Ending debates with style

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-03-02 03:27pm

Why can't people end debates in better ways than just disappearing? I'm sure you've all been there; you've been debating with someone and written a very thorough and logical response to try to win the debate, only to find out that the person never writes back. Alternatively you get random flames/ad hominems. It's really irritating.

I recently debated with a guy on another board. It was a really long debate, had been going for over two months, I think. I was growing real tired of it because we had basically stagnated and didn't get anywhere, so I thought that I'd just end it because of lack of interest. At first I just intented to just not reply to the latest message, but when I thought about it, I realized that I hate it when people do that to me. So instead I wrote something along the lines of

I wrote:Look, this debate has been going for a real long time now and I think we've reached the point where we're just not going to get any further, so let's just call it a draw. So you have a good life now until we can find something else to disagree on

It didn't take long at all to write, but I bet it made all the difference (and it felt really good too

). So why can't people do that instead of just vanishing from the scene?

And also when I lose an argument, I usually tell the other person that I've realized that I was wrong. Not just ignoring the lost point and getting to the next, which the vast majority seems to be doing (at least on many other boards). And I think that it's a good idea to do this, because even if you were wrong, at least you realized it and conceded the point; maybe you even learned something new in the process. In another recent debate I showed how the other person's argument was stupid by using a very obvious and funny analogy. That of course made her look stupid for using that argument, but she could easily "break free" of that stupidity by conceding that the argument was indeed stupid. By doing that she would have made herself look less stupid. She didn't do that, but threw a sarcasm about how it was "nice to know that she discussed with a serious person... not", instead.

I think this has to do with pride. I think humans generally take pride in being right all the time and hate to be proven wrong. By responding the way she did, the girl did not look like she was wrong the subject, but it didn't make her look any less stupid either, as anyone could read and understand that her argument was stupid, and her refusal to admit it made herself stupid too. So it would seem like humans would prefer being stupid before being wrong. Personally, I take more pride in not being an idiot than being right all the time, which is impossible anyway.

Lucifer · Post by **Lucifer** » 2005-03-02 03:48pm

As an agnostic, I have no problem with admiting fault, because I'm only certain that I don't know. However, most of the people I argue are creationists or use fallacious arguments.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-03-02 04:20pm

Sometimes they just get busy. I generally don't interpret someone's disappearance as a dishonest act unless they try to raise the exact same arguments in a subsequent thread as if the first thread never happened (which is something that happens a lot with certain types of individuals, particularly fundies and some types of hardcore Trekkies).

spikenigma · Post by **spikenigma** » 2005-03-03 08:11am

Darth Wong wrote: *snip
(which is something that happens a lot with certain types of individuals, particularly fundies and some types of hardcore Trekkies).

...completely unlike some types of hardcore warsies of course

--------------------------------

I would agree with the OP poster that simply "dissapearing" without any closing statement or expression of desire for the thread/debate to be finished with. I normally post as such

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-03-03 09:56am

spikenigma wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: *snip
(which is something that happens a lot with certain types of individuals, particularly fundies and some types of hardcore Trekkies).
...completely unlike some types of hardcore warsies of course

Are you talking about the weirdoes on starwars.com who cling to the EU figures for SSD length and ignore the movies? They're fucked up too. Mind you, in SWvST military debates the SW side generally doesn't have to worry about that because their position is intrinsically stronger.

I would agree with the OP poster that simply "dissapearing" without any closing statement or expression of desire for the thread/debate to be finished with. I normally post as such

Have you never simply gotten too busy to bother continuing with a time-consuming debate? Posting "I'm too busy to continue" would give people the same impression as not posting at all, and it would be wrong to expect someone to actually concede even though he still thinks he has a good position and something just came up in his personal life. Or do you not have a personal life?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-03-03 10:30am

I of the thought that unless the returning person just simply blithers on the same rhetoric that life happened. I've had a person disappear for the greater part of a year because he was in the military. I thought at first he disappeared for some other reason but when he came back with new reasons and arguments and when asked he came up with something.

Whether it was true or not I'm not going to nitpick.

Literally if the other side has something they believe is feasible simply conceeding is just as bad as giving up since it's up to the otehr to prove how flawed the argument is.

As for hardcore anything...they can be at times the most trying but show the most flaws. It's easy enough to exploit and practically repeat your argument ad nauseum. It's both the best and worst. They don't concede but then again at times they are such a one track mind you have to wonder.

