What do you like and dislike about the GD Forum

[Himaginn]

Who has ever said that someone's opinion is not their opinion?

FFS.

No, but it would still be their opinion.

No it wouldn't.

Aah, OK, that's John's opinion.
I don't agree with his opinion, on this occasion, unless he can substantiate his opinion. Then I might agree, or not. I don't follow his logic on this occasion.

But I don't think you were being very succinct in your replies.
To summarise, if I may:
You first used the phrase 'to wrongly disagree':

That some people wrongly disagree.

Surely, it's never 'wrong to disagree'. It may be silly, stupid, warranted, even bold at times.
Similarly, it's never a wrong opinion, in the true sense of the word. It may be a misguided, stupid, not credible opinion.
So it's never wrong to disagree. A bit provocative, boring, silly, nonsensical sometimes, but not actually wrong. Sometimes, quite the opposite.
It goes back to noseall's question: "is it wrong to disagree?" and your response was to discuss the semantics of wrong.

Your next retort was - is it wrong to disagree?
I suppose it depends what you mean by wrong.

Then we have another of your vague statements without explanation:

I'm interested to know why YOU think it's wrong.

BECAUSE THE OPINION IS THEIR OPINION

And we eventually end up with:

Can you explain why it would be wrong to discredit, refute or argue against, an opinion?

NO. I never said it was.

I think it's been an interesting mystery tour, or to put it another way, a circuitous discussion.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Surely, it's never 'wrong to disagree'. It may be silly, stupid, warranted, even bold at times.

In this instance, he was disagreeing with me, that the opinion was still their opinion even if wrong; ergo - wrongly disagreeing.

Similarly, it's never a wrong opinion, in the true sense of the word. It may be a misguided, stupid, not credible opinion.

Please read the thread again and turn the stick around.
If you don't understand that, it means you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

So it's never wrong to disagree.

...but JohnD WAS wrong.
He wasn't disagreeing with someone's opinion; he was disagreeing with me for saying that it was still an opinion even if someone else disagrees with that opinion.

 

[JohnD]

No I wasn't.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

No I wasn't.

That's your opinion

 

[JohnD]

I'm pretending to be a plumber.

 

[Deleted member 63160]

I'm pretending to be a plumber.

Try cowboys and indians that's fun too.

 

[noseall]

I'm pretending to be a plumber.

Careful John, you are starting to sound like Mr Vague aka EFLI. He thinks it's clever to type short ambiguous sentences then roll his eyes and get exasperated whilst forum members desperately try and guess which of the ten thousand meanings he's trying to convey.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Careful John, you are starting to sound like Mr Vague aka EFLI. He thinks it's clever to type short ambiguous sentences

It is called succinct.

then roll his eyes

First time, I think. Can you find another?

and get exasperated

Difficult not to on here.

whilst forum members desperately try and guess which of the ten thousand meanings he's trying to convey.

If you don't understand then don't reply - or ask "What do you mean?"

 

[noseall]

Opinions can be personal, and therefore may not be verifiable.

That sort of statement is hardly likely to garner a reaction from anyone.

.

Ok, I'll ask. Why did you cherry pick a short part of my post then put a question mark. Were you trying to be succinct, clever or just felt like copying a small potion of the post in order to make the post appear to not make sense.

Here is the rest of it.....

If you mean something along the lines of "I think it's quite warm today", whereas someone else may think that it is cold. Ho hum.

That sort of statement is hardly likely to garner a reaction from anyone. However, there are statements and there are statements. Some are provocative and some are contentious and are typical troll fodder.
blah, blah, blah....

 

[EFLImpudence]

I've already told you and apologised for misunderstanding - have you ever done that?

I thought the paragraph beginning with "That sort..." referred to what Brigadier had written and to which you were replying.



What is the point of quoting a complete post if I only want to reply to one part of it?

 

[EFLImpudence]

Perhaps you should have begun the paragraph with "This sort..." and it would have been clearer to what you were referring.

 

[JohnD]

What do you like and dislike about the GD Forum

I like the fact that sometimes it can be sensible.

 

[noseall]

Can you explain why it would be wrong to discredit, refute or argue against, an opinion?

NO. I never said it was.

Summing up then.....

A large portion of this post argued about whether it was justified/warranted/expected that if someone posted their opinion on a public forum, it would urge people into responding, especially if that opinion were contentious or provocative.

Yes, we get that it is an opinion EFLI and thanks for the repeated reminders. However, just because it is an opinion, it does not mean it can not be criticised/refuted/rebuffed. It is fair to say that a poster should actually expect to have provocative statements responded to on a public forum and that will highly likely mean using various search engines on the internet, i.e. Google etc, for those for or against the content of the post.

Using the phrase "it was just my opinion" should not mean immunity from criticism. It is up to the poster to either justify their opinion or expect doubt and derision from those who question it, if no explanation is forthcoming. Otherwise, why voice an opinion on a public forum.

 

[Himaginn]

Summing up then.....

Very eloquently and succinctly put.
I'd have given it a 'thanks', but I don't like to do 'thanks' in the GD forum, because of the behaviour of some to heap praise on others for meaningless or sometimes offensive comments.

Similarly, it's never a wrong opinion, in the true sense of the word. It may be a misguided, stupid, not credible opinion.

Please read the thread again and turn the stick around.
If you don't understand that, it means you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

Another vague meaningless comment, without justification or explanation.
If you're going to make such comments, without supporting them with a substantive argument, then it becomes a meaningless statement.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Similarly, it's never a wrong opinion, in the true sense of the word. It may be a misguided, stupid, not credible opinion.

Please read the thread again and turn the stick around.
If you don't understand that, it means you have got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

Another vague meaningless comment, without justification or explanation.
If you're going to make such comments, without supporting them with a substantive argument, then it becomes a meaningless statement.

Not when read with the rest of the post.
I did say read the thread again - all of it.

If anyone thinks wrong or stupid opinions are not opinions then so be it.
I really do think you are being deliberately obtuse (there's a novelty) so there is no point explaining further.


I have no doubt you will accuse me of inadequacy, inability, cowardice and lots more but there is no point in trying to explain. It is obviously beyond you.
It is all but impossible arguing when replies are said to be vague and meaningless and you veer off to tangential subjects and irrelevances.