# How does one debate without making it personal?



## Firawyn (Dec 26, 2007)

I've often heard people look at debates (friendly and otherwise) and advise that one does not make it personal.

My question is: _How is that even possible?_ 

A debate or discussion is all about different personal views. It's about taking a stand for what you personally believe. 

Or by definition it is *1. a discussion, as of a public question in an assembly, involving opposing viewpoints:* (Dictionary.com)

On TTF, we are encouraged to debate; to expand our knowledge base and have intellectual discussion with our fellow members. But, then when things get personal we are given notices like this:



> *OK. Personal attacks on this thread STOP NOW.
> 
> This is not a request.
> 
> [Gothmog] TTF SuperModerator!*



I'm not disputing that the moderators have a right and responsibility to maintain a certain order and civility, but personally (there's that word again!) I think that the moderators should interfere only _when asked_. 

I don't know if situation from the quote above had or had not been asked to be 'taken care of' by any members or not, and it's not on that situation that I'm making this point. I'm simply wondering how we can be allowed to debate on TTF (and by NO means I'm I suggesting this privilege be revoked) and then rebuked when things get personal.


Any thoughts?

Edited by Gothmog for accuracy


----------



## Gothmog (Dec 26, 2007)

When you debate you deal with the ideas of another. There is no problem with attacking the views and ideas of another person. I have done so many times and have had many attack my views and ideas.

However, when someone has to resort to attacking the person instead of the ideas it ceases to be a debate about an idea or a view, it becomes a personal attack.

As for how it is possible to have a discussion or debate without it becoming 'Personal' I would suggest that you take a look in any of the Fora, there are any number of examples for you.


As for Moderators only interfering when asked, we were asked to do this the day we became Moderators by the WebMaster. It is part of our responsibility to not only deal with problems that are brought to our attention, but also to deal with such problems before they reach that point.


----------



## YayGollum (Dec 27, 2007)

Debates and discussions are not entirely about differing personal views or taking stand for them. I enjoy jumping from one side of a debate to another, every now and then. Just as I might have one side that I agree with more than another but can argue either just to obtain entertainment, someone else might not really care about either side and merely state a bunch of facts to back one side up, chosen via a twirled coin. Whether a person especially cares about one side or another seems to matter less than having their beautifully formed ideas disected and beaten. Towards the beginning of a debate, humans accept that, but towards the end, they've gotten more attached. "No! My infant! Important to me for at least one reason!" I have noticed plenty of humans who don't take things personally, who never forget that it's just a fun little battle of wits.

Towards evil moderating types jumping in and atempting to stop offenses, yes, I understand the point of view. There are a bunch of people who are more entertained by insulting others, so they wouldn't want their fun stopped. There are some who prefer to employ insults strategically to weaken their opponents, and they don't enjoy having a familiar weapon removed. There are also those who prefer to be left alone, the type who are fans of dealing with their own problems, not being interfered with in any way, and the evil moderating types are just rudely jumping into someone else's business. But! Whether anyone is distressed enough to pathetically whine for help because they can't solve their own problems or not, it is my personal view that the job of the evil moderating types is to be horrible janitors. A debate dissolving into a shouting match is a mess that should be cleaned. Some enjoy playing in the mud. Others, who are nowhere near the mud, are quite disgusted by the very thought. Yay for not disgusting humans? 

Also,  what did that scary Gothmog edit? Creepy!


----------



## Gothmog (Dec 27, 2007)

Firawyn replaced my name in the quoted announcement. I simply put it back in.


----------



## greypilgrim (Dec 27, 2007)

Does the TTF have an ignore feature? Curiously, I've been here almost 6 years and don't know the answer to that. 

Debates can get heated - and in an emotive state, we are prone to reactionary (primitive) responses, not pro-actionary (a word I just made up) - we humans haven't evolved and advanced enough to leave behind our old instinctive traits. at least that's my take on it, but I'm no shrink or biologist. Just a sheepdog for the people. 

P.S.: I agree with all of your statements on the subject.


----------



## Firawyn (Dec 27, 2007)

@ Gothmog - I removed your name for two reasons. First, so to not make it sound like I was attacking you, and second to drive home the point that I was not simply making note of that incident. It is however your call to put it back.



> P.S.: I agree with all of your statements on the subject.



Whose statements _greypilgrim_? 




> As for Moderators only interfering when asked, we were asked to do this the day we became Moderators by the WebMaster. It is part of our responsibility to not only deal with problems that are brought to our attention, but also to deal with such problems before they reach that point.



So you're saying it's preventive actions. You assume that people will go "too far" and therefore stop it when they take a baby step out of your box. 

This is an issue for me. It's the same principle as when an American won't get into a cab with a Muslim because he's afraid of getting blown up. It's a prejudice. I know that probably sounds extreme, but it gets the picture across. People can't lock all the Muslims up because maybe a few of them have blown a few buildings up, and in that same respect, a moderator can't put a halt on a discussion because a member or two have gotten out of hand. Deal with the problem. (The singular Muslim, member, etc.) Leave the regular flow of the world (or forum) alone.


