It’s a fundemental aspect of the medium, though. A bit of a stretch to call people cowards for interacting in the way the platform was designed around.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit i take it….
Solely ‘downvoting’ with no expressed reasoning besides presumably being butthurt and as one person said ‘because it’s presented wrong’ is coward like. It was designed around comments, the vote system is one aspect and the least important one that, i don’t think you know what ‘fundamental’ means.
I confess, I shouldn’t have used the less common meaning. “[…] why are you so aware of it?” would have been a more accessible phrasing. Why is it important to you?
That doesn’t change anything… but since my comments going to be arbitrarily removed then this i pointless anyway. Besides that you’re just going to keep being indirect just to waste time and dissolve the thread. Its not more important than the content, but it’s a good metric for gauging the audience
(I can’t speak to the actions of the moderators, alas.)
Indirect discussion is usually the best way to approach a complex topic. Or a language in general, really. It’s the foundation of… well, rhetoric. It’s been a fascinating topic of discussion for (at least) 2000 years, if you’re at all interested in engaging with it.
Downvotes are a modern implementation of a truly ancient concept here. It’s a pretty critical aspect of the comment system, or participatory discussion in general.
Then follow me and give me audience, friends.
Cassius, go you into the other street
And part the numbers.
I mean sure, he’s not referring to the number of upvotes and downvotes, but if any human being in history understood the role of the audience surely it was Shakespeare. “The audience can’t exist without the subject, but neither can the subject have import without the audience” and all that. It really is a fundamental aspect of human interaction, not just internet forums.
crashing out while no one is talking to you is so funny
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
It’s a fundemental aspect of the medium, though. A bit of a stretch to call people cowards for interacting in the way the platform was designed around.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit i take it….
Solely ‘downvoting’ with no expressed reasoning besides presumably being butthurt and as one person said ‘because it’s presented wrong’ is coward like. It was designed around comments, the vote system is one aspect and the least important one that, i don’t think you know what ‘fundamental’ means.
But, if it’s not important, why are you so sensitive to it?
Sensitive? It was a passing remark used to segway into the actual point lol however, you can’t seem to get over it
I confess, I shouldn’t have used the less common meaning. “[…] why are you so aware of it?” would have been a more accessible phrasing. Why is it important to you?
That doesn’t change anything… but since my comments going to be arbitrarily removed then this i pointless anyway. Besides that you’re just going to keep being indirect just to waste time and dissolve the thread. Its not more important than the content, but it’s a good metric for gauging the audience
(I can’t speak to the actions of the moderators, alas.)
Indirect discussion is usually the best way to approach a complex topic. Or a language in general, really. It’s the foundation of… well, rhetoric. It’s been a fascinating topic of discussion for (at least) 2000 years, if you’re at all interested in engaging with it.
Downvotes are a modern implementation of a truly ancient concept here. It’s a pretty critical aspect of the comment system, or participatory discussion in general.
I mean sure, he’s not referring to the number of upvotes and downvotes, but if any human being in history understood the role of the audience surely it was Shakespeare. “The audience can’t exist without the subject, but neither can the subject have import without the audience” and all that. It really is a fundamental aspect of human interaction, not just internet forums.