# Why?



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

I am just curious about something: why do people feel a need to bash other people's ideas? I don't mean disagree or have an intelligent discussion about stuff. I am talking about trolling threads and repeating over and over again why you think people are utter fools for believing what they do? 

If someone posts that they want to start a small farm they get deluged with naysayers. If they are concerned about our current food supply for any sort of reason they are taken to task repeatedly for it. 

If you really think the other side are idiots why bother telling them over and over again?


----------



## puddlejumper007 (Jan 12, 2008)

sounds like you need to stay on here an not go to those other places with stinky people:grin:


----------



## Nomad (Dec 19, 2002)

puddlejumper007 said:


> sounds like you need to stay on here an not go to those other places with stinky people:grin:


I believe the OP may be talking about here. I have seen a lot of that as well, but I just let it roll off. Some people genuinely believe what they say, others are just negative in all things. I guess it's each to his own. I just take what I can from posts and ignore the rest. Sometimes people do need to hear the opposite side of things, but maybe presentation could be a bit better. Just my opinion.

Nomad


----------



## Lyra (Sep 15, 2009)

On the other hand, there are a lot of overly sensitive people that get offended by any opinion that isn't the same as theirs. I once had an Atheist roommate that asked me what do Christians believe will happen to those who do not believe in God. Would they go to Heaven? I said no. She did a 180, moved out, and never spoke to me again. She said that was too judgmental of an answer.


----------



## oneokie (Aug 14, 2009)

Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Having got that off my chest, seems like those people have tunnel vision, they are focused on one small part of whatever is being discussed, instead of looking at the larger picture.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

I like that Oneokie.  

And like I said I don't mind disagreeing or discussion or anything like that it's just it seems like some people must search the forum for certain topics because the only time they pop up is to argue about something.


----------



## katy (Feb 15, 2010)

IMHO, it's several things. 

1. The jealousy factor. If the responder doesn't have the courage to try, neither should anyone else.

2. The whipping boy / scapegoat mentality. Another case of inadequate self esteem, so therefore destroy others, it makes em feel better about themselves.

3. Self centered, mob mentality. Their way is the only way. What a destructive way to be. And if you can't change a person's attitude, blast away until they simply leave a forum.

It takes more thought to express a negative in a manner that is not harmful. Hope that makes sense.


----------



## springvalley (Jun 23, 2009)

Oneokie, I really don`t believe those people have a big picture, they most often than not are narrow minded. They don`t like seeing other people having ideas other than theirs. But Patt, even those people aren`t bad, just don`t like other people enjoying themselves.>Thanks Marc


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

I think that disagreeing or even discouraging remarks are not neccessarily a bad thing- makes people think more deeply. What I hate are the nasty, sniping ones that are simply things like saying that someone's stupid or just plain wrong. If even they are wrong, no one has to throw hate out by the shovel full. Unless, of course, you have so much of it, you just need to get rid of it.
But it's the best that it can get when it's open to all who can write (more or less) and have a computer.


----------



## QoTL (Jun 5, 2008)

I agree with the other folks, but I also think we are all trained to be.. somewhat judgemental. Some of us control that better than others.

I honestly think some folks read a thread imagining that the OP is a complete, incapable idiot... or really a 'city person' trying to jump on an imaginary bandwagon, and they want to discourage that. Or maybe they feel threatened.

It's hard to feel attacked, and I have left, and come back to, this forum numerous times. I come back because there ARE nice folks here. There ARE folks who give good advice without resorting to name calling or nitpicking. Sometimes those people seem to be a tiny minority, but they are worth my time. I have a running list of screennames in my head 

As for the people who have to poopoo on everyone else well.. they must have a miserable life to carry that over and visit it on complete strangers. Some people will argue about the color of the sky, and you just have to let them go.


----------



## Ardie/WI (May 10, 2002)

Patt said:


> I am just curious about something: why do people feel a need to bash other people's ideas? I don't mean disagree or have an intelligent discussion about stuff. I am talking about trolling threads and repeating over and over again why you think people are utter fools for believing what they do?
> 
> If someone posts that they want to start a small farm they get deluged with naysayers. If they are concerned about our current food supply for any sort of reason they are taken to task repeatedly for it.
> 
> If you really think the other side are idiots why bother telling them over and over again?


Opinions are like noses. Everyone has one.


----------



## Minelson (Oct 16, 2007)

I think it's the heat and the bugs. Everybody is irritated and irritating.


----------



## Callieslamb (Feb 27, 2007)

One of the things I like about this forum is that you DO get two (or more) sides to each idea/question. I see people chiming in with helpful hints as they think of them. Perhaps they don't always go along with the intent of the thread. Perhaps the OP could be being told things they already know or feel that someone is raining on their parade. But I think most people post to be as helpful as they can be. It's the beauty of the forum. And maybe someone else reading the thread could use the extra information or differing opinion that the OP didn't need. In the end, you pull out the things that are useful to you and let the rest go.


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

Gee, Patt, I thought you did pretty well on the obesity postings until you got to your post(#39) where you said that Mayo Clinic must have been taken over by PETA, or Greenpeace, or Mother Earth News, for them including that social and economic causes may also be linked to obesity........ 

Sometimes I think this forum is a re-enactment of the old movie "Lord of the Flies," then other times I think, "No, it's more like we are the natives in "The Gods must be Crazy." Maybe it's because we have no adult teacher, principal, judge, or cop to make us quit. Sometimes it's because the internet has no rules for anonymous, faceless people--in person, we might get and give a few nosebleeds and maybe land in jail for our behavior. Some of us don't know how to discern scientific studies from op ed publishing. Some of us closed up our chemistry books in high school. Some of us want to be King of the Hill, Leader of the Pack. Some of us always see low clouds and yell, "The sky is falling!" Some of us get heated up by hot button words. Some of us know that and use those hot button words. Some of us don't recognize "validation" language--that of using rash, over the top phrases and saying radical things to the base in order to get them to accept you, and your product, agenda, political beliefs, or blog because they think you really, really, agree with them and their preset beliefs. Some of us never got into a water fight as college Freshmen, where the cops and ambulances had to be called in because it escalated. Some of us are just ornery, perverse, blind, unsympathetic, unChristian, rude, arrogant, stupid IDIOTS......(It's a human thing, none of you would understand) 


geo


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

There's also been a huge influence into public education to create a disintegration of conservative religious traditions by the socialist collectivist ideolgy that most of us have been brainwashed with. If you'd like more information on the socialist dialectic vs. didactic philosophy let me know. We're being overwhelmed by the dialectic in our society today.


----------



## where I want to (Oct 28, 2008)

As my Mom used to say to irritate the heck out of her teenagers- all the world's crazy except thee and me and I have my doubts about thee.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

----->Truth<------- is hard to come by, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

Ya know, Patt, it comes down to a glass half full, or half empty.

Both sides have a right to discuss things.

I suspect the other side views you as judgementally & as negatively as you view them.

