# PSA For Those Afraid To Like Posts **URL:** \ **Category:** Off Topic\ **Created:** [June 24, 2016, 4:04pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257 "2016-06-24T16:04:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Link](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/link/32/36125_2.png) [@Link](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Link)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 9:59am UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/41 "2016-07-14T09:59:54Z")
just stop ---
**Author:** ![meharryp](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/meharryp/32/2897_2.png) [@meharryp](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/meharryp)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 1:21pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/42 "2016-07-14T13:21:45Z")
petition to rename this thread to “picking appart every small element of someone’s argument: the thread” ---
**Author:** ![rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/rythian/32/83765_2.png) [@rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/rythian)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 6:44pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/43 "2016-07-14T18:44:36Z")
Should this even be happening? ---
**Author:** ![Omnipotent](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/omnipotent/32/19793_2.png) [@Omnipotent](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Omnipotent)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 7:13pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/44 "2016-07-14T19:13:42Z")
@mikusch **Just because this is off-topic doesn’t make it okay to come into someones thread and just talk crap.** I wouldn’t go into your topics and say they are useless threads. Treat other people the way you’d like to be treated. Those that treat other people like crap are in turn treated like crap. There is absolutely no reason to be a complete dick when I have done nothing to you. **I’m not saying we should all need to follow rules to the teeth, but Off-Topic shouldn’t be welcoming flame wars. This topic was meant to be positive and people are taking it in the wrong direction.** I’m not looking to have people starting another flame war. If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > About that line in particular: I know it sounds weird. It was supposed to be a direct contextual reference to the “See what I did there?” and at the time I didn’t see any way to phrase that so it sounds less… weird. Gotcha, so basically it was supposed to go hand in hand with the reference. Not much to say here then. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > Not sure what exactly you mean. I don’t want to start counting since how many posts our exchange is not primarily about likes anymore. (Which I don’t see as too bad because that’s how I interpret the forum category.) And I’m pretty sure you started out with the lack of sarcasm in text as quoted here. Now you agree that there can be. It’s because that is not what this topic was supposed to be about. 😆 The reason that this topic is now about sarcasm is because you had taken it in that direction. I was never intending to say anything about sarcasm. That was just part of my clarification for why text doesn’t have the same content that voice does. Maybe I used a wrong word here and there, and it may have sounded like that. But my only goal from this topic was to have people view posts objectively and without bias. It’s very interesting to see your viewpoint on these things, but we’ve gotten pretty off-topic. \* ba-dum-tsss\* 😄 So can we please move on from the sarcasm topic? It’s not that I don’t want to hear what you have to say, but I don’t think we should be doing it in _this_ particular topic. Shoot me a message over [steam](http://steamcommunity.com/id/omni-potent/) or the forums here and we can continue the conversation further. I’m pretty sure most people have gotten what they needed from this topic. Even the trolls are out now. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > My goal when discussing with someone I disagree with is to find the rationally “correct” side or a compromise that involves having understood everything involved. No offense, but I’m not looking to be “corrected” when it’s an opinion like that. To you, this may seem like you’re “fixing a problem” or “making something right”, but when it’s an opinion the only way to prove it is with fact. I might not have explained it perfectly, but there is not a chance that you can convince me into thinking text is better than face-to-face conversations. I’d take text as good for understanding long and in-depth conversations sometimes, sure. But a good face-to-face conversation has you actually understanding what the person says. You shouldn’t need to re-read(i.e. re hear) anything if you actually understood it. And when it comes to daily interactions, voice is KING. _So_ much more content can be conveyed in a matter of seconds. If you don’t understand me IRL, then just like you said, you just tell them you didn’t understand it. And I can quickly reply with “What part don’t you understand?” and then can clarify that point for you/them. Then I can bring in different examples and what not. I’m not really sure why you’re so against having to restate yourself in voice. But in comparison, a text conversation like this uses potentially 30+ minutes on just one message. There’s no doubt about it in my mind that voice is king. Unless you’re afraid to speak to someone, or your drunk or something, using voice requires much less time and effort on my part than physically typing/writing out a message. I don’t understand why you dislike having to clarify things in voice because it only takes a matter of seconds. I could definitely understand if you said you disliked having to clarify things in text though. Because things like tone are _far_ harder to convey with the right meaning when all they have is text. If you use markers, different styles and fonts, and etc: you can make it easier to understand, sure. But there’s no guarantee they properly understood your tone. At least not the same way that it can be done in a face-to-face interaction. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > When all the facts are available (Philosophically debatable as to how likely that is…), maybe even the truth. It’s not like a boxing fight where I can say “You win because you were quicker and my reply wasn’t as strong as it could have been. Let’s repeat the topic next Saturday and then hopefully I am correct for the following week!”. And if the goal is not to “fight” and quickly have a good reaction but to carefully find the solution best to everyone, you should always take the time to understand each other and make sure of that. I think part of the problem here is you’re trying to, “win” and in turn make someone else “lose.” When in reality I am not looking to win or lose. My goal was simply spreading understanding and breathing more life and love into this community. I see a lot of negativity and it’s unnecessary. It drags people down when we should be supporting one another. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > Also if you compare speech to programming, semantics are what can cause the subtlest bugs and I prefer my programs to be stable and maintainable by readability. Sure, if this were programming that would be true. This isn’t programming however, so I’m sorry but this is illogical in this situation and nonsensical. Getting hung up on semantics just pisses people off; especially when you know what they are trying to say. Semantics != Spelling errors in programming. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > It’s a shame, isn’t it? 😉 The “saved” time is converted into speech disfluency, asking people to repeat or explain where they weren’t clear enough. Luckily daily life isn’t all about complex discussion and most conversations aren’t paused because you don’t know whether to say “Excuse me, I have noticed your Shirt might be on backwards.” or “Is it just me or does your Shirt look like it’s on backwards?”. Some might view it as “saved” time (or in the opposite, “wasted” time), but I would just call it time that can now be spent elsewhere. Viewing time as saved/wasted causes people to not appreciate the now as much as they should. Time is never actually “wasted”. You may have “spent” it doing something, but that doesn’t mean it was all useless. Also, this “speech disfluency” problem you speak of is because of the speaker/listeners. That’s not voice conversations fault at all. “A poor worksman blames his tools.” That’s like me saying all wrenches suck because sometimes I grab the wrong wrench. If the people involved in the conversation are able to understand one another, there is none of that whatsoever and conversations flow quickly and easily. Even when there is a misunderstanding or a mix-up, they can be quickly corrected with the utterance of one or two sentences. 5-10 seconds later and the misunderstanding is wiped away before further thought is put into that wrong idea. And there are facts to support that face-to-face interactions have more content available which makes the meaning (and reasoning) of certain parts a lot easier to understand. When it comes to text, I could completely misunderstand your meaning, and in my reply I spend 2-3 paragraphs trying to reply to my misunderstanding. Only to find out with your next reply that that’s not what you were trying to say at all. This has happened to me with you several times already. And it’s happened to you with me several times already. We both have misunderstood eachother in places with misunderstandings that could have been dissolved in seconds (had we been using voice in a face-to-face interaction). But instead we spent a lot of time talking about things that were misunderstandings. That alone proves my point that voice can be easier to understand than text. Even things like body movements and hand motions can say a lot about what someone is trying to say. For example, if a girl is trying to tell you something and she has her hands on her hips, she might not be very happy with you. Of course this isn’t the case 100% of the time, as are all other non-verbal-queues. But the entire all encompassing combination of things like the seemingly simple non-verbal-queues, tones, talking rates, hand movements, and etc: give face-to-face interactions _much_ more **depth** than a typical text conversation. > [@JohannesDau](#): > > I have a feeling that the others might disagree. Maybe the thread should be in Meta. But if it’s moved now, that’d be probably too much off-topic. Yup. It’s been steered off course entirely. So hopefully we can stop the off-topic train right here. As meharryp said, > [@meharryp](#): > > petition to rename this thread to “picking appart every small element of someone’s argument: the thread” You can tell its headed this way when someone says, [quote=“JohannesDau, post:39, topic:11257”] My goal when discussing with someone I disagree with is to find the rationally “correct” side or a compromise that involves having understood everything involved. [/quote] The main reason this happened was due to some basic misunderstandings (which can easily happen all the time with text). But because you think there is something that needs to be, “corrected”, you are already viewing the other persons viewpoint as “wrong.” It’s kinda like the USA where we go and raid third-world countries, and then we force them into “democracy” just because we think its the way everyone should be and it’s, “whats right.” Maybe in 2/3+ of all cases that may be true, but that one solution doesn’t work for everyone. Maybe what they had before was working way better for them and they were happy and peaceful. Eg: Their “ruler” was giving them everything they wanted and more, while not abusing their power. But then you try to implement your system and the system breaks and is thrown into disorder. This is an exaggerated example but I hope you’ll get the point. Not everyone is looking to be, “fixed.” This argument could even be pointed back at me for this thread, and I’m okay with that. But if _even one person_ can break down the wall of separation in their mind that goes, “oh its just a noob, I’m not going to like his post!” Then I’ll consider this topic well worth the time to create. ---
**Author:** ![rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/rythian/32/83765_2.png) [@rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/rythian)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 8:20pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/45 "2016-07-14T20:20:26Z")
Please close this thread. Thanks @Noodleneck ---
**Author:** ![Radek](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/radek/32/53267_2.png) [@Radek](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Radek)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 8:59pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/46 "2016-07-14T20:59:50Z")
I don’t even know what’s going on in this thread anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Mikusch](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/9fc348/32.png) [@Mikusch](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Mikusch)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 9:45pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/47 "2016-07-14T21:45:21Z")
[![](http://i.imgur.com/5S4RfCR.png) ](http://i.imgur.com/5S4RfCR.png) ---
**Author:** ![rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/rythian/32/83765_2.png) [@rythian](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/rythian)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2016, 9:55pm UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/48 "2016-07-14T21:55:23Z")
> [@Omnipotent](#): > > Just because this is off-topic doesn’t make it okay to come into someones thread and just talk crap. I wouldn’t go into your topics and say they are useless threads. To be honest, there really isn’t a point to this. Just arguing about everything but being afraid to like posts. ---
**Author:** ![Noodleneck](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/noodleneck/32/120_2.png) [@Noodleneck](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Noodleneck)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2016, 2:22am UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/49 "2016-07-15T02:22:52Z")
Alright, cool. Locked. ---
**Author:** ![Noodleneck](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/user_avatar/forums.pixeltailgames.com/noodleneck/32/120_2.png) [@Noodleneck](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/u/Noodleneck)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2016, 2:22am UTC](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257/50 "2016-07-15T02:22:55Z")
[Previous page](https://forums.pixeltailgames.com/t/psa-for-those-afraid-to-like-posts/11257.md?page=2)