New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

How To Win a Forum Argument

BitterPill

The Shoe Cometh
Supporting Member
I want to start an ongoing op-ed on how to win forum arguments. I'll fill in some more of my ideas with a few anecdotes as I go along, but I thought I'd start with my most basic and far-reaching observation: occupy the high ground. It is a great advantage in both the tactical and strategic sense.

There are, of course, different high grounds: the moral, the correct, the vulgar, and there may be others, but I'll deal with these three main ones.

First, in the moral dimension - by far the most important, there are certain considerations that bear examination. For example, if one is arguing with an anti-Semite, a racist, a misogynist or a bigot in general, one already owns the high ground assuming one is not also similarly prejudiced. Of course one's bigoted opponents realize this and may try to move one off that high moral ground, make one the bigot by claiming, for example, that Democrats, and I'm a Democrat, were the original racists is an attack that one often encounters, but they can't hope to occupy that high ground themselves, so one simply needs to remind any accuser of when that was and what happened since. Democrats elected a Black president, and I'm a Democrat who voted for him twice.

That should shut them up, and a sensible yet bigoted opponent, if there is such a thing, will quickly abandon that line of attack.

Of course, it helps immeasurably if one also abandons one's own prejudices, a task not easily accomplished, but one well worth the effort. I say this because a hypocrite can never hold the high ground, hypocrisy being a poor and undesirable example of the human condition to say the least, so it is imperative that one abandons prejudice and be forever on the lookout for it cropping-up in one's thinking since thought begets action - be brutally honest with one's self.

Now, before I go on to, I feel I should address hypocrisy more directly, and I will shortly....
 
Last edited:
I want to start an ongoing op-ed on how to win forum arguments. I'll fill in some more of my ideas as I go along, but I thought I'd start with my most basic and far-reaching observation: occupy the high ground. It is a great advantage in both the tactical and strategic sense.

There are, of course, different high grounds: the moral, the correct, the vulgar, and there may be others, but I'll deal with these three main ones.

First, in the moral dimension, there are certain considerations that bear examination. For example, if one is arguing with an anti-Semite, a racist, a misogynist or a bigot in general, one already owns the high ground assuming one is not also similarly prejudiced. Of course your bigoted opponents realize this and may try to move you off that high moral ground by making you the bigot, claiming for example that Democrats, and I'm a Democrat, were the original racists is one attack that I often encounter, but one simply needs to remind that accuser of when that was and what has happened since. Democrats elected a Black president, and I'm a Democrat who voted for him twice.

That should shut them up, and a sensible yet bigoted opponent, if there is such a thing, will quickly abandon that line of attack.

Of course, it helps immeasurably if one also abandons ones own prejudices, a task not easily accomplished, but one well worth the effort. I say this because a hypocrite can never hold the high ground, hypocrisy being a poor and undesirable example of the human condition to say the least, so it is imperative that one abandons prejudice and be forever on the lookout for it cropping-up in ones thinking since thought begets action - be brutally honest with ones self.

Now, before I go on to, feel I should address hypocrisy more directly, and I will shortly....
:cool:
 

BitterPill

The Shoe Cometh
Supporting Member
As I said before, hypocrisy is a part of the human condition - not one of us can escape it. As an example, I will admit my own hypocrisy or two:

Until four years ago I paid a utility to provide power to my house, yet I was, and am, dead-set against global warming and not a fan of the utility, either.

How could that condition exist if I weren't a hypocrite?

So I put a solar-array up and everything is kosher on that front, yet I still drive an internal combustion vehicle, actually two of them. In a year or two I'll be trading the Camry for a Tesla, but I'm never going to give-up my beater-truck, a '94 Ranger.

I use it for work.

Certainly I am a hypocrite in that regard, Tesla be damned, yet hypocrisy is a matter of degree. My petty hypocrisy in the past, and my petty hypocrisy in the future amount to little compared to the large and ongoing hypocrisies, some are massive, of many though I won't name names.

One should examine one's self for hypocrisy because the more one owns, the more it weighs, and that accumulated weight surely keeps one from achieving the moral high ground.

Beware of being a hypocrite.

That brings me to another tangent, lies. Please bear with me....
 
Last edited:

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
I want to start an ongoing op-ed on how to win forum arguments. I'll fill in some more of my ideas with a few anecdotes as I go along, but I thought I'd start with my most basic and far-reaching observation: occupy the high ground. It is a great advantage in both the tactical and strategic sense.