If you look at your message, it actually is pretty judgemental itself.

Nothing wrong that!

I believe we humans are all judgemental & view our own opinions and facts are correct.

As someone said, any group of people turns into a relection of a big society - Lord of the Flies type of thing.

Not all homesteaders think alike, and that is a good thing. Some are conservative, some are practical, some are dreamers, some are liberal.

And then - there are some ideas that are just plain dumb and need to be called as such.....  

Have a good one. 

--->Paul


----------



## Prismseed (Sep 14, 2009)

> seems like some people must search the forum for certain topics because the only time they pop up is to argue about something.


Well, arguably the board is so well stocked with educated and informed posters the 'good replies' get covered pretty quickly. So some folks might only have reason to speak up when it is a nuh-uh moment.


----------



## plowjockey (Aug 18, 2008)

I have an old saying, that I am quite fond of,

"Nobody ever kicks a dead dog!"

If you are ambitious, or have some ideas, no matter how out there they are, some people will always have to get after you.

If you sit around and do nothing (except complain), like the basher's do, then you will be good to go, at least in their eyes.

Mediocrity loves company, unfortunately.

Let em' kick away!


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

Boy, if you don't know anything about the dialectic or didactic reasoning you're probably baffled by my last post. Sorry 'bout that. 

Here's a good sample audio of a discussion on the topic that will give you a lot of insight into why there is such a sudden attack to certain ideas when they are brought up. Trust me... it's not boring at all and will help you make sense of what is happening everywhere in society today.

You can go to the following website and, if you have RealPlayer installed, can listen to a free 20 minute sample. Today's (07/24/10) topic discusses the issue of dialectic vs. didactic. 
http://www.steelonsteel.com/broadcasts.php

And, another great resource website on the subject:
http://crossroad.to/Excerpts/community/dialectic.htm


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

In specific, the threads by folks who want to start a commune or cooperative or find someone to work for room and board and share the crops are responded to vehemently by those of us who have, as my son says, a higher odometer reading, and have had enough real world experience to try to warn those rose-colored glasses wearers.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

oneokie said:


> Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
> 
> Having got that off my chest, seems like those people have tunnel vision, they are focused on one small part of whatever is being discussed, instead of looking at the larger picture.


I agree with you. *hint*


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

geo in mi said:


> Gee, Patt, I thought you did pretty well on the obesity postings until you got to your post(#39) where you said that Mayo Clinic must have been taken over by PETA, or Greenpeace, or Mother Earth News, for them including that social and economic causes may also be linked to obesity........
> 
> Sometimes I think this forum is a re-enactment of the old movie "Lord of the Flies," then other times I think, "No, it's more like we are the natives in "The Gods must be Crazy." Maybe it's because we have no adult teacher, principal, judge, or cop to make us quit. Sometimes it's because the internet has no rules for anonymous, faceless people--in person, we might get and give a few nosebleeds and maybe land in jail for our behavior. Some of us don't know how to discern scientific studies from op ed publishing. Some of us closed up our chemistry books in high school. Some of us want to be King of the Hill, Leader of the Pack. Some of us always see low clouds and yell, "The sky is falling!" Some of us get heated up by hot button words. Some of us know that and use those hot button words. Some of us don't recognize "validation" language--that of using rash, over the top phrases and saying radical things to the base in order to get them to accept you, and your product, agenda, political beliefs, or blog because they think you really, really, agree with them and their preset beliefs. Some of us never got into a water fight as college Freshmen, where the cops and ambulances had to be called in because it escalated. Some of us are just ornery, perverse, blind, unsympathetic, unChristian, rude, arrogant, stupid IDIOTS......(It's a human thing, none of you would understand)
> 
> ...


There is definitely plenty of orneriness! I think it's a requirement though to be a homesteader.  

I have to admit there is one person here who causes me to stumble into snarkiness due to their need to make annoying posts, I have to repent frequently......good y'all can't see all the stuff I type and then delete! 

I do really try to grit my teeth and walk away though if it's obvious that people are posting about something I disagree with and they are all like minded and enjoying the thread. My problem comes when the OP is something I agree with and get entrenched into defending it.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

OK, I have to clear something up... What does OP stand for???


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

If I really honesty felt like you were about to make a mistake, would I be your friend if I kept my mouth shut and said nothing?

There are thinkers and feelers in this world. Thinkers make decisions based on logical thought, and we tend to think that we can make a feeler see the world our way by repeating the same logically flawless thoughts again and again. The feelers don't like the way those logical thoughts make them feel, and so get upset, starting a vicious cycle of upsetness.

That said, it is smart for a feeler to listen to a thinkers advice. Thinkers go places in life, feelers usually spend their lives in low rent apartments making music, art or some other "useless" or pencil pushing pursuit. That last statement probably made the feelers upset, even though it is accurate and logical.

Pete


----------



## DamnearaFarm (Sep 27, 2007)

Original Poster


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

RedneckPete said:


> If I really honesty felt like you were about to make a mistake, would I be your friend if I kept my mouth shut and said nothing?
> 
> There are thinkers and feelers in this world. Thinkers make decisions based on logical thought, and we tend to think that we can make a feeler see the world our way by repeating the same logically flawless thoughts again and again. The feelers don't like the way those logical thoughts make them feel, and so get upset, starting a vicious cycle of upsetness.
> 
> ...


Probably should bite my tongue here but......having seen some of those "flawless" bits o' logic hammered over and over at people on threads might I suggest 2 things? 1. It's possible the logic is not flawless and 2. It only has to be said once. Oh and a third: just because people are caring does not mean they can't also be highly logical. :thumb:


----------



## dezingg (Feb 25, 2010)

I don't think that the weather and bugs help peoples' mood much. Likewise a lot of folks are seeing simply unbelievable things happening to the country they love and it upsets them.

Then of course there are people who don't want to read any opinion that doesn't echo their own opinion.

You add all that to the fact that they can say whatever they want on an Internet forum and are fairly insulated from repercussions by the anonymity that is offered by such a forum.


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

Hmmm, doesn't seem like trolling to me. Just as the poster on one side of an argument wants to discuss their opinion, so does the poster on the other side of an argument.

Saying "I don't agree with you because....." or "Your argument doesn't make sense," isn't an insult. Saying "You're a meanie head," is. I've noticed that there are a number of people who say someone is being insulting for just disagreeing and they throw a barb. 

Maybe, if instead of being upset, we ask someone if they meant something a certain way, we could really understand the other's point, we could get along better. 

Personally, I'm very conservative. I do enjoy, however, debating issues with those who are not. That doesn't mean I'm insulting, hateful, mean, or anything else. It means I'm inquisitive and I like to challenge my own and others' beliefs.


----------



## AngieM2 (May 10, 2002)

a novel thought. Use the report a post feature so the mods will know to review a post. If you don't do that, then it might be missed - 
also, a mod might see a reported post, review it and not agree with you as it being a bad post, or they may agree, and that post or thread gets deleted, etc.

