one comes in here expecting aggressive speech, that's what they'll get (and considering how discourse often is on the internet, it's not surprising to expect that). However, you could read this comment in a condescending way, or you can read it the way I'm writing it, which is "I disagree with you like an adult, meaning we can use our inside voices and hash our disagreements out". No. You, and everyone in the world, are allowed to hold whatever opinion you choose. However, When you advance that opinion in public - which is what the internet is, regardless of its presumed anonymity - you are opening that opinion to criticism. If it doesn't pass scrutiny, why do you have that opinion? Is that opinion worth having? There are lots of discussions where both sides of an argument will have lots of evidence - Economics, for example, or "How does one run a country?" Disagreement and discussion is great, I'd argue it's most of why we're here. People disagree about shit all the time here. take this comment tree for example, where I say something dumb, get called on my shit, and I said "whoah, my Bad" then learned a bunch, while retaining that much of my fundamental point was unchanged by what I learned. The world didn't explode - indeed, i enjoyed the whole exchange. but to an outside viewer, i can see how that comment could look like it includes: 2: A condescending and sarcastic tone. 3: A sense of superiority. To me, it held none of those things. You're right that tone has an affect on the image of this website, but I say that the tone of this site is not as poor as you perceive it to be, or indeed, as many people who come from other places probably perceive it to be.I'm talking about the effect the tone of conversation on Hubski has on the image of the website as a whole.
Isn't demanding proof or sources for an opinion insulting?
You're saying that all views need to be accepted by the community before being discussed?
1: A veneer of kindness kept up until a disagreement.