If I can just chip in here - not aimed at any specific poster - but I think a lot of what is said here and in other threads, well its not *what* someone says, but the way in which they say it.
In the majority of cases, people are banned from forums, become disliked, attract conflict or lose the respect of others without realising that this is the reason. You often see posts from banned posters on other forums saying they were banned because they said something out of turn, when in fact it was how they said it and more often than not, their lack of respect for other people's opinions.
If everyone took on the philosophy of reading their own posts back putting themselves in a) the recipients position and b) a casual observer's position, they would probably recognise the antagonism a lot easier and the quality of posts, debates and even arguments would become a whole lot better and would also probably achieve more.
It's human nature to think that you're right and the other guy's wrong. It's how you negotiate that obstacle that determines the end result.
It's like the phrase "the customer is always right". We all know that's bollocks but it's misinterpreted. What it means is "the customer needs to think they are always right". The same principle applies in most conversations where there are conflicting opinions and if your aim is to get something from the other person, or to get them to alter their opinion, you often need to present a case in a way which they feel means that they don't lose face.
The best place to start: read your posts back before you post them and see how you would react if it was aimed at you.
End of chip-in. Carry on campers
Cheers
Simmo!
In the majority of cases, people are banned from forums, become disliked, attract conflict or lose the respect of others without realising that this is the reason. You often see posts from banned posters on other forums saying they were banned because they said something out of turn, when in fact it was how they said it and more often than not, their lack of respect for other people's opinions.
If everyone took on the philosophy of reading their own posts back putting themselves in a) the recipients position and b) a casual observer's position, they would probably recognise the antagonism a lot easier and the quality of posts, debates and even arguments would become a whole lot better and would also probably achieve more.
It's human nature to think that you're right and the other guy's wrong. It's how you negotiate that obstacle that determines the end result.
It's like the phrase "the customer is always right". We all know that's bollocks but it's misinterpreted. What it means is "the customer needs to think they are always right". The same principle applies in most conversations where there are conflicting opinions and if your aim is to get something from the other person, or to get them to alter their opinion, you often need to present a case in a way which they feel means that they don't lose face.
The best place to start: read your posts back before you post them and see how you would react if it was aimed at you.
End of chip-in. Carry on campers
Cheers
Simmo!