Just a thought of an action to get something at least considered done, rather than just talking about the over all happening.

Angie


----------



## dezingg (Feb 25, 2010)

Heritagefarm said:


> OK, I have to clear something up... What does OP stand for???


I assume it means something like Original Poster. You'll see it quite often when a thread of discussion wanders and then someone will write a comment and remind people that they are responding to the points made by the Original Poster or points made in the Original Post.


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> Probably should bite my tongue here but......having seen some of those "flawless" bits o' logic hammered over and over at people on threads might I suggest 2 things? 1. It's possible the logic is not flawless and 2. It only has to be said once. Oh and a third: just because people are caring does not mean they can't also be highly logical. :thumb:


1. Logic is correct or it's not. It's a binary system. I love interacting with people who argue articulately and logically. It sharpens me and opens my mind to new and exciting possibilities.

2. If the point is accurate and correct, it can and should be said until everyone involved in the discussion recognizes that it is, or points out why it is not. Again we come to the binary nature of logical reasoning. If the point is correct but some people don't want to acknowledge it because they don't like the implications or how it makes them feel, then the discussion is over and we may as well go home. How can two people discuss when one person won't acknowledge relevant factual information?

3. Thinkers can feel and feelers can think. On the other hand, every personality is dominated by one or the other. Feelers subject rational logical thought to the way it makes them feel. Thinkers ignore their feeling in favor of rational logical thought. There is no harm in acknowledging this.

Google "personality type test" and run a couple. I'm guessing you are either ISFP or INFP, and I'm leaning towards INFP.

Pete


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

RedneckPete said:


> 1. Logic is correct or it's not. It's a binary system. I love interacting with people who argue articulately and logically. It sharpens me and opens my mind to new and exciting possibilities.
> 
> 2. If the point is accurate and correct, it can and should be said until everyone involved in the discussion recognizes that it is, or points out why it is not. Again we come to the binary nature of logical reasoning. If the point is correct but some people don't want to acknowledge it because they don't like the implications or how it makes them feel, then the discussion is over and we may as well go home. How can two people discuss when one person won't acknowledge relevant factual information?
> 
> ...


INFJ actually. I have no problems with logic.

Your first point is only true if you line of logic starts with a correct premise. Glenn Beck can spin out fascinating lines of logic that are all sadly based on false premises. But they are still lovely clear cut lines of logic.

There is absolutely no point in repeating the same thing over and over especially if it happens to be wrong. Repitition does not make what you say true nor does it make your hearer more likely to agree with you. Discussion involves both parties trying to understand each other and then moving from there to finding the truth. Both parties must be open to the fact that they could be wrong. 

In the end all that matters to me is truth. And truth is based on facts. Now sometimes you can have a set of facts and I can have a set that contradicts yours and we may come to an impass but again we both have to be willing to look at the other person's side and we have to listen because it is always possible we are wrong.


----------



## Navotifarm (Dec 16, 2009)

Binary only? Thinkers and feelers only? Seems too limiting to me. What about creativity, imagination, "thinking outside the box?

Some thinkers can feel and some of us incurably romantic feelers aren't operating at 80 IQ. 

For myself, I find I generally agree with Patt and find her posts very interesting. There are others on here who I tend to think of as "rainy crows.". One in particular is like a little tape recorder griping about "free."So no matter what the topic, that response might be triggered in that person. So, that's where that person is stuck. What's more interesting are the people who change, grow, move on, even admit when they made a mistake. Those are the living, growing persons who have contributed the most here from my point of view. 

Now, I'm still upset when I ventured something on here and Alice characterized it as a scam, but while that was a slam at me, it was also helpful because she spoke her mind. Doubtless others had the same thought but didn't have the courage or forthrightness to say so. So sometimes things can be hurtful but helpful, too. Sometimes pills are bitter to swallow but sugar coating of everything? Naaah!


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Patt said:


> I am just curious about something: why do people feel a need to bash other people's ideas? I don't mean disagree or have an intelligent discussion about stuff. I am talking about trolling threads and repeating over and over again why you think people are utter fools for believing what they do?
> 
> If someone posts that they want to start a small farm they get deluged with naysayers. If they are concerned about our current food supply for any sort of reason they are taken to task repeatedly for it.
> 
> If you really think the other side are idiots why bother telling them over and over again?


Could it be that they have already tried the idea and it didn't work for them. 
If I was going to try some new idea I would want all of the naysayers I could find. It would save me the experience, cost, and dissapointments of making the same mistakes. If I was truly serious about an idea I wouldn't let what some one else thinks bother me. I would use their failures to learn. The more failures I hear the fewer mistakes I make. 
Sometimes the naysayers are right. Some ideas just won't work. Better to think out their reasons first and learn if you were thinking of making the same mistakes that caused others to fail.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Agreed, as that is also known as "Thinking Outside Of The Box" instead of a one tracked mind.


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

If you'd like to understand more of why logic and truth aren't always relevant in a discussion check out this link on Small Groups and the Dialectic Process.

http://http://crossroad.to/articles2/04/3-purpose.htm


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

According to my family and in-law family I am naturally offensive and insentitive and should think more before I speak! Over the years I have been told I lack tact and am too out spoken.That could be because I say things exactly as I think them but try not to be insensitive to others feelings. I have been accused of being narrow minded and only capable of seeing one side of a matter. In other words everyone who knows me thinks I lack social graces.

So I apologize if anything I have ever said has offended anyone. I only offer comments on things I or we have experienced ourselves in our homesteading, farming experience. Of course there are many ways of doing things but I can only comment on what I know and we have done.

On my blog I also write only what we have learned from experience and trial and error. I learn alot from others who post comments here and there. I add my two cents worth and maybe it will benefit someone or maybe not. I hate debate, try to avoid people in real life so I won't offend or disappoint anyone, but still like to help others. I try to help through writing of our experiences.

Being a total introvert no one would ever know what I think if it was not for internet blog writing and sites such as this. I would be hiding in the woods somewhere communing with the animals who seem to like me just the way I am. Yesterday at our camp I conversed with a squirrel who felt quite comfortable scratching at the screen door of the trailer trying to come in.Hope he wasn't offended because I didn't feed him! lol


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

lmrose said:


> I have been accused of being narrow minded and only capable of seeing one side of a matter. In other words everyone who knows me thinks I lack social graces.


In group consensus thinking you WILL be ostrasized by others to intentionally put you in your place. It's how they are successful in achieving the "outcome-based" nature of the Hagelian Dialectic Process (Purpose Driven et al).

Because absolute truth is anathema to them this is the way they vote you out from being relevant.

This dialectic philosophy is so widespread in our society it would do us all well to understand it.


----------



## big rockpile (Feb 24, 2003)

I didn't go through and read all the Post.But all my life have tried to make a Dollar off the Land as best we could everything from Cattle,Logs and Produce.And like they say around here Poor Folks have Poor Ways.