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2005-03-03 11:55am

Darth Wong wrote:
spikenigma wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: *snip
(which is something that happens a lot with certain types of individuals, particularly fundies and some types of hardcore Trekkies).
...completely unlike some types of hardcore warsies of course
Are you talking about the weirdoes on starwars.com who cling to the EU figures for SSD length and ignore the movies? They're fucked up too. Mind you, in SWvST military debates the SW side generally doesn't have to worry about that because their position is intrinsically stronger.

On some boards i don't need to name,some think you're an Hard Core Warsie.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-03-03 11:57am

Montcalm wrote:On some boards i don't need to name,some think you're an Hard Core Warsie.

And some think I'm a hardcore radical "EVILutionist" too; I don't lose any sleep over it. I wonder why it doesn't bother them that only people who lack scientific background ever seem to find their arguments convincing. In both cases.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2005-03-03 12:01pm

I recently got into a ten page debate, all day long, during my work day but I was so worked up by the topic and the innanety of the other side, got a concession, retired satisfied with my work only to see the SAME fucker bring up the SAME arguments in another thread only a day later. Christ was I pissed.

Its those special fuckers that piss me off more than simple WOI or trollish shit. I tend to lose patience with trolls and drop out of a debate or as Mike points out we tend to get busy with things like work and RL to get too caught up in a debate about Sci Fi stuff.

Post by **Coyote** » 2005-03-03 12:08pm

It would have to be a case-by-case consideration of the nature of who you're debating. Some people would take the "I'm too busy" or "It's going nowehere" posts as a sign of weakness or a default-- thus allowing them to post that you conceeded and they are "t3h Ub3r".

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-03-03 12:14pm

Coyote wrote:It would have to be a case-by-case consideration of the nature of who you're debating. Some people would take the "I'm too busy" or "It's going nowehere" posts as a sign of weakness or a default-- thus allowing them to post that you conceeded and they are "t3h Ub3r".

And then there are the people whose entire tactic is to simply outlast you, thus basically forcing you to eventually drop out so they can declare their cheesy pseudo-victory.

I personally believe that if I can tell the more knowledgeable people in the forum can see what I'm saying, then that's good enough for me. You can't possibly hope to convince everyone, no matter what you say or how you say it. And you will almost never convince a direct opponent.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2005-03-03 12:20pm

I have a general rule. If there is a conversation and no one is going to change their position and the conversation is generating nothing new in terms of information, it's not worth having, so I might as well be the first to stop. I've seen way too many conversations that have lasted 5 or 10 pages longer than they need to because the people involved with the conversation refuse to give the other person the last word because they are afraid that that means they lose the debate. As far as I'm concerned, if you are at that point, you've already lost.

Gunhead · Post by **Gunhead** » 2005-03-03 12:33pm

I agree with Gil. When everything has been said why bother with more.
It pisses me off when debates (specially vs. ones) derail into personal arguments where you just try to prove the other guy is wrong, doesn't really matter what about, just so he's wrong and you're right. They generate long winded nit picky threads that are not fun to follow and I imagine are not fun to write.

-Gunhead

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2005-03-03 06:16pm

I try very hard to properly concede points and accept being proven wrong. I'm not perfect, of course, but I do believe that the best form is to concede gracefully and let the person you're talking to know that you've conceded.

I have ended up letting the occasional discussion drop for lack of time, which I find irksome but simply unavoidable.

So I don't always assume that someone I'm disagreeing with just ducks the topic, with a couple of exceptions. One is if their position just got thoroughly and vigorously demolished and they simply stop replying, especially if up until that point they'd been vigorously attending and posting. The other is if they have a notable pattern of simply dropping out of discussions after their points have been refuted.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-03-03 06:49pm

One thing I sometimes do, because of my habit of participating in more threads than I really should due to time constraints, is to drop out when it looks like others are saying the same thing as me anyway, so I'm not the only one standing there alone with this idea.

Petrosjko · Post by **Petrosjko** » 2005-03-03 06:57pm

Darth Wong wrote:One thing I sometimes do, because of my habit of participating in more threads than I really should due to time constraints, is to drop out when it looks like others are saying the same thing as me anyway, so I'm not the only one standing there alone with this idea.