There are, of course, different high grounds: the moral, the correct, the vulgar, and there may be others, but I'll deal with these three main ones.

First, in the moral dimension - by far the most important, there are certain considerations that bear examination. For example, if one is arguing with an anti-Semite, a racist, a misogynist or a bigot in general, one already owns the high ground assuming one is not also similarly prejudiced. Of course one's bigoted opponents realize this and may try to move one off that high moral ground, make one the bigot by claiming, for example, that Democrats, and I'm a Democrat, were the original racists is an attack that one often encounters, but they can't hope to occupy that high ground themselves, so one simply needs to remind any accuser of when that was and what happened since. Democrats elected a Black president, and I'm a Democrat who voted for him twice.

That should shut them up, and a sensible yet bigoted opponent, if there is such a thing, will quickly abandon that line of attack.

Of course, it helps immeasurably if one also abandons one's own prejudices, a task not easily accomplished, but one well worth the effort. I say this because a hypocrite can never hold the high ground, hypocrisy being a poor and undesirable example of the human condition to say the least, so it is imperative that one abandons prejudice and be forever on the lookout for it cropping-up in one's thinking since thought begets action - be brutally honest with one's self.

Now, before I go on to, I feel I should address hypocrisy more directly, and I will shortly....
My contention is that it is impossible to win a forum argument because truth is subjective and everything is seen through individual perspective. Ie: The argument that Obama is a good president because he was elected twice is invalid, in my opinion, because I believe he was elected by an ignorant and uninformed electorate and with the use of massive voter fraud. One will counter with: There is no proof that there has been massive voter fraud. I would respond to that with: There have been many cases of voter fraud and we are seeing a candidate for president on the ropes right now for engaging in all sorts of illegal activity.
No matter what you contend, my opinion will almost certainly be different. Who is to determine who wins the forum argument? There are people who will applaud your case and claim you won. And there are folks here I can surely count on to call them idiots and claim that I gave you a sound drubbing, followed by your supporters telling me I don't know how to tie my shoes.
It is impossible to win a forum argument except in the minds of the two adversaries.
 

bdtex

Administrator
Staff member
You know you've won a forum argument when the best your adversary can do is ridicule your nickname,avatar or grammar or engage in off-topic personal attacks. There is a lotta that in this forum.
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
You know you've won a forum argument when the best your adversary can do is ridicule your nickname,avatar or grammar or engage in off-topic personal attacks. There is a lotta that in this forum.
That's a good point. BTW, I like your Avatar.
 

TheResister

Council Member
Okay, I'm in this for the learning experience. Help me out:

I run into posters who have extreme ego problems. One poster may attack everyone he disagrees with. If he don't like you, EVERY post is laced with LMAO, SMFH, and whatever you quote (according to these beaming paragons of human virtue) means opposite of what you quoted. They lace their responses with words like inane, stupid, etc. In my mind they have to do that in order to hide the weakness of their own argument.

I would maintain that it is impossible for someone to be wrong in every post and on every topic. Hell, even a broken clock has the potential to be right twice a day.

Yet, those poseurs have their cheering section and it's hard to tell if you "won" any argument or even made your point. So, how do you handle the professional instigators?
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
Okay, I'm in this for the learning experience. Help me out:

I run into posters who have extreme ego problems. One poster may attack everyone he disagrees with. If he don't like you, EVERY post is laced with LMAO, SMFH, and whatever you quote (according to these beaming paragons of human virtue) means opposite of what you quoted. They lace their responses with words like inane, stupid, etc. In my mind they have to do that in order to hide the weakness of their own argument.

I would maintain that it is impossible for someone to be wrong in every post and on every topic. Hell, even a broken clock has the potential to be right twice a day.

Yet, those poseurs have their cheering section and it's hard to tell if you "won" any argument or even made your point. So, how do you handle the professional instigators?
There are some good examples of the type of poster you reference on this board. Another board (Political Hotwire) is poly-saturated with them but PJ only has a few. You can have fun with them and poke fun at them or just ignore them. They're kind of like the forum buffoons. I won't mention their names because they'll take it as a compliment. I like to poke fun at them. I never block anyone; that just seems childish to me but I do ignore some of the real idiots who refuse to accept the truth. Just don't take them too seriously but more importantly, don't take yourself too seriously. This is mainly for fun; we are not going to solve the world's problems here.
It's a place to vent and have fun.
 