If someone ask about how to do something I give them the way I was always told wheather it be right or wrong its always worked for me and I would say 90% of the time someone will blast me on it.But I've found most go by the Book you do it this way there is no other way.But I'm always open for ideas.

I just try to help best I can.

big rockpile


----------



## lmrose (Sep 24, 2009)

MrCalicoty; My simple mind does not really know or understand what you just said to me.But thankyou for caring enough to comment and have a nice day!


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> INFJ actually. I have no problems with logic.
> 
> Your first point is only true if you line of logic starts with a correct premise.


Yes, but it is important that the thinking side of your brain dominate the feeling side of your brain when you analyze the starting premise. Discarding it out of hand because you don't like the way it makes you feel or don't like the implications it has for your life does nothing to help yourself or move you forward as a person.



Patt said:


> In the end all that matters to me is truth. And truth is based on facts. Now sometimes you can have a set of facts and I can have a set that contradicts yours and we may come to an impass but again we both have to be willing to look at the other person's side and we have to listen because it is always possible we are wrong.


If there are two contradictory sets of facts either one set (could be a bit of both sets) are wrong, or the facts are being improperly applied. If I insist the grass is orange, and you insist it is green, we aren't both right.

Pete


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

lmrose said:


> MrCalicoty; My simple mind does not really know or understand what you just said to me.But thankyou for caring enough to comment and have a nice day!


Thanks! You have a nice day too. Say hello to the squirrels for me 

Here's an article explaining the process I mentioned and how it is applied to people who disagree with the group. 

http://crossroad.to/articles2/04/4-purpose-resisters.htm


----------



## Navotifarm (Dec 16, 2009)

MrCalicoty, when I tried to access your reference, there was a glitch. I kept geting timed out and the "details" gave this: " The following error was encountered: Unable to determine IP address from host name for http The dnsserver returned: Name Error: The domain name does not exist. This means that: The cache was not able to resolve the hostname presented in the URL. 
Check if the address is correct."

Would you kindly post a synthesis of what you are trying to communicate? Somehow it just don't sound right. I surmise you are saying consensus is always rejection? It's true somethings get ganged up on here, and very unreasonably so in some threads, I find, but overall there is more helpful information than bashing or at least enough that I keep coming back so woild you kindly elucidate on the rejection by consensus directly?? Thanks. Oh yeah and rejection isn't quite the same as bashing, is it? To me, this bashing is sometimes just plain mean and cussed!


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

Hagelian Dialectic is rooted in Socialism. In group consensus a facilitator is used to bring the group to a pre-determined outcome. It doesn't matter if people disagree. The process requires tension to work from diverse individuals. If you resist the outcome of the facilitator you will be villified or even banned but most people will form a consensus of agreement and continue with the group.

It's so widespread that it's not necessarily intentional anymore. We, through public education and mass media, have been conditioned to the process and don't even know we're following it. 

Please let me know what link isn't working and I will edit it. If you're behind a corporate firewall this may be part of the problem. Or your ISP could be having problem with their DNS (Domain Name Service) servers which resolve domain names (url) into IP addresses.


----------



## motdaugrnds (Jul 3, 2002)

They have a right to be negative if they want. What they practice, they become. I feel sad for them and just let whatever is said lay there without comment.


----------



## stanb999 (Jan 30, 2005)

All this logic and thoughtfulness breaks down to the simple fact that folks are for the most part set in their ways and petty. 

Look how vigorously people defend silly notions. IE: religion. How can so many people be wrong? Is it the Christians, Muslims, or the Hindus? You tell me?


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2010)

Some views appear to be self evident to some people, whereas other people know an opposing "truth". As a good example, I've had a lot of people tell me that if you grow potatoes in stacks of tires, you can get bushels of potatoes from one plant. They swear this is true. BUT, of all the people that have said that, not one has ever shown me the results. Lot of excuses as to why the tire method didn't work, never any "bushels of potatoes" though. They accept the tire potato theory because, in their mind, it triggers a response of "yea, that makes sense". Having spent some time around potatoes, I can tell you that no matter what you do, you'll get one or two decent size potatoes, one or two medium size potatoes, and a handful of little ones. No matter what you do, thats what you'll get. To me, that is a truth, because I've seen it. More than once. *BUT* I live in the south. Potatoes do not necessarily respond to the climate here the same as they would in Maine or Idaho. So, there could be people there who have a completely different "truth" about the tire/potato theory. So, That person and myself could go on all day long, each convinced of their own "truth" and becoming increasingly irritated as why the person on the other end of the argument was such a liar.


----------



## Ardie/WI (May 10, 2002)

AngieM2 said:


> a novel thought. Use the report a post feature so the mods will know to review a post. If you don't do that, then it might be missed -
> also, a mod might see a reported post, review it and not agree with you as it being a bad post, or they may agree, and that post or thread gets deleted, etc.
> 
> Just a thought of an action to get something at least considered done, rather than just talking about the over all happening.
> ...


It's a great feature!

I don't use it often, but once in awhile I see something that needs reviewing.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

lmrose said:


> According to my family and in-law family I am naturally offensive and insentitive and should think more before I speak! Over the years I have been told I lack tact and am too out spoken.That could be because I say things exactly as I think them but try not to be insensitive to others feelings. I have been accused of being narrow minded and only capable of seeing one side of a matter. In other words everyone who knows me thinks I lack social graces.
> 
> So I apologize if anything I have ever said has offended anyone. I only offer comments on things I or we have experienced ourselves in our homesteading, farming experience. Of course there are many ways of doing things but I can only comment on what I know and we have done.
> 
> ...


I have to say I have always found your posts interesting and haven't seen one so far that came off as insensitive or tactless.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

zong said:


> Some views appear to be self evident to some people, whereas other people know an opposing "truth". As a good example, I've had a lot of people tell me that if you grow potatoes in stacks of tires, you can get bushels of potatoes from one plant. They swear this is true. BUT, of all the people that have said that, not one has ever shown me the results. Lot of excuses as to why the tire method didn't work, never any "bushels of potatoes" though. They accept the tire potato theory because, in their mind, it triggers a response of "yea, that makes sense". Having spent some time around potatoes, I can tell you that no matter what you do, you'll get one or two decent size potatoes, one or two medium size potatoes, and a handful of little ones. No matter what you do, thats what you'll get. To me, that is a truth, because I've seen it. More than once. *BUT* I live in the south. Potatoes do not necessarily respond to the climate here the same as they would in Maine or Idaho. So, there could be people there who have a completely different "truth" about the tire/potato theory. So, That person and myself could go on all day long, each convinced of their own "truth" and becoming increasingly irritated as why the person on the other end of the argument was such a liar.


That is a really good point sometimes your truth may vary.  And I do think people do get caught up in ideaologies that they don't want to let go of too.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

RedneckPete said:


> Yes, but it is important that the thinking side of your brain dominate the feeling side of your brain when you analyze the starting premise. Discarding it out of hand because you don't like the way it makes you feel or don't like the implications it has for your life does nothing to help yourself or move you forward as a person.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Like I said I have no problem with logic or following the thread of truth. Simple fact is you can ignore what I say by labeling me emotional, trust me I am used to it being a woman and all. If you choose to write me off it is your loss not mine.