----------



## Gothmog (Dec 27, 2007)

> @ Gothmog - I removed your name for two reasons. First, so to not make it sound like I was attacking you, and second to drive home the point that I was not simply making note of that incident. It is however your call to put it back.


I did not and would not have taken it to be an attack on me as you were directly quoting my announcement in another thread. I considered it better to be fully accurate. (Also anyone who checked the 'Forum Leaders' would have been able to tell you who posted that announcement  )



> So you're saying it's preventive actions. You assume that people will go "too far" and therefore stop it when they take a baby step out of your box.
> 
> This is an issue for me. It's the same principle as when an American won't get into a cab with a Muslim because he's afraid of getting blown up. It's a prejudice. I know that probably sounds extreme, but it gets the picture across. People can't lock all the Muslims up because maybe a few of them have blown a few buildings up, and in that same respect, a moderator can't put a halt on a discussion because a member or two have gotten out of hand. Deal with the problem. (The singular Muslim, member, etc.) Leave the regular flow of the world (or forum) alone.


Yes it is preventitive action. I do not assume that people will go "too far", when I feel that the bounds have been oversteped I step in. This means that *In my opinion* someone has already 'gone too far'. If you feel that my decision is wrong then you are free to PM me and I will gladly explain my reasons.

It is far from being the same principle as the prejudice of which you speak. Moderators do not 'put a halt on a discussion because a member or two have gotten out of hand'. Had I done so the thread in question would have been locked or removed completely.

I did deal with the problem.

It is Not the place of the Moderators to Leave the regular flow of the forum alone. It is the place of the Moderators to Moderate according to the forum rules.


----------



## greypilgrim (Dec 27, 2007)

Firawyn said:


> Whose statements _greypilgrim_?



Greetings Firawyn!

I was referring to yours, YayGollum's, and Gothmog's statements.


----------



## Firawyn (Dec 28, 2007)

Gothmog said:


> Yes it is preventitive action. I do not assume that people will go "too far", when I feel that the bounds have been oversteped I step in. This means that *In my opinion* someone has already 'gone too far'. If you feel that my decision is wrong then you are free to PM me and I will gladly explain my reasons.



Hummm....Tempting. 



> It is far from being the same principle as the prejudice of which you speak. Moderators do not 'put a halt on a discussion because a member or two have gotten out of hand'. Had I done so the thread in question would have been locked or removed completely.



But that HAS been done before. *cough* Pre-Project Evil *cough* And now that not even PE is up we're back to that same place. How long, do you think, until members will get bold again, especially as we approach the making of the Hobbit and can expect a flow of new (and younger with no concept of respect) members? 



> I did deal with the problem.



All your 'dealing with the problems' I've seen is a band-aid on a cut that needs stitches. You're not fixing anything Gothmog, you're simply capping the pressure and, mark my words, you will see an explosion in time. 



> It is Not the place of the Moderators to Leave the regular flow of the forum alone. It is the place of the Moderators to Moderate according to the forum rules.



So moderate. Don't become a dictatorship with pawns.


----------



## Gothmog (Dec 28, 2007)

Firawyn said:


> Hummm....Tempting.


Why is this Tempting???




> But that HAS been done before. *cough* Pre-Project Evil *cough* And now that not even PE is up we're back to that same place. How long, do you think, until members will get bold again, especially as we approach the making of the Hobbit and can expect a flow of new (and younger with no concept of respect) members?


Yes it has been done before. I have indeed closed and removed threads myself. This has always been the last option I will take. I have usually found that early action prevents the closure of threads. As to how long? Do you think that allowing a very minor argument to grow into a full blown war before acting is a good idea?



> All your 'dealing with the problems' I've seen is a band-aid on a cut that needs stitches. You're not fixing anything Gothmog, you're simply capping the pressure and, mark my words, you will see an explosion in time.


Where is the cut that needs stitches?
And exactly how much of my 'dealing with the problems' have you seen?

So where is the pressure that I have been 'simply capping'?

Are you then going to be the source of this explosion?



> So moderate. Don't become a dictatorship with pawns.


I do.


> _8.	to reduce the excessiveness of; make less violent, severe, intense, or rigorous: to moderate the sharpness of one's words.
> 11.	to act as moderator; preside.
> _


I act as a moderator on this site I work to help keep the forum tidy and to reduce the excessiveness of problems that arise on the site.


----------



## YayGollum (Dec 28, 2007)

Hm. Mayhaps your band-aid and stitches analogy won't work for this, but how's about you state specific problems, then what you think the evil moderating types should do about them? So far, I have seen that the problem is that you predict that some humans will wish to write about banned topics, and that the natural flow of such ideas will become impossible to stop. Your solution seems to be to let anyone write about anything they want, and the evil moderating types should only move if there is a request. 

