Basic Argumentation, And The Causing Of Offence

[Funt Solo]

Expressing an opinion or preference here can occasionally feel like sticking your head above the parapet.

Well, at least when you tried it on this occasion you didn't get it shot off.  Oh, wait...

---

I heard what you said and how neutrally and peacefully you put across your thoughts.  Like you say, you can't control how people interpret things.

[SIP]

Does insulting me twice somehow further the debate Jim? As I said, the comments were intended as transparent, no hidden subtext was intended whether you found it there or not.

Perhaps this was not the thread to raise my point, but it appeared to be pertinent in the context of the other replies posted.

[shaolin_monkey]

Is this the right room for an argument?

[The Legendary Shark]

Is this the right room for an argument?

I told you once...

In my book, that's a weaselly way of saying "yes".

I take it back - change!

[Tjm86]

Expressing an opinion or preference here can occasionally feel like sticking your head above the parapet.

Part of that could well be the fact that this is a message board rather than FTF possibly.  It feels at times like a lot of inhabitants of this place have a slightly (okay, maybe a bit more than that ...) off the wall sense of humour that would come across more effectively in real life than it does online.

That said, I tend to find the old rules about certain topics helpful.  Knowing that some folks have quite strong but possibly different views to mine on some issues I find it easier just to steer clear.  Getting sucked in like that doesn't really help anyone.

[Dark Jimbo]

Expressing an opinion or preference here can occasionally feel like sticking your head above the parapet.

Well, at least when you tried it on this occasion you didn't get it shot off.  Oh, wait...

[CalHab]

On a not entirely unrelated note, I have found the forum an increasingly confrontational and "cliquey" place over the last year. You expect clique, but hope for a little more tolerance. Expressing an opinion or preference here can occasionally feel like sticking your head above the parapet.

To be fair, it has always had that edge to varying degrees, but I feel like I have witnessed more people getting cut down (especially newer people) over the last year.

In my opinion. For what that's worth.

I think this is a friendly(ish) place. It's certainly better than some of the 2000AD Facebook groups, which can be absolute cesspits. That's probably a different topic, though.

[Hawkmumbler]

If the 2000AD Facebook groups are the 'Last Stand' scene from Cross of Iron.

Then the 2000AD Forum is the mashed potato fight from Bugsy Malone.

[Mattofthespurs]

I've been here a few years now. I don't comment that much. I prefer just to read and make the odd (sometimes very odd) remark.

I don't find anyone particularly rude or unwelcoming. Prickly sometimes but I think that's true of all forums.

[TordelBack]

If the 2000AD Facebook groups are the 'Last Stand' scene from Cross of Iron.

Then the 2000AD Forum is the mashed potato fight from Bugsy Malone.

While that is definitely an apt analogy for this place (a gaggle of children dressed as adults splurging on icons of the recent past*), and the others, I have found myself biting my tongue here a lot more over the past year or so, mainly out of reluctance to start/continue a tedious argument. 

I accept that this may be due to my newly reflexive CBT'd self, a daily-contested poorly-sustained state that tries to indulge neither shame nor pride in favour of keepin' on keepin' on, and embraces restorative practice over bossing and (especially) bitching (where's that halo emoji when you need it?), but even so, the forum seems quicker than formerly to take the hump and force a line**.     




*You get to be Jodie Foster in your own analogy, Hawkmumbler!
** I'm not aiming my splurge gun at Jim here, BTW.

[sheridan]

I'm not looking to fire shots off at anyone personally, Jim.

That's a pretty weaselly way of saying "yes", Si. Since this entire thread is more or less about my behaviour, and you chose to add a post about people behaving badly, there is inference invited to connect the two. I don't think that's fair, which is why I asked the question. If the answer was "no" then saying so wouldn't have been "firing of shots", would it?

Jim, I don't have the power to influence how you choose to interpret my posts, could have done without the "weaselly" comment though.