Obviously we can see what color grass is maybe you could try a different analogy like you see grass as green and I see it as blue because I am color blind. Technically speaking the grass is green but I will still always see it as blue which makes blue true for me.


----------



## Guest (Jul 25, 2010)

Here's a better analogy(I think) Snakes.
Some people are deathly terrified of snakes. I'm not. Does that give me the right to belittle and defame those people because they're afraid of snakes as if their fear is not real? Can I just ridicule those who don't see life my way? 
That's a big part of the snarking and arguing. Some people feel superior in certain contexts, i.e. in the above case, I could feel superior because of my lack of snakefear.
Pretty easy for anybody to see how wrong that is though, isn't it?? Everybody except the posters who are not afraid of snakes, that is.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

zong said:


> Here's a better analogy(I think) Snakes.
> Some people are deathly terrified of snakes. I'm not. Does that give me the right to belittle and defame those people because they're afraid of snakes as if their fear is not real? Can I just ridicule those who don't see life my way?
> That's a big part of the snarking and arguing. Some people feel superior in certain contexts, i.e. in the above case, I could feel superior because of my lack of snakefear.
> Pretty easy for anybody to see how wrong that is though, isn't it?? Everybody except the posters who are not afraid of snakes, that is.


I think that is a better analogy for the forum in general yes.  Mine was more aimed at fixing his analogy.


----------



## Hooligan (Jul 18, 2007)

People are too darned concerned with not getting their feelings hurt. As soon as something is said that makes someone feel bad (guilty?) the emotional attachments start flying and all chance for discussion is lost. No matter how much truth was in the original comment.


Ignoring valid discussion points because somebody is overly sensitive does nobody any good. No matter how they are presented.


I can't even imagine reporting a post. I'm a big boy and can handle anything anyone has to say to me without crying to the authorities. 

I rarely see any threads get to where I would consider out of control on this forum. 

We need to toughen up and stop acting like victims all the time.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

MrCalicoty said:


> Hagelian Dialectic is rooted in Socialism. In group consensus a facilitator is used to bring the group to a pre-determined outcome. It doesn't matter if people disagree. The process requires tension to work from diverse individuals. If you resist the outcome of the facilitator you will be villified or even banned but most people will form a consensus of agreement and continue with the group.
> 
> It's so widespread that it's not necessarily intentional anymore. We, through public education and mass media, have been conditioned to the process and don't even know we're following it.
> 
> Please let me know what link isn't working and I will edit it. If you're behind a corporate firewall this may be part of the problem. Or your ISP could be having problem with their DNS (Domain Name Service) servers which resolve domain names (url) into IP addresses.


I read all of your links and I have to admit I am still not getting it. From what I understand the dialectic method is the Socratic method teaching by discussion which I think is good. It is definitely a more Hebrew way of thinking. It's the method Jesus frequently used.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Mr Cal, your group discussion info is interesting and I indeed see what you're saying. Then you can throw in the extra fun(and Zong alludes to this) of some people have great PRIDE in being the expert in their field(master gardeners are notorious for this)--ask them question and you get the wrath of a person who takes offense at your lack of worship (because, you know you just don't swallow everything hook line n sinker). And you know when you've "won" when after presenting the "facts" they come back with "you're a blind snot nosed idiot" and "you're mean"--ie they got jack, and they're trying to divert attention to that fact by ridiculing and demonizing you and playing the victim to get group sympathy. Right out of the socialist Alinksy's Rules for Radicals, eh?!

pancho says he seeks out the advice of experts when trying something new, and learns from their failures--well NSS(I dont' mean NSS towards you pancho), why pound sand trying to reinvent the wheel???

lmrose, unless you are really an actual sanctimonious jerk, I bet you have a lot of good things to share with people. 

Patt, there is a question I see never addressed. Personally I dont' care if people are "mean"--I'm looking for truth. I've been here 5 years, and I see a lot of things given in advice or expressed as method that is downright dangerous and foolish to spout, and lots of times the spouter is "respected" and the people who say WHOA! are knocked down as "mean" and Debbie Downers. When you see your toddler toddling along the edge of a cliff, do you just go grab him (without saying "honey you need to come to mommy")(and thank Jesus you saw the situation to DO something), or do you pray that God suspends the law of gravity and guides your child's feet away from the edge(so you can say hey I prayed to Jesus for a miracle and He performed!). 

Then we can go on to the people who take great pride in being/appearing the most spiritual/godly--they are the most vicious to battle against. Believe me, when you get these people behind closed doors and they take the mask off, it is UGLY, FUGLY UGLY. 

**************
I'm on another forum that has a lot of threads on mechanical stuff and techical skill. You have a reputation--say good stuff and you get good rep points, say stupid stuff and you got no points--that way people know who's advice to take, because the people with lots of rep points have given good usable solid advice in the past. As well as when someone SAYS something stupid people are free to call it stupid and move on. Kinda puts the brakes on stupid because, ya know, everyone wants to have good rep points, and stupid is freely revealed as stupid--and guess what, people are better educated because stupid IS labeled stupid!. Not to mention the forum owners have a stake in being a place of good information...

blah blah blah ramble ramble. Please eat more than 500 calories a day. Your children depend on you.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

Patt said:


> I read all of your links and I have to admit I am still not getting it. From what I understand the dialectic method is the Socratic method teaching by discussion which I think is good. It is definitely a more Hebrew way of thinking. It's the method Jesus frequently used.


There is group discussion that explores the member's life observations (like...gravity) and facilitates creative problem solving based on "reality"(not wishes, or protecting feelings), and then there is group discussion where the leader directs the conversation with an agenda in their mind, weeding out "bad answers". The second one is how most bible studies go. I do my subversive best to turn them into the first.


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

Patt said:


> I read all of your links and I have to admit I am still not getting it. From what I understand the dialectic method is the Socratic method teaching by discussion which I think is good. It is definitely a more Hebrew way of thinking. It's the method Jesus frequently used.


On the contrary. The dialectic concensus is NOT discussion. Discussion presents facts and individual responses and it's conclusion is based on those facts alone. The dialectic is seen in group dialoging where you are free to express your feelings BUT are guided toward the pre-determined outcome by group pressure.

A perfect example of this is Ohio's recent voter Issue 2 last November. The community meetings were all lead by FACILITATORS who brought the group to it's pre-determined end. The new LAW (issue 2 passed) will be implemented the same way. The Governer's hand picked panel (representing views from diverse groups) will function exactly the same way. It's not just here in this one issue, it's all around us. Beware!

True discussion of facts and individual understanding IS the didactic method which is seen by the progressives as archaic. Facts and reason have little or nothing to do with the "outcome" .


