Grown Tired of Online Debating

Over the past decade or so, I have become habitually accustomed to reading through long online discussion threads, but am getting headaches the last couple years from all of the debating. Most of these debates boil down to hairsplitting exercises. The debaters agree with each other 90% of the way, but will go back and forth for pages about the 10% disagreement. The other debates where they disagree 100% have become headache-inducing to me as well. Plus I think sarcasm has become overused as a way to make one's point online. What do you think? Can anyone relate? Are my headaches just a symptom of one who hates the free interchange of ideas?

This seems consistent with boredom, and who can blame you; Most of these debates boil down to hairsplitting exercises

But ... but ... the only hair I have is on my back ...

It's not just you. I find that most of the time when people are arguing with me online, it's over semantics.

You're probably getting headaches due to unrealistic expectations. The people on the Internet are not lawyers, and the Internet is not a court of law.

Your headaches will go away when you view the Internet as an online version of "The Jerry Springer Show."

apt comparison!

I'll just mention that these headaches happen even browsing through discussions that I have no part in. Even my eyeballs will start throbbing with pain before long. I used to like browsing through pages of it, but not any more. I mean, no one talks like that to one another in real life.

Sounds like a case of eye strain. How much time a day do you stare at the screen hun?

Ugh, YES. Barely-suppressed dismay incoming:
I used to check facebook multiple times a day. What can I say? I was a member when it was beta and/or just up, when it was still cultist and you could only sign up when you declared the college you were CURRENTLY going into. Ah, the days. ...And thus, professional procrastinator via it all through school. XD

Anyways, because of this, it took me a long while - too long - to realize every time that I finished taking a look at it recently, most of the time I'd end up super irritated or another unpleasant flavor. ...The psychology going around is that fb can depress people when they start comparing their lives to the unrealistic facades that so many project to each other. ...Nope - that is, not for me. ...It's everyone **tc*ing at everything and everyone so vehemently that they've beaten dead horses and revived them all so many times that there is now a horse-zombie invasion stampeding barbarously feral and unchecked across the Internet! (top ten weirdest metaphors I've used?!)

I also have a compulsive comment-reading habit for articles and such...just plain curiosity. It used to be for perusing unique opinions, ideas I hadn't considered, with the occasional naysayer/kid with a keyboard...Potential education. Now, everyone is hackles-up with bated breath, just aching for an opportunity to perpetrate a textual lashing. Convicting, hopelessly serious devil's advocates and arbitrarily politically-correcting super-analyzers abound, many wearing the guise of humanitarians watching out for the every-person via intense judgement and poor reading and comprehension skills. Some of my "favs" are when someone chews a user out for being judgmental, then negatively judges that user in the last sentence. ...If people over-analyzed words and phrases and reacted as disgustingly and nastily as they do online in "real" life, Earth would be little more than a radioactive gas giant by now.

I've had to give myself a personal rule to almost never cruise comments anymore on articles. I've stopped going to certain sites entirely, because the rabid users have actually battered the site into changing things for that one collective opinion. It's sad. Just this morning, I read an article no longer than 150 words featuring simply a massive fish that was caught and released by a guy. A living marvel. ...A single comment. Paraphrasing: "A**h***. It should be released." . . . . .

As a somewhat unrelated aside, and ironic considering it is nitpicky: As an anti-social and stereotypically geeky human that has lived inside of the internet as much as "irl" at this point (:P), I am driven hyperbolically insane that everyone uses "troll" incorrectly now, too. I guess this isn't really off topic now that I've gotten going here, if you stick with me til the end, I promise this nitpick has a reason... XD

"Troll" started out meaning someone, a user, that purposefully incites a reaction in a conversation, OR someone that sort of digitally pulls another user's leg, gets their goat; the latter, if done "correctly", being unbeknownst to the targeted user to start. These are meant to be pretty much harmless interactions. A practical joke where no one gets hurt - an "I see what you did there..." gag. A silly example would be: Q: "Has anyone read [this book?]" A: "Yes. It really got to me when John Doe dies in chapter nine." (...When John Doe doesn't actually die.), and the answerer keeps posting bogus info. ...In a way, it's almost a sideways tactic to weed out the flamers...("Flaming" is quite different from trolling, albeit only a marginally different topic.) Of course, there are bad apples - those trolls would be folks that might respond to that question "jokingly" with "Wow, you must be dumb, under twelve, or both if you like that book. Are you serious?" It's also a flame, if meant truly. This is also just being a meanie-head.

With this original (ahem, PROPER ) definition in mind, it is frustrating but apt that the trend is anyone with a genuine contrary opinion or argument than someone/the majority is labeled "troll." (All flamers are labeled trolls too - again, likely wrong.) "What? You don't agree with me? TROLL GTFO THE INTERNET, [debasing insult]!" After all, if someone doesn't agree, throwing them under a fairy-tale bridge fixes it, right? It's public school lunch tables made binary.

Argument and debate do not a conversation make.

I mentioned it briefly above, but COMPREHENSION is getting worse and worse. And, I'm sure a lot of it is not just "lack of comprehension" skills per se, but instead/also poor or too-fast reading. The amount of opinionated conflagration would drop instantly if people actually read, and really read what they were attacking so ferociously instead of snapping at trigger-words.

...I haven't used facebook for months.

I lolled when I read this. So true!

Usually the most I'll do is ask someone a question, but I don't participate in the discussions beyond that. Life's too short, and I've had enough drama in my own life.

Nowadays if someone tries to bate me into a debate after I post just a simple question or comment, I'll avoid responding because I know where it's heading. And I may just put them on my ignore list which can come in handy for peace of mind.

Up to several hours a day. I'm usually okay though.

I don't really debate online. I have noticed that some people don't seem to understand words they use a lot of the time. They might use a word thinking it means one thing and it actually means something else. That makes it hard to converse with certain people.

I wonder if there's a component of OCD for those who feel like they just have to read a full thread and discussion?

Just say no!

Believe in Him or not --- GOD LOVES YOU!

Want to share your Christian faith? Click HERE