Between kids, a marriage, work, and posting here, I've occasionally found myself wondering just where the hell you find any time to sleep.

spikenigma · Post by **spikenigma** » 2005-03-04 05:19am

Darth Wong wrote: Are you talking about the weirdoes on starwars.com who cling to the EU figures for SSD length and ignore the movies? They're fucked up too. Mind you, in SWvST military debates the SW side generally doesn't have to worry about that because their position is intrinsically stronger.

not specifically no, fanatics come in all shapes and sizes (trekkies and warsies alike) . I've seen debates (culture vs [insert force] to be specific) where 5 pages later the same point proven 5 pages ago is asked to be proven again, and again, and again because the opponent has not read and/or digested the previous debate before wading in to shout the odds

Have you never simply gotten too busy to bother continuing with a time-consuming debate? Posting "I'm too busy to continue" would give people the same impression as not posting at all, and it would be wrong to expect someone to actually concede even though he still thinks he has a good position and something just came up in his personal life. Or do you not have a personal life?

I have a personal life. As I have done in many a debate I no longer have the time, patience or motivation to continue - a simple "ok, we are simply going around in circles here: my assertions = xyz; your assertions = abc. We will never prove our points to each other so I'm leaving this debate - perhaps again another time"

that then puts a cap on the debate and takes a minute to type out. If the opponent then screams concession accepted - he/she looks like a fool but the debate is still over.

Medic · Post by **Medic** » 2005-03-04 05:49am

Petrosjko wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:One thing I sometimes do, because of my habit of participating in more threads than I really should due to time constraints, is to drop out when it looks like others are saying the same thing as me anyway, so I'm not the only one standing there alone with this idea.
Between kids, a marriage, work, and posting here, I've occasionally found myself wondering just where the hell you find any time to sleep.

No offense but I have to agree with him.

:

My problem is the prime time of the board is basically US and Canadian East timezones. If I jump in to a raging debate in N&P after I get off work, everyone's sleeping and they're gonna wake up to "OMG vulturing and me-tooing newb!" so I usually just read these, much as I'd like to contribute.

As to the OP, if I lose then I'll admit as much instead of just disappearing. If it's a stalemate, there isn't much point in "agreeing to disagree" as you already know that. Leave at once and let the silently agreed upon trench lines lay as they are. In the case of victory, I try not to pile on, unless it's a rabid idiot on the other end.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2005-03-04 06:52am

Petrosjko wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:One thing I sometimes do, because of my habit of participating in more threads than I really should due to time constraints, is to drop out when it looks like others are saying the same thing as me anyway, so I'm not the only one standing there alone with this idea.
Between kids, a marriage, work, and posting here, I've occasionally found myself wondering just where the hell you find any time to sleep.

This is the power of anal sex. Behold what it can do for one.

But seriously, Mike brings up a good point. When other start agreeing with you and defending your points, it's pretty easy to bow out because you have people who are going to take some of the slack and really your voice is not needed one hundred percent anymore.

Also there is a point when even five to ten pages later...you've won. No need to hear concession and if you really eraned it, nothing arrogant about going "Concession accepted". Just because one side won't admit it, doesn't mean the average viewer won't come in and see it for themselves and wonder what the fuck is up with the other person.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2005-03-04 11:27am

Is there anything anal sex CAN'T do?

...

Apart from *THAT* :p

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2005-03-04 01:15pm

Ghost Rider wrote:Also there is a point when even five to ten pages later...you've won. No need to hear concession and if you really eraned it, nothing arrogant about going "Concession accepted". Just because one side won't admit it, doesn't mean the average viewer won't come in and see it for themselves and wonder what the fuck is up with the other person.

I think that's along the lines of my second point about people not wanting to be wrong. Their refusal to admit it makes them look really stupid and there's not really any other way to end such "debates" other than dropping out or the "Consession accepted"-way. You could say "Okay you're obviously too stupid to realize when you've lost and everyone who read this will know it. Unless you get smarter this debate is over", but that has the potential to piss him off, and so does "concession accepted". Perhaps dropping out really is the preferred way to handle such cases.

As for being too busy with real life to reply to long discussions, well if you know that you won't be able to respond in some time then why not just write and tell the other part that you don't have the time right now to continue but still don't think that the discussion is over? Just disappearing would be pretty ambiguous, as you could have any reason for doing so, but saying you're too busy can not mean anything besides that (for most people anyway; some people might take it as a concession, but they would do so for disappearance too). I guess it's all in how you express yourself...

Of course, if you're so busy you don't even have the time to write anything back, then there's nothing you can do about it.