----------



## Sanza (Sep 8, 2008)

Patt said:


> I am just curious about something: why do people feel a need to bash other people's ideas? I don't mean disagree or have an intelligent discussion about stuff. I am talking about trolling threads and repeating over and over again why you think people are utter fools for believing what they do?
> 
> If someone posts that they want to start a small farm they get deluged with naysayers. If they are concerned about our current food supply for any sort of reason they are taken to task repeatedly for it.
> 
> If you really think the other side are idiots why bother telling them over and over again?


 People usually start a thread asking for opinions or advice and then get upset when someone voices their opinion that doesn't go along with theirs, or shoots holes in their dreams. A wise person listens to all the advice they can get and then decides the best way to use that advice. 
An example would be baling....you might be talking about 50 bales while I am talking about 1000 bales. The time to do that chore and the method will not be the same.


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

It would be interesting if this site had Karma points! 

Like I said in the beginning it isn't disagreeing that I have a problem with or pointing out something you think is dangerous it's just hammering away over and over in a thread full of like minded people your disagreement and your feeling that they are stupid. 

Just for an example if someone here starts a thread on the joys of using Round-up I might pop in and throw in my thoughts but then again I might not bother. If it's full of glyphosphate fans what's the point of my 2 cents?


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> Like I said I have no problem with logic or following the thread of truth. Simple fact is you can ignore what I say by labeling me emotional, trust me I am used to it being a woman and all. If you choose to write me off it is your loss not mine.


Just because you FEEL that you are able to follow the logical line doesn't mean you are able to. You demonstrate that by responding with an emotional outburst to the presentation of a scientific fact. That doesn't make you a bad person, just very different then me.

I'm not believing the INFJ designation. It's the rarest personality type by quite a margin. XNF personalities almost always answer the J or P questions by emotion, because they don't like the way the P profile makes them feel. That provides a false result because they answer how they would like to be and not how they really are. The proof is in the pudding. If you are always on time for your appointments, are on top of your chores and your house and car are neat and tidy, you are probably a J. If you have a list of reasons why your house and car aren't tidy and show up just a bit late for most appointments because something outside your control seems to always "just happen" you are almost certainly a P.

Regardless, good luck, and try not to take people's comment too personally.

Pete


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

MrCalicoty said:


> On the contrary. The dialectic is NOT discussion. Discussion presents facts and individual responses. The dialectic is seen in group dialoging where you are free to express your feelings BUT are guided toward the pre-determined outcome by group pressure.
> 
> A perfect example of this is Ohio's recent voter Issue 2 last November. The community meetings were all lead by FACILITATORS who brought the group to it's pre-determined end. The new LAW (issue 2 passed) will be implemented the same way. The Governer's hand picked panel (representing views from diverse groups) will function exactly the same way. It's not just here in this one issue, it's all around us. Beware!
> 
> True discussion of facts and individual understanding IS the didactic method which is seen by the progressives as archaic. Facts and reason have little or nothing to do with the "outcome" .


Dialectic:
Dialectic (also called dialectics or the dialectical method) is a method of argument, which has been central to both Eastern and Western philosophy since ancient times. The word "dialectic" originates in Ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato's Socratic dialogues. Dialectic is based on a dialogue between two or more people who hold different ideas and wish to persuade each other. This is in contrast to rhetoric, which is a relatively long oration conducted by a single person, a method favored by the Sophists.[1] Different forms of dialectical reason have emerged in the East and in the West, as well as during different eras of history (see below). Among the major forms of dialectic reason are Socratic, Hindu, Buddhist, Medieval, Hegelian, Marxist, and Talmudic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

Didactic: A didactic method (Greek: didÃ¡skein, to teach; lore of teaching) is a teaching method that follows a consistent scientific approach or educational style to engage the studentâs mind. The didactic method of instruction is often contrasted with dialectics and the Socratic method; the term can also be used to refer to a specific didactic method, as for instance constructivist didactics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didactic_method


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

I'm referring to Hagelian Dialectic as practiced in modern times by socialists and progressives. I'm not referring to Socrates.


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

Maybe this link will help Patt:

http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

RedneckPete said:


> Just because you FEEL that you are able to follow the logical line doesn't mean you are able to. You demonstrate that by responding with an emotional outburst to the presentation of a scientific fact. That doesn't make you a bad person, just very different then me.
> 
> I'm not believing the INFJ designation. It's the rarest personality type by quite a margin. XNF personalities almost always answer the J or P questions by emotion, because they don't like the way the P profile makes them feel. That provides a false result because they answer how they would like to be and not how they really are. The proof is in the pudding. If you are always on time for your appointments, are on top of your chores and your house and car are neat and tidy, you are probably a J. If you have a list of reasons why your house and car aren't tidy and show up just a bit late for most appointments because something outside your control seems to always "just happen" you are almost certainly a P.
> 
> ...


Wow you are just amazing. Obviously on top of your amazing logic skills you also happen to have god like abilities to see what my personality actually is because you don't think I can take a test right. You do have an unlimited amount of gall! I suppose you are actually a Jungian Psychiatrist too? 

My house is neat and tidy and I do get to all my appointments on time and I happen to follow through on anything I promise to do. 

And just for the record you are not stating scientific facts you are stating our opinions and the way you state them, since it is frequently made in a condescending and rude manner, will continue to gain you emotional responses I can guarantee that. 

You need to read the INFJ personality type definition again because it fits me to a T:

http://typelogic.com/infj.html



> Beneath the quiet exterior, INFJs hold deep convictions about the weightier matters of life. Those who are activists -- INFJs gravitate toward such a role -- are there for the cause, not for personal glory or political power.
> 
> INFJs are champions of the oppressed and downtrodden. They often are found in the wake of an emergency, rescuing those who are in acute distress. INFJs may fantasize about getting revenge on those who victimize the defenseless. The concept of 'poetic justice' is appealing to the INFJ.
> 
> ...


----------



## terri46355 (May 16, 2003)

Patt,

I believe there are many opinionated people who believe their ideas are the only ones that matter. They are usually close minded and don't care to look at things from another perspective. It is easy and safe (to narrow minded people) to go through life thinking you're right and people who think differently are wrong.

Some people just like to argue. They enjoy it and feel they have to win. They let their emotions take over and get ugly. Unfortunately, arguments lead to nothing but anger. Just look at how governments operate and wars begin over differences of opinions.


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> My house is neat and tidy and I do get to all my appointments on time and I happen to follow through on anything I promise to do.


Then you are a J. Like I said, the proof is in the pudding, I've got no problem admitting I'm wrong. Congratulations, welcome to the club.

Pete


----------



## terri46355 (May 16, 2003)

big rockpile said:


> I didn't go through and read all the Post.But all my life have tried to make a Dollar off the Land as best we could everything from Cattle,Logs and Produce.And like they say around here Poor Folks have Poor Ways.
> 
> If someone ask about how to do something I give them the way I was always told wheather it be right or wrong its always worked for me and I would say 90% of the time someone will blast me on it.But I've found most go by the Book you do it this way there is no other way.But I'm always open for ideas.
> 
> ...


