I quite like these strands.
Nevertheless, there is a peril to them.
When we converse, face to face, we watch and listen for cues that amount to much more than just the words.
It is not possible to be as sensitive to what someone is feeling when we are using a two dimensional media. Sometimes therefore, people will be affronted by a statement, or a reply.
Also, because of the very nature of the distance between us, we can say things in a way that is more blunt than we would employ face to face.
When we say something which comes very much from the heart, and that view is detracted by another person, that can feel like more than just the opinion is being rejected or contested.
Peril aside, I think that these strands are interesting.
In my own case, on those rare occasions that I have felt upset or rejected by a response to that which I have offered, I tend to move on, mull over the response, and come back later, when my reply will be more reasoned.
As to the fact that some people can be very good and productive members, and still not take part in the debates, to me that is fine.
If I go to a supermarket, I chose what lines I avail myself of. I don't buy everything that is on offer.
I remember an old, apocryphal story about an American businessman in the 1920's.
He believed that it was then possible to make a cheap, affordable and reliable aircraft from available materials. So, he went to a local hardware store, and bought most of the new modern lightweight materials 'off the shelf'.
However, he just could not get the damn thing to fly. It was just too heavy.
So he called in an engineer to look his 'flivver' over.
The guy did so, and suggested......
'first of all, you don't need the bathroom, and take out the sink.'
To me the moral reiterates that basic premise.
Just 'cos it's there, it isn't neccesary for you to use it.
Like I say I enjoy lots of this group.
Free Forum Hosting
First
0 recommendations 
Return to Debates