Passive Aggression toward other Posters

[Loyal]

It could be that I am misusing an idea/action, but I am speaking of a certain method employed by some to invalidate others ideas through indirect belittlement. A recent example was a poster's comment in agreeing that a LT should be considered the right pick at #23, instead of a ILB or edge rusher. He agreed with a poster that said this, but then went farther in belittling the arguments of 30 other posters before him.

"[Finally]A small glimmer of sanity."


In the context of what he posted, it wasn't a joke. Although he was not being literal, he really meant the positions of all the other posters besides the one he agreed with were stupid, because they didn't see what was obvious to him. To say it this way would be more honest and direct, but then would fall afoul of this sites guideline against personal attack. To be clear, I am no saint on the internet. "When in Rome..." ideal is what I do in various internet environments.

I spend a lot of time on a NFC West Troll site where we are often vicious with each other, but normally it is funny/vicious. It is vicious but is also direct and is honest in that way. I know how to come at someone when they are coming at me just as hard (IE, cue "Come at me Bro" gifs...lol). That's why I don't like indirect attacks, which at times are veiled direct attacks. My instinct is to attack directly, but I come to this site for a more peaceful dialogue and would like to not be banned. That's why it pizzes me off when I know deep down I'm being personally attacked, but cannot respond honestly.

*steps off soap box.

 

[Prime Time]

One has to have a thick hide to have conversations on the internet. Personally passive-aggressiveness ticks me off as well but as long as a member is staying inside our guidelines there's not much we can do about it. If a fellow member offends you once too often, we have an ignore feature that works quite well.

 

[fearsomefour]

People have different opinions about players, moves, picks etc. So it goes.
Plenty of people are incapable of having a debate or discusion. Things quickly devolve into "Im right, I'm right."
The only thing that keeps the board great and moving forward are the rules.

 

[Loyal]

One has to have a thick hide to have conversations on the internet. Personally passive-aggressiveness ticks me off as well but as long as a member is staying inside our guidelines there's not much we can do about it. If a fellow member offends you once too often, we have an ignore feature that works quite well.

It's a gray area and I have a very thick skin...or, I have the ability to defend myself against direct attack. I just think passive aggressive attacks are chicken shyte.

 

[Loyal]

People have different opinions about players, moves, picks etc. So it goes.
Plenty of people are incapable of having a debate or discusion. Things quickly devolve into "Im right, I'm right."
The only thing that keeps the board great and moving forward are the rules.

agreed....But it also is more fun when the spirit of the rule isn't bypassed through indirect means.

 

[Prime Time]

I just think passive aggressive attack is chicken shyte.

Sure it is. I've been married for almost 33 years and have become an expert on that tactic.

Sometimes the blue font we use here is a cover for that. It's like when someone insults you and then says "I was just kidding."

If mods here had to delve into the psychological motivation of every post we'd never get anything done.

 

[Loyal]

Sure it is. I've been married for almost 33 years and have become an expert on that tactic.

Sometimes the blue font we use here is a cover for that. It's like when someone insults you and then says "I was just kidding."

If mods here had to delve into the psychological motivation of every post we'd never get anything done.

Sure...I wasn't posting this thread because I was asking the site to change its rules, or being passive aggressive towards MODS (ha!). I am letting off steam about something I don't like, and am therefore telling those that use this tactic that what they are doing is noticed and IS CHICKEN SHYTE. I am directly attacking in the only way I know the tactic of indirect belittlement!

 

[Loyal]

Prime Time...Thinking more about it, it's the lack of humor when the offensive passive aggressive attack happens. If a poster can laugh at himself, as well as at "you," that is kind of fun.

 

[IowaRam]

 

[1maGoh]

I'll admit that I'm guilty of this. I'll try to tone it down.

 

[Angry Ram]

Passive aggression is one thing. But if you have an opinion and feel strongly about it, then don't budge. I did that during the whole refs and NE thing. I still feel that way. Wasn't popular, was told I was a closet NE fan, etc. But it didn't shake me. Other times in Tavon threads I call people out, people don't like it. I know I ended up on a couple folks' ignore list (maybe more), but I calls it like I sees it.