Big Rockpile, 
Reading your post reminded me of a recent dilemma I had. My yearling mule just became buddy sour and doesn't want to do what I want her to. I read the online horse/mule trainers' suggestions. I didn't follow them, because they sounded too soft an approach (lead her away, take her back, over and over for days). I put the mule in a pen by herself. Because I wondered if the highly paid expert trainers were right, I called the local guy who has trained mules longer than I've been alive. He said he'd do exactly what I did until the mule wanted to be my buddy. So, it is always advisable to ask people and do your research. Maybe you'll find the right answer or someone who agrees with you!


----------



## geo in mi (Nov 14, 2008)

A dielectic is a piece of plastic you put in a water line between a copper pipe and an iron pipe..................

I wonder which books sell best? Fad diet books or fad religious books? 

geo


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

geo in mi said:


> A dielectic is a piece of plastic you put in a water line between a copper pipe and an iron pipe..................
> 
> I wonder which books sell best? Fad diet books or fad religious books?
> 
> geo


...says geo as he engages in the dialectic put-down...

Thanks for proving my point! :duel:


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

Patt said:


> It would be interesting if this site had Karma points!
> 
> Like I said in the beginning it isn't disagreeing that I have a problem with or pointing out something you think is dangerous it's just hammering away over and over in a thread full of like minded people your disagreement and your feeling that they are stupid.
> 
> Just for an example if someone here starts a thread on the joys of using Round-up I might pop in and throw in my thoughts but then again I might not bother. If it's full of glyphosphate fans what's the point of my 2 cents?


I, for one, would not be interested in any site that has any tool that scores popularity. Such devices encourage people to make comments to increase their popularity. IMO that's what I left behind in high school.

Because someone makes comments several times does not mean they are harping their opinions. We're all different and the differences in our debating styles show that. Because someone debates multiple times but you only do so once doesn't mean the other person is being insulting. 

Seems to me that by above logic, the OP should have made only one comment and each successive poster should also make only one comment. If someone else has an opinion similar to one already stated they probably shouldn't make a comment anyway.

Not specifically about this thread, but I've noticed that when people say that others are being negative or doing something in a mean manner, the person saying that is often being that way himself.

So... is someone is being insulting, report them. I know that I started a thread and I felt that people were being insulting, mostly because they'd not read my comments entirely. It bothered me a lot because the thread was about concerns for my child. I didn't cause any problems with the person. I didn't throw a fit. I asked that the thread be removed. It was.


----------



## ronbre (Apr 26, 2009)

this is a great thread.

i have been hurt in the past by things people have said, sometimes in a very rude manner, however, i figured to myself that it is a public forum and they have every right to express their opinion to me..and freedom of speech is something i highly respect.

so if they get really really rude..and obnoxious..then i can see that they should be removed or corrected..or edited..but otherwise..i will just skim over their post when i re read the threads..and know that not everyone is going to agree with me.

and i'll not always agree with all of them

as i get older i enjoy more and more the differences in people and attempt to celebrate the differences ..including different opinions..however..rude is rude no matter what..so if it is mean and obnoxious..edit it out.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

karma has nothing to do with popularity, and the forum I was referring to was "reputation" ie you give good, reliable, true advice and newbies know that people with lots of points(reputation) can be trusted. kinda old fashioned, from the olden days.


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

Patt said:


> I am just curious about something: why do people feel a need to bash other people's ideas? I don't mean disagree or have an intelligent discussion about stuff. I am talking about trolling threads and repeating over and over again why you think people are utter fools for believing what they do?





Patt said:


> Wow you are just amazing. Obviously on top of your amazing logic skills you also happen to have god like abilities to see what my personality actually is because you don't think I can take a test right. You do have an unlimited amount of gall! I suppose you are actually a Jungian Psychiatrist too?


In the latter post, didn't you do what you complained about in the former post?


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

Joshie said:


> In the latter post, didn't you do what you complained about in the former post?


That was a response to repeated attacks on my personal intelligence level and personality type. I think it was warranted. And no I did not do what I mentioned, I did not go in to his thread and attack his beliefs or likes, I responded to his attacks on me. Read what the OP again.


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> That was a response to repeated attacks on my personal intelligence level and personality type. I think it was warranted. And no I did not do what I mentioned, I did not go in to his thread and attack his beliefs or likes, I responded to his attacks on me. Read what the OP again.


I recant my earlier recantment. I should have gone with my gut. Patt is a solid P personality. It took an XSTP to point it out to me.

Pete


----------



## Patt (May 18, 2003)

RedneckPete said:


> I recant my earlier recantment. I should have gone with my gut. Patt is a solid P personality. It took an XSTP to point it out to me.
> 
> Pete


Whatever that means since there is no such thing as an XSTP. Now you are making up personality types.... 

And you don't appear to have the vaguest idea what you are talking about J's are:Judging (J)

Judging is the preference outwardly displayed. Judging does not mean "judgmental". Judging people like order, organization and think sequentially. They like to have things planned and settled. Judging people seek closure. 

Judging Characteristics 
Decisive 
Controlled 
Good at finishing 
Organized 
Structured 
Scheduled 
Quick at tasks 
Responsible 
Likes closure 
Makes plans 


I do all of those things. Since you do not know me you have no business whatsoever trying to tell me who I am or what I think. I don't know why you have chosen to follow me around and take cracks at me but I will be ignoring you in future.


----------



## rambler (Jan 20, 2004)

Patt, you are an opinionated person.

You'll find a whole bunch of them around here.

That's a good thing.

What you are complaining about is what I actually like - people who know what they know, and stick to it.

Ain't no one going to convert you. But likewise, you won't convert anyone either.

Seems fair enough.

I don't see the problem.

Or, if their is a problem, you are as much a part of it as anyone else?

So, again, I don't see a problem.

If someone comes on and asks about how to do something, it's real hard to sit back & not tell them the pitfalls of what they are wanting to get into. Voice of experience... Typically they are all gung-ho, and full speed ahead. The comments of a stranger really shouldn't put those fires out; or they didn't have enough conviction to begin with!

The words to the wise might help them think through or realize some troubles up ahead in their plan. Often that doesn't stop people from making the mistakes, but perhaps it helps them overcome those mistakes once they are in the middle of them.

Otherwise, what do you want? Just a cheering section, everyone is a yes-man, good good good?

What good is that to anyone. Pfft.

My opinion on the matter. Not worth any more than yours. 

--->Paul


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

What rambler said. Whats the point of posting something if you don't want to hear other's thoughts on the subject? It's realy crazy around here. Some Folks get thier noses out of bent and cry foul everytime someone doesn't agree with what they post and take it very personally that something they post to be true for themselves is not so true for someone else, as if everyone is the same.


