Do you prefer live replies or delayed replies? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Polls on politics, news, current affairs and history.

Debate politics with people online in realtime, or do you prefer delays between replies?

1. Live one-on-one with posters who are online (why?)
No votes
0%
2. Delayed replies between posts (why?)
11
69%
3. Other (please explain)
5
31%
#15140484
In serious debates about political questions, do you prefer debate partners that are online at that moment, or do you prefer delayed responses?

Do you prefer instant answers, or periods of reflection?
#15140705
Depends how busy I am. Nothing more annoying than a debate you are winning but you have a user who replies with an ad-hom almost straight away after a point you made, making you feel compelled to respond back ASAP to discredit them further or getting a response to something you wrote a month ago when the issue has already been put to bed by other users discussing the topic amongst themselves.
#15140710
I prefer delayed replies because it tends to make both the sender of the reply and the receiver more thoughtful than a instant reply would.
#15140813
Like Goranhammer and annatar1914, I voted for "delayed replies" because it allows more time for thought and research BEFORE replying, thus preventing dead-end arguments that are quickly dismissed by other posters who have done some research or reflecting.

Many times, a point I wanted to make is obliterated by research before I can post it. By preventing these, it means that easily-dismissed mute points don't have a chance to contaminate a thread with unresearched stupidity on my part. Less wild goose chases for everyone.

On the other hand... spontaneity leads to more honesty as it reveals the natural ignorance that posters (including myself) might have. And off-the-cuff posting is more likely to lead to heuristic discovery, rather than to the rehearsed strategies for discussion that can emerge from planning.
#15141696
B0ycey wrote:Depends how busy I am. Nothing more annoying than a debate you are winning but you have a user who replies with an ad-hom almost straight away after a point you made, making you feel compelled to respond back ASAP to discredit them further or getting a response to something you wrote a month ago when the issue has already been put to bed by other users discussing the topic amongst themselves.


This is cute. You fucking cunt.

Also, you discredit yourself with every post you make you shit posting fuck face...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm fucking with you, in case you didn't notice.

To answer the question. I voted delayed. But overall, I don't really care.

One thing that I always have to watch myself, is getting dragged into dumb shit. Sometimes you get hooked into a stupid argument and don't know how to let go. :lol:
#15144984
I like to shoot them before they can get to their horse.



ON EDIT: Thoughtful replies are the ones I like the most but there is something really satisfying about gunning someone down, blowing the smoke out of your barrel and heading for TLTE.

There are a couple of poster's here who are so quick with the Google finger that you can tell they did not even read the "evidence" that they post. It is hallarious when their quote disproves the very point that they meant it to support. And this happens time and again.

Slower is better I suppose.

Peace out.
#15145862
Drlee wrote:I like to shoot them before they can get to their horse.



ON EDIT: Thoughtful replies are the ones I like the most but there is something really satisfying about gunning someone down, blowing the smoke out of your barrel and heading for TLTE.


This may be temporarily satisfying to the person blowing the other person's head off, but it doesn't add much to the overall argument usually. It's like proving that "you are faster than he is," without necessarily adding to the truth of any particular information that has been provided in the thread.

Blackjack21 uses a "drive-by quoting" style that attempts to "respond" to multiple other posters in one sweep. The problem I have with this is exactly that he doesn't contribute much to the general validity of the direction of the thread. It's just little gripes and polemics he is able to find in the wording of their posts.

The problem with this is that most of these aren't worth responding to as this will only spam up the thread with unnecessary polemics that have nothing to do with the subject of the thread.

Better to really READ what other people have written to try to understand their logic. And this takes time and should provoke delays before responding so that you can contemplate.
#15146706
Heavily depends on the nature of my participation.

In general, I prefer more instant response from less intellectual participants (they provide amusement so quick words will be good), and few or no reply from more knowledgeable people (admittedly I do not bother reading them unless I am serious in making a point).
#15146760
Patrickov wrote:I prefer ... few or no reply from more knowledgeable people (admittedly I do not bother reading them unless I am serious in making a point).

Does this mean that you don't like when smart or well-informed people answer your posts?

Or are you saying that you don't like long-winded, incomprehensible posts that appear to have been written by *an intellectual*?

Which is it you don't appreciate: (intellectual) content or style?
#15146762
QatzelOk wrote:Does this mean that you don't like when smart or well-informed people answer your posts?


Sometimes true, especially if I know that person strongly disagrees with me.

But in such cases I will simply shut up.


QatzelOk wrote:Or are you saying that you don't like long-winded, incomprehensible posts that appear to have been written by *an intellectual*?


Yes, this is 100% true.


QatzelOk wrote:Which is it you don't appreciate: (intellectual) content or style?


The former, I suppose.

The complicated truth about China's social credit[…]

Still nothing from you about the very real danger […]

Racism definition & use

As long as everyone understands that it is not a […]

I doubt she would have won, too many misogynists.[…]