Respect, aiiight

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Reading through these threads it is quite often the case that I'll come across a poster who's point of view I couldn't disagree with more.

Sometimes, although less frequently than in my sub-300 post days, I would get quite angry at posts which are completely at odds with my own view.

However, there are also times when someone has put across an opinion in such a way that I am not only prepared to sit and read it, but I may also be swayed by it.

My question therefore is this, what kind of posts, expressing an opposite opinion to the one you hold, gain your respect. Passion? Eloquence? More sources than you can point a stick at?

 

[kingjoshi]

I'm persuaded by reason. What else should it be?

Though I do give extra points when a person mentions a perspective I haven't thought before. Well, sometimes, people bring up (what I consider) bad examples but let's not get into that aspect.

I try not form opinions on people based upon their issues. I can discuss something with someone for pages and then in another thread, forget who believed what. However sometimes, people make series of such aburd remarks, it does form some impression.

I'm still working on not criticizing the poster when they say something stupid. It's difficult. Especially if they purposely discredit or distort my view and say something stupid. I find that disrespectful but obviously, I shouldn't retort in kind.

 

[BCLG100]

Short posts, people that can express their opinion in a few lines generally sway me. Use of Bold and Italics also help

 

[kingjoshi]

I never learned how to be terse

 

[bathsheba666]

Reason with moral underpinnings, otherwise it's just bigotry.

 

[Till]

Eloquent and humorous post are most likely to make me reconsider my views. I usually don't check sources, unless i am already half convinced, that the poster has a point.

 

[azzaman333]

If i can see reason behind their insanity, then i will respect moreso than if they just said "MY WAY IS RIGHT UR WAY IS WRONG U'VE BEEN PWNED LOL!!!1111"

 

[Grisu]

people who are level headed and don't get angry/mad just for disagreeing with them.
people who don't pretend to know it all.
people who use their own words instead of speaking in slogans

 

[Perfection]

People who give the impression that they actually know what they're talking about.

 

[Rambuchan]

People who end their posts with:

"Ya git me, aiiight?"
*gangsta hand gesture*

 

[ComradeDavo]

people who are level headed and don't get angry/mad just for disagreeing with them.
people who don't pretend to know it all.
people who use their own words instead of speaking in slogans

Yup

That and good 'reason'.

 

[ComradeDavo]

People who give the impression that they actually know what they're talking about.

I wouldn't really agree with that one.

Not really on forums, but i've been known to debate a viewpoint I know bugger all about pretty well. Once at school I even argued from the view point of an anti-abortionist and got good marks for it!

 

[Sparta]

Short posts, people that can express their opinion in a few lines generally sway me. Use of Bold and Italics also help

I rule.

On-topic, what KaeptnOvi said, for the most part.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

People who end their posts with:

"Ya git me, aiiight?"
*gangsta hand gesture*

What about a Westwood bomb?

BOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!!!!!!! Babyboy.

 

[Rambuchan]

Westwood?

Dopest wigga in tha hood bruda.

(Did you know he produced the first ever rap album in the UK? Gangster Chronicle by The London Posse)


EDIT:

"Ya git me, aiiight?"
*gangsta hand gesture*

 

[Dell19]

Not really on forums, but i've been known to debate a viewpoint I know bugger all about pretty well. Once at school I even argued from the view point of an anti-abortionist and got good marks for it!

Would that actually support Perfection's point? Since you probably knew quite a lot about the subject and you got a good mark through being factual rather than trying to convince people through belief?

 

[jamiethearcher]

well, i am now past my "sub 300 post days" (barely), but a well worded, concise post with citations will be more likely to sway me than a long, unorganized rant (which there are plenty of!)

 

[ComradeDavo]

Would that actually support Perfection's point? Since you probably knew quite a lot about the subject and you got a good mark through being factual rather than trying to convince people through belief?

Not really, cuz this was 5/6 years ago when I was 15 in English class Didn't knwo much about it then, I just made it up as I went along!

But to be fair thats probably not the best example.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

Not really, cuz this was 5/6 years ago when I was 15 in English class Didn't knwo much about it then, I just made it up as I went along!

That maybe so, but I think that the point Dell was trying to make was, would you be more inclined to change your opinion after listening to a person eloquently put the point across, even if they don't believe what they are saying, or after someone passionately rants at you?

Feel free to correct me if I've misinterpreted you by the way Dell

Is it me or is this thread moving towards the 'Hypocracy' Thread?

 

[ComradeDavo]

That maybe so, but I think that the point Dell was trying to make was, would you be more inclined to change your opinion after listening to a person eloquently put the point across, even if they don't believe what they are saying, or after someone passionately rants at you?

Personally, I'd go for the passionately rants, because then I know that they really believe in it

Plus I tend to passionately rant....