I think the simplex communication of an article and the half-duplex communication of forums both have their time & place, I don't think it's a problem that television is simplex.
OH. OH.™
I think maybe you're not communicating as clearly as you imagine? Your statements don't feel connected to me, I don't understand why you feel some of the things you're talking about are related. Maybe you're better at communicating in person than you are over text? Maybe we're all being dumb is a hindrance to you seeing what you might do differently to explain yourself better?
I understand your frustration with the increasing financialization of online communities/interactions, but it seems like you're blaming the wrong people (creators and people you suspect of supporting them) and making your criticism in an inappropriate way (heated rhetoric targeting everyday people just living their lives).
It's just not okay to call out random people like that and make them answer for perfectly normal behavior which happens to bother you. The people in your comments section are saying they feel harassed and stalked by you - and as far as I can tell, they're right. That made me hesitate to even respond because I wondered if I would be receiving the same kind of treatment.
You seem like someone with a lot of passion and technical ability who sometimes struggles to understand where the line is between making passionately arguing your position and being inappropriate.
I think you should consider taking a break from making content while you figure some stuff out. I think calling out these random, tiny creators creates trouble for them in a really unfair way, but also that it will lead you to a dark place.
I hope that helps.
I am not a big fan of time policing, but may I suggest you try to correct the folks using childish names rather than suggesting they be treated extra nice?
I'm not defending their insults, but I take issue with you responding to them in an inflammatory way. It's not okay to stir someone into a temper, and then when they react badly, weaponize that against them.
Someone behaving badly in conversation is not license to treat them badly. An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
My suggestion to you would be to flag insulting comments and move on rather than trying to be hurtful to someone who was hurtful to you. I try to abide, as a personal rule, to respond respectfully or not at all. I don't always succeed at this.
How many paragraphs were you prepared to write to admonish that poster? This bit of policing is kind of strange to me.
My genuine feedback to you: Your very detailed analysis of my posts was not asked for, and calling me a jerk and a bully is not going to engender a working conversation between us in the same way that if I said “holier-than-thou backseat moderator” wouldn’t encourage you to engage in a real dialogue either.
Respectfully, in the future please try to curtail your impulse to impose your personal rules on me. I am not open to your coaching. Any further criticism of me is wholly unwelcome, will not be applied, and I’ll just have to ignore our respond to it in the same way I decide how to engage with any other pointless off-topic emotional nonsense.
I don't think I'm better or holier than you, I regularly fail to live up to what I'm suggesting. I'm not trying to impose anything on you; everything I said was a suggestion, and I interpreted your offering me advice as an invitation to offer advice in return.
Much like you feel you have license to tell people they are childish when you judge it appropriate, I feel I have license to tell people they are being rude when I judge it appropriate. Both of us are expressing our view of how people should behave in this community, "back seat moderating" if you will.
Thank you for your feedback. Have a great rest of your day.
The first thing you said to me was a condescending command. lol at “inviting advice in return”
Buddy you showed up to backseat mod in the first place. I’ve just asked you to personally leave me alone with the (from my perspective) kind of silly decorum police nonsense. I did not come out of nowhere and tell you how to interact with other people. That’s kind of a significant difference.
I don't see why you feel it's condescending to ask you not to mock people, and I'm sorry you feel patronized - but you told someone you'd "laugh in their face" and called both of us "buddy". You're being condescending on purpose because you feel it's warranted - you said as much ("I see no issue with pointing out the fact that that behavior is in fact childish to the point of being comical").
You're free to say whatever you please, but I don't see why a different standard applies to me. The same goes for "lol at advice in return" - it's not clear to me why you think the notion that I might respond in kind is laughable. For that matter, that also goes for your criticism that I'm sharing thoughts in a way that's not conducive to productive conversation - was laughing in their face conducive?
You "came out of nowhere" to tell this person you had a problem with the way they were interacting with the forum as much as I did. No one gets invitations here, we all come out of nowhere. Again, I don't understand why there should be a different standard.
The real difference here is that we view our own behavior as justified and each other's behavior as excessive. I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
No it isn’t, it’s a command dressed up in lazy condescension.
Lol, again, buddy, this is super silly to the point of being sincerely comical!
For instance: News story said "The 32-page manifesto of the mass shooter went into detail about how he hated every fast food employee." and then they don't link to the downloadable manifesto for us to read. We have to rely on comments for someone to actually post the link.
Same thing with torrentfreak. They TALK about kindle books being pirated but they're not linking them. You'd find the link in the comments. Yeah. THE LINK.
(Sure wish I could use the word I really want to use there.)
Takes all kinds in this world, I guess.