Thread:Alzrius/@comment-16774229-20131031212846/@comment-11687-20131031222136

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: I've decided that our argument has no place on the JNPR dorm thread any more, and that it's best that we continue it here.

I'm not adverse to that. If you feel it's more apropos to continue the debate here, that's fine with me, as we do seem to have shifted the discussion somewhat.

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: Now, I understand your point, and I think that in the end, it will be a difference of opinion. But if you plan do this, I have some advice and warnings for you. No, you can't perfectly predict what people can and can't understand, but I would think that someone who prides themselves on their communication skills as much as you can deduce a general standard based on the pervs posts. Just as you wouldn't speak to 3rd grader the way you do to a doctor and expect them to understand you, you can't go onto foume about hormonal teens sharing a room(where most of the content is ideas for how this could work out in funny scenes) and expect them to understand your high brow analysis. Again, I understand that you're guess can't be perfect, but I think I would have thought the crowd wasn't up for that sort of thing give what came before.

This is probably the most fundamental point of disagreement we're having. Quite simply, I refuse to think that little of the other people here. They are not third-graders (I presume), and I think that presuming that they won't be able to understand me is a borderline insult to their intelligence.

I don't necessarily expect that everyone will carry on a conversation in the same style that I do, certainly; hence why I mentioned before my reasoning regarding on whom the burden of comprehension was placed should there be an issue of understanding due to a lack of comprehension regarding particular words (as opposed to my not having made my point clearly enough). However, I'm intent on giving people the benefit of the doubt.

To reiterate, I presume people are intelligent until proven otherwise. You seem to be telling me to do the opposite.

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: Of course, there were some people there who did enjoy the discussion, but I suspect you may not always be as lucky. If you were to bring this kind of discussion to a more popular thread, say “What's Going on With Juane and Pyrrha”, or any of the “Where For Here?” threads, chances are you would be met with more opposition, annoyed emoticons, and maybe even caps lock rage. That's just a guess on my part, but I've spent a good amout of time on the forums, and I that's the understanding I have of the community.

That's understandable, and perhaps even inevitable. The difference there being that should some people take umbrage at my manner of conversing, I don't believe that I'm the one at fault. As I've explained, the burden of comprehension (where vocabulary is concerned, as opposed to ambiguity) falls on the listener, in my opinion. Likewise, I don't think that it's fair to others to presume that I'm talking over their heads. It's also not fair to me to say that I shouldn't participate in the forums unless I write at less than my degree of natural inclination.

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: Now I understand if you disagree with me, but that's the way I see the isue. Althoe we're a speculation based comuity, the things that we discus at lacth tent to be about story, charicters, and other importent things. When we bring up less important matters(Klepto Yang, anti corporate Blake, and JNPR dorm at a time), the discussion is more tongue and cheek, and less in depth. I'm sorry, but I think I was wrong when I said that this was about being inclusive. Now that I think about it, I just feel like this sort of thing is trying to turn the forums into something their not. It's worked pretty well for you on that thread, but as you could tell by Argen's post on Maki's wall, there are some people who don't want it to go in that direction.

I fundamentally, but respectfully, disagree. The forums are made up of the people who participate in them. Presuming that they are doing so in good faith (e.g. that they're not deliberately trying to make things uncomfortable for people via insults, trolling, and the like), then there's really no particular reason for anyone not to participate, regardless of the manner in which they do so.

Outside of a particular code of conduct, there's no presumption that any particular poster, or individual post for that matter, needs to conform to any style of presentation, or manner of engaging with a particular topic. There's certainly no presumption that only certain topics are "alright" to tackle seriously, whereas others can only be dealt with in a lighthearted manner.

That some people will disapprove of that is, quite simply, a matter of course, and is certainly no disincentive to continue posting in whatever manner pleases a given poster. Why should there be? Popularity has never been the watchword for communication, in any regard.

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: I apologize if this looks like an attack, but I'm worried about the wiki, and I'm worried for you to a degree.

I think it's a drastic overstatement to say that my posting in a manner that a few people don't care for is cause to worry about the wiki as a whole. Likewise, while I appreciate your concern, I'm not particularly troubled by it.

ImposterParrotGrass wrote: P.S. I was looking on your contributions to see if you'd been on any other threads, and that's how I found your post on Maki's wall. Posting on someone's wall is the most personal method of communication we have here, so it's generally seen as intrusive to respond to a post on somebody else's wall. Just trying to show you the ropes. :)

I find that responding to a particular post on someone else's wall is no more intrusive than making an unsolicited post on their wall in the first place. That's my demonstration to you regarding wiki etiquette. ;)