----------



## RedneckPete (Aug 23, 2004)

Patt said:


> Whatever that means since there is no such thing as an XSTP. Now you are making up personality types....
> 
> And you don't appear to have the vaguest idea what you are talking about J's are:Judging (J).


XSTP means I don't have enough information to determine if someone is intro or extroverted. Both types share a lot of common characteristics, and both are very adept at pointing out obvious errors in a feelers logic, errors that I should have picked up on but didn't.

Having read what you posted on other treads, it is obvious that sometimes you have a difficult time staying on track and seeing the job to completion. I can think of one very obvious example.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with different personality types. I'm not sure why you have the phobia towards them. Throw a designation at me, I think it would be kinda fun.

Pete


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

On personality types...

I imagine the Lord looking down upon us and shaking his head, wondering, "where'd they come up with THAT?"


----------



## MrCalicoty (Jun 27, 2010)

HT forums are a lot different than others I have participated in. When you think about it homesteaders are very independent individuals that don't go along with the masses. They don't easily accept the status quo if at all. They/We are intently learning and experiencing in ways that outsiders may never do.

As a result of this "social sorting" we are a select bunch with a lot of certain traits in common. Opposing ideas still exists but the intensity is very high. 

My own observation is that a good amount of it lacks empathy, praise, and warmth. We would all do well to work on our shortcomings... including myself. Maybe it's the topics that tend to attract me. There may be many topics that I DON'T frequent that exibit much different tendancies. We'll see as time goes on. I'm still very new here.


----------



## NickieL (Jun 15, 2007)

i wonder what personality I am? LOL I'm never late for anything but my house and certinly my car ARE NOT TIDY!!! lol

Thank goodness I'm not a hoarder or I'd be in trouble.


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

Patt said:


> That was a response to repeated attacks on my personal intelligence level and personality type. I think it was warranted. And no I did not do what I mentioned, I did not go in to his thread and attack his beliefs or likes, I responded to his attacks on me. Read what the OP again.


IMO, if we attack someone who attacks us we're as guilty as the person who made the attack. 

Nobody insulted your IQ or personality type. They disagreed with you. There's a difference. There's not a thing wrong with any personality type. Because we have an inborn tendency towards one trait does not mean that we cannot function like someone with a different personality type, at least some of the time. 

Seems to me to be more effective to walk away from a snowball fight instead of throwing another snowball.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

sigh, I love snowball fights!

I got INTP

it's a shame they don't play dodgeball in school anymore.


----------



## Heritagefarm (Feb 21, 2010)

And now, I suppose, we will start talking about this one...
http://www.homesteadingtoday.com/showpost.php?p=4550960&postcount=196
*sigh* Although I hadn't seen anything on obesity there in quite some time.


----------



## FunnyRiverFarm (May 25, 2010)

There is a difference between politely disagreeing and trying to make the person posting appear to be an idiot. I don't mind it so much in the politcal threads where I kind of expect things to get heated...but in the posts asking only for personal experiences on a subject it really bugs me to see people being told that their own personal experience is wrong and they must be either stupid or lying about it or living in some illusion...not because of actual facts, but because their personal experience is different from someone else's or the majority's.


----------



## Hooligan (Jul 18, 2007)

Does anyone have the guts to admit they were the one(s) who reported posts in the latest obesity thread?

You really need to get a life. I did not see one post in there that deserves to be reported.

Do you have enough character to step up and own up to it?


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

Joshie said:


> Hmmm, doesn't seem like trolling to me. Just as the poster on one side of an argument wants to discuss their opinion, so does the poster on the other side of an argument.
> 
> Saying "I don't agree with you because....." or "Your argument doesn't make sense," isn't an insult. Saying "You're a meanie head," is. I've noticed that there are a number of people who say someone is being insulting for just disagreeing and they throw a barb.
> 
> ...


Awesome post!


----------



## ca2devri (Feb 29, 2008)

Lyra said:


> On the other hand, there are a lot of overly sensitive people that get offended by any opinion that isn't the same as theirs. I once had an Atheist roommate that asked me what do Christians believe will happen to those who do not believe in God. Would they go to Heaven? I said no. She did a 180, moved out, and never spoke to me again. She said that was too judgmental of an answer.


Almost totally off topic, but I had to comment: Any serious Atheist wouldn't believe in Heaven and wouldn't care where someone else thought they were going. Must have been another issue or your roommate wasn't really an atheist.

Chris


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

Hooligan said:


> Does anyone have the guts to admit they were the one(s) who reported posts in the latest obesity thread?
> 
> You really need to get a life. I did not see one post in there that deserves to be reported.
> 
> Do you have enough character to step up and own up to it?



I gotta ask...are you TRYING to get banned?:lookout:


----------



## Reptyle (Jul 28, 2005)

AngieM2 said:


> a novel thought. Use the report a post feature so the mods will know to review a post. If you don't do that, then it might be missed -
> also, a mod might see a reported post, review it and not agree with you as it being a bad post, or they may agree, and that post or thread gets deleted, etc.
> 
> Just a thought of an action to get something at least considered done, rather than just talking about the over all happening.
> ...


A novel thought? Not even close...usually around here it is the flavor of the day.:icecream:


----------



## Guest (Jul 27, 2010)

How about this: if a post gets reported, the poster gets notice that said post has been reported. No names or anything. I'm well aware that I sometimes am abrasive, but from my POV it is argument as an art form. However, if I got a PM saying "your post #1234 was reported as being offensive" then I could just walk away for a little while, or realize that I was on dangerous ground. Not that I would ever change my view, but, I could step back. On the other hand, if it seems(TO ME) like fists are flying, I'm not as politic in my choice of words.


----------



## wyld thang (Nov 16, 2005)

I got notice of posts of mine being reported for my two infarctions from the past--I received no reports (yet, bwhaha) of being reported in this thread or the coupon wrestle or what I've written in FOrerunner's thread.


----------



## The Paw (May 19, 2006)

MrCalicoty said:


> Maybe this link will help Patt:
> 
> http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm


That article is absolute rubbish. It is heavily value-laden, and advancing a particular ideological agenda and its mischaracterization of the dialectic is part and parcel of what I would call red-baiting.

The Hegelian dialectic is simply this: Thesis produced an Antithesis. These two struggle, and in the course of that struggle, there is a synthesis (not necessarily consensus). Eventually, that synthesis becomes a new Thesis, and the process continues. 

Marx and Engels took this philosophical dynamic and applied it to the notion of class struggle in the economic and political spheres. Their use of dialectics suggested capitalism and socialism were Thesis and Antithesis respectively.

The use of facilitators or consensus building methods are only distantly related to dialectics, and do not work towards a pre-determined outcome. That is a spin that is designed to appeal to the paranoid and conspiratorial...


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

The Paw said:


> That article is absolute rubbish. It is heavily value-laden, and advancing a particular ideological agenda and its mischaracterization of the dialectic is part and parcel of what I would call red-baiting.


Ok, then instead of just pointing out how it's rubbish, try suggesting an alternative online.


----------