I see a few problems. People should read rules and know which topics are banned. If they don't read them (or even if they do) and start such things anyway, they are usually quite quickly informed. When banned topics pop up, I have noticed people starting them getting Private Message type things from evil moderators, threads getting warnings to keep the discussion of such topics as light as possible, or just getting rid of the thread along with the should-have-been-obvious-already-via-reading-the-rules information that such things are banned. It doesn't look like much of a problem, to myself. 

The problem that I foresee (and I don't even see it as much of a problem, since I don't take debates and discussions personally) is humans ranting about what should and shouldn't be banned. But then, I thought that that problem was solved via that scary Webmaster person showing up that one time and writing something along the lines of, "Stop that. No more discussion. I have written."  

Also, did you have some superly cool idea for solving such problems, Firawyn person? You wrote that the evil moderating types should leave things alone unless called upon, but that an explosion shall occur unless something is done. How is leaving things alone the same thing as stitching a wound?


----------



## Firawyn (Dec 30, 2007)

@ Gothmog - 

I said 'tempting', but choose not to PM you, because I know myself and I know that if this discussion left the public forum area, I would loose my cool and turn a discussion into a war. I do not wish to do that. This is exactly why I did not just PM you in the first place about my questions and concerns.

I think you would find that a gentle and less formal rebuke (for example - "Hey guys, I'm seeing some tempers flying, chill out.") is a better received than:


> OK. Personal attacks on this thread STOP NOW.
> 
> This is not a request.
> 
> Gothmog TTF SuperModerator!




Seriously, if you were in the middle of discussing something you were passionate about, which of the above would you take better? For my part, I'd rather the first.

Here's another analogy (I'm a writer, I love analogies): A dog has an electric training collar on - does he need to be electricuted in order for the master to get the point across, or is a little zap usually sufficient?



> Are you then going to be the source of this explosion?



I take this to mean that you already think I'm out of line. A fair enough question. Answer? I dearly hope not. I've been a member of TTF nearly 5 years now and have managed not to get in trouble of any sort (I hardly think my presence here is even noticed most of the time) and I'd like to keep it that way (not getting in trouble) .

Perhaps part of my reason for arguing this so hard is because I want to better understand what it is that makes a good moderator. I have aspirations to play that role myself at some point on a scale like TTF. (I'm already a moderator on a smaller forum, but there's minimal moderating to be done there)



@ YayGollum - 

I believe I answered your questions above, and if not, restate them and I'll give it another go.


----------



## Barliman Butterbur (Dec 30, 2007)

Firawyn said:


> I've often heard people look at debates (friendly and otherwise) and advise that one does not make it personal.
> 
> My question is: How is that even possible?



Answer: No personal attacks. Tell the truth. Be genuine. Stay civil. Maintain your own integrity. An answer with those qualities is infinitely more powerful than any other kind.

Barley


----------



## Gothmog (Dec 30, 2007)

Firawyn said:


> @ Gothmog -
> 
> Perhaps part of my reason for arguing this so hard is because I want to better understand what it is that makes a good moderator. I have aspirations to play that role myself at some point on a scale like TTF. (I'm already a moderator on a smaller forum, but there's minimal moderating to be done there)


I have put this part of your post first because, to me, this is the most important part of your answer and everything else will relate to this.

First, I too would like to better understand what it is that makes a good moderator.


> I said 'tempting', but choose not to PM you, because I know myself and I know that if this discussion left the public forum area, I would loose my cool and turn a discussion into a war. I do not wish to do that. This is exactly why I did not just PM you in the first place about my questions and concerns.


This was a mistake. If you wish to improve your ability as a Moderator being able to 'Take the disscussion off the public forum area" is very important as much work can and does get done where others cannot see. In fact most of the time it is necessary to be even calmer in PMs than it is in public. Had you PMed me and asked reasonably clearly why I chose to use a particular way to handle a situation I would have answered you as fully as I could.

I do not assume that because I am a TTF moderator that I have the right to interfere simply because I have the athority or power to do so. Nor do I consider myself to be infalable. The calm use of PMs can help minimise the inevitable errors.



> I think you would find that a gentle and less formal rebuke (for example - "Hey guys, I'm seeing some tempers flying, chill out.") is a better received than:
> 
> 
> > OK. Personal attacks on this thread STOP NOW.
> ...


I Think that you will find that if you look at all the times I have intervened in threads as a moderator, I use different methods according to what I see happening and who is involved. Sometimes a gentle humorus hint is enough, other times I feel that a shout will get the attention I want.



> I take this to mean that you already think I'm out of line. A fair enough question. Answer? I dearly hope not. I've been a member of TTF nearly 5 years now and have managed not to get in trouble of any sort (I hardly think my presence here is even noticed most of the time) and I'd like to keep it that way (not getting in trouble) .


No I do not think that you are already out of line. Had I thought that I would not be having this disscussion with you now. I asked that question in hopes of getting a response that would let me make sense of this thread.

I hope that I have answered your questions here. If you would like to talk more about this Please feel free to PM and I will answer any further points you would like to talk about.


----------