I think my comment was transparent and could be alternately expressed as "naming no names", as I don't see it as constructive to call individuals out on a public forum. I wanted to take the opportunity to express my current view on the atmosphere (sometimes) of the forum and, as I pointed out, this discussion is "not entirely unrelated" to that discussion.

It's pretty obvious to me that SIP's statement was not about any one board member and about the general tone of the board.

[Jim_Campbell]

It's pretty obvious to me that SIP's statement was not about any one board member and about the general tone of the board.

Well, it wasn't obvious to me, and I don't think politely asking whether he was referring to me constitutes "shooting someone down" (per Funt's comment, not yours).

Tone and implied meaning are hard to judge online, which was the entire point of my original post...

[Frank]

... embraces restorative practice over bossing and (especially) bitching

Unfamiliar with that concept. Interesting:


Restorative practice is a strategy that seeks to repair relationships that have been damaged. It does this by bringing about a sense of remorse and restorative action on the part of the offender and forgiveness by the victim.

​Rationale

The rationale behind this approach is that when offenders reflect upon their harm to victims:

- They become remorseful and act restoratively.

- Practitioners can focus on the unacceptable behaviour of offenders rather than their moral character.

- This can lead to healthier interpersonal relations among members of the community.


Application
   
The work is commonly guided by an agreed script which directs practitioners to ask the offender to describe what happened and to reflect on what harm it has done.

The victim is asked to say how she or he has been affected and what needs to be done to put things right.

Feelings of shame that are elicited need to lead to re-integration into the community rather than a sense of being alienated and stigmatised. 

In the spirit of personal responsibility, forgiveness and commitment to positive future behaviour, both the target and the offender express their acceptance of the proposed solution/s and discuss what can be done to prevent a recurrence.

The situation is then monitored by staff and further intervention occurs if the situation does not improve.

In some cases considerable work is done behind the scenes to prepare the participants including bystanders and others to ensure a positive outcome.


Limitations

Inadequately trained practitioners may make matters worse. This can result in the offender feeling resentment rather than contrition and incline him or her to act anti-socially. This must be avoided.

Strong support in the community for this approach may sometimes be lacking. 

Some offenders may pretend to be remorseful and deceive the practitioner into thinking the matter has been resolved. 

Being integrated into the community may have little appeal to some offenders, especially when their own social network provides them with more attractive support.


Conclusion

Used appropriately by trained practitioners, restorative practices are particularly effective when the offender can be induced to experience genuine remorse. The most detailed evaluation of its effectiveness in England indicates that it is successful in stopping offending from continuing in about two cases in three

[Proudhuff]

If the 2000AD Facebook groups are the 'Last Stand' scene from Cross of Iron.

Then the 2000AD Forum is the mashed potato fight from Bugsy Malone.

While that is definitely an apt analogy for this place (a gaggle of children dressed as adults splurging on icons of the recent past*), and the others, I have found myself biting my tongue here a lot more over the past year or so, mainly out of reluctance to start/continue a tedious argument. 

but even so, the forum seems quicker than formerly to take the hump and force a line**.     




*You get to be Jodie Foster in your own analogy, Hawkmumbler!
** I'm not aiming my splurge gun at Jim here, BTW.

Funny been thinking along similar lines myself ^^^^

[Link Prime]

Personally, I don't see that much confrontation / arguments on this forum - that may be because I avoid The Political Thread like the Bubonic plague.
But I do appreciate that some of yis still like the taste of Marmot kidney - so have at it.

Overall, this is likely as convivial a company of fans and creators you're going to get, at least when compared to most other internet / social media interactions that I had the misfortune of coming across in recent years.

One other observation on the topic; we are (generally) a group of blokes in our mid to late 40's, with a lot in common.
The fact we're even here yammering on about a comic that we never gave up for 4 decades is embarrassing enough - but to have a genuine - genuine - internet argument with another grown man over this bullshit? Most wouldn't - it's just too uncouth.