TheResister

Council Member
There are some good examples of the type of poster you reference on this board. Another board (Political Hotwire) is poly-saturated with them but PJ only has a few. You can have fun with them and poke fun at them or just ignore them. They're kind of like the forum buffoons. I won't mention their names because they'll take it as a compliment. I like to poke fun at them. I never block anyone; that just seems childish to me but I do ignore some of the real idiots who refuse to accept the truth. Just don't take them too seriously but more importantly, don't take yourself too seriously. This is mainly for fun; we are not going to solve the world's problems here.
It's a place to vent and have fun.

I hear what you're saying, but some posters are like fleas. You slap at them and they keep biting. The people who find it necessary to reply to EVERY post you do and respond in a manner whereby other posters quit posting on the thread is a problem not only for the guy being needled, but for those participating in productive conversations.

And, since you brought up PH (it should be renamed Political Hacks) they ban anyone that disagrees with the ultra-liberal position of that board. Some right wingers are kept on just to be made fun of. They are a cancer on the face of the Internet.
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
I hear what you're saying, but some posters are like fleas. You slap at them and they keep biting. The people who find it necessary to reply to EVERY post you do and respond in a manner whereby other posters quit posting on the thread is a problem not only for the guy being needled, but for those participating in productive conversations.

And, since you brought up PH (it should be renamed Political Hacks) they ban anyone that disagrees with the ultra-liberal position of that board. Some right wingers are kept on just to be made fun of. They are a cancer on the face of the Internet.
The type poster you referenced is the type I just ignore. I don't block them but I just never respond to them.
I got banned once from PH for saying Whoopi Goldberg was ugly. I finally got in a fight with one of the female moderators and told her some extremely rude and graphic things she could do to herself and they banned me permanently. It was for the best; the place is run by idiots.
 

TheResister

Council Member
The type poster you referenced is the type I just ignore. I don't block them but I just never respond to them.
I got banned once from PH for saying Whoopi Goldberg was ugly. I finally got in a fight with one of the female moderators and told her some extremely rude and graphic things she could do to herself and they banned me permanently. It was for the best; the place is run by idiots.
I'm glad to have this exchange with you. I got banned several times - this time for multiple infractions (it will probably due to saying something critical of a liberal.) This board has much more promise.

There is a type of poster and I've run across one or two. When I put them on ignore, they still posted in EVERY thread I participated in and in EVERY one of their posts, they would have nothing but negative comments aimed toward me. If I did nothing, the thread would get ignored by those participating because the trolling is nothing more than a personal attack on me.

Ignoring the individual didn't do the trick and responding only encourages trolls to stay on the Internet, 24 / 7 / 365 licking their chops and hoping for that opportunity to screw with your head. I don't think the OP has a method of dealing with that kind of poster.
 

Jen

Senator
You know you've won a forum argument when the best your adversary can do is ridicule your nickname,avatar or grammar or engage in off-topic personal attacks. There is a lotta that in this forum.
By that standard, I win a lot of arguments.
 

JackDallas

Senator
Supporting Member
I'm glad to have this exchange with you. I got banned several times - this time for multiple infractions (it will probably due to saying something critical of a liberal.) This board has much more promise.

There is a type of poster and I've run across one or two. When I put them on ignore, they still posted in EVERY thread I participated in and in EVERY one of their posts, they would have nothing but negative comments aimed toward me. If I did nothing, the thread would get ignored by those participating because the trolling is nothing more than a personal attack on me.

Ignoring the individual didn't do the trick and responding only encourages trolls to stay on the Internet, 24 / 7 / 365 licking their chops and hoping for that opportunity to screw with your head. I don't think the OP has a method of dealing with that kind of poster.
This forum is the most reasonable and well managed I've ever been involved in. I was on the Slate FRAY for many years and the moderators heavily favored the Lib posters. You could insult them but they would start reporting you and I got short bans several times. It's best not to call names (there are ways to be critical without engaging in bad name calling). I've found that even the Libs on this board are not the really vicious and whiney [Unwelcome language removed] like the ones that are at PH. I disagree most of the time with the Liberals on this board but I've been posting with some of them for so long that I just can't consider them mortal enemies. I use a lot of political hyperbole sometimes just to make a point.
 
Top