In short:

 

[BatteringRambo]

View: https://youtu.be/zVOuRQPPdoo

:rockon::yay:

 

[fearsomefour]

Passive aggression is one thing. But if you have an opinion and feel strongly about it, then don't budge. I did that during the whole refs and NE thing. I still feel that way. Wasn't popular, was told I was a closet NE fan, etc. But it didn't shake me. Other times in Tavon threads I call people out, people don't like it. I know I ended up on a couple folks' ignore list (maybe more), but I calls it like I sees it.

In short:

I don't understand the mentality of not being able to hear or debate a different opinion. Ignore lists are for putty cats

 

[BatteringRambo]

Love this OT thread. Rock on. Selfishly, I prefer Gold, Blaze or Black in that specific order.
[GALLERY=media, 298]You-should-burn-your-wifes-deck-furniture-while-blasting-slipknot-23788061 by BatteringRambo posted Mar 31, 2018 at 12:02 PM[/GALLERY]

 

[LesBaker]

agreed....But it also is more fun when the spirit of the rule isn't bypassed through indirect means.

This is a valid point.

I don't understand the mentality of not being able to hear or debate a different opinion. Ignore lists are for putty cats

I can't wrap my head around that either. How can one wall of ones own brain and not be willing to discuss different issues. I've gone to PM's with posters about sensitive topics that aren't allowed here and had civil back and forth even when it got slightly heated.

I'be never put a single poster on ignore on any board and I've been posting on Rams boards since the start of the season after the SB win.

 

[Selassie I]

I have everyone on ignore.

 

[Loyal]

Passive aggression is one thing. But if you have an opinion and feel strongly about it, then don't budge. I did that during the whole refs and NE thing. I still feel that way. Wasn't popular, was told I was a closet NE fan, etc. But it didn't shake me. Other times in Tavon threads I call people out, people don't like it. I know I ended up on a couple folks' ignore list (maybe more), but I calls it like I sees it.

In short:

If you dispute with someone and each mind is made up = "We'll agree to disagree..." This is good.


If one says instead "if you do some thinking, you know I'm right" or if having debated after a while and an impasse is reached, one side posts to the world "Intelligent people agree with me." Both infer that if you disagree with their POV, you really haven't achieved the same level of understanding as have they. Neither is a direct assault, but both are a little offensive. I understand there is a fine line with context, and many veiled insults are done from a point of humor. My favorite is the use of friendly false attributions in blue font directed at LACHAMP46. He tickles me and I like to tweak him for his own good. I am sure he knows that I tease him because I like him, and not because I disrespect him. When the above is done from a place of exasperation, you know its said in a passive aggressive way that is slightly disrespectful.

This thread isn't from just one event, but is the response from several years of it, and I realize nothing can really be done by the MODS. I just wanted to raise the issue, because this is the only place I can express my dissatisfaction about the tactic....

 

[nighttrain]

If you dispute with someone and each mind is made up = "We'll agree to disagree..." This is good.

 

[LesBaker]

I have everyone on ignore.

Did anyone hear that? I swear I hear something.

 

[Corbin]

Honestly Loyal I think a huge part of online communication, in particular words in a message ( text, e-mail, forum, etc.) can be interpreted in many different ways than if their was voice attached to the same words. Tone, infliction, volume, and in person facial expressions are easier to dictate someones meaning where words (depending ones current mood) can change or delude them totally wrong.

For example, I had a long distance relationship (DON'T EVER DO IF YOUR READING THIS!) and messages typed either way can be perceived in a total different light than how they were intended. It was very difficult to overcome this and we had to use other methods to limit the message interaction especially in disagreements to fix issues properly.

Psychologists call this " the transparency illusion" and just like many other human conditions has a lot to do with the parties involved state of being at the time of interaction.

Also, in consideration is the newer ' micro agressed' culture that get offended and feel traumatized by somebody that they feel is an attack on them if their view isn't resounded 100% by the other party.