Chat about Novel Coronavirus - 2019-nCoV - COVID-19

Seriously, no fans of civil discourse in this thread?

Welcome to the internet.

Welcome to the internet.

Good point, well made.

I get that some people are beyond conversation and would be a waste of time to engage with but I also think that the majority of vaccine hesitant people are just missing a few key bits of knowledge that would help change their minds.

Good point, well made.

Textual, group conversations, with asynchronous reply times and a lack of social contact and history between participants.

This is not a fertile medium for civil discourse, I'm afraid.

I don't bemoan this fact, just note it. In the same way as noting that a Nokia 3310 speaker was not a good delivery mechanism for a high fidelity rendition of Blink 182 track, when set as a ringtone.

Know your audience, but also know your medium.

If this were an IRL, over a pint conversation between 2 or 3 humans, then I would have more empathy with Stonehedge's empathies.

NB - I am not claiming that internet conversations cannot ever be civil discourses. Just that they are much less conducive to being such.

Silence on internet = nods of agreement
Silence on internet = disinterest
Silence on internet = frustrated disagreement but cba to engage anymore

???

.

Another point, that VB often makes and makes well is that these conversations are as much, if not more, for the post-hoc readers than for the participants.

Which I suppose argues in favour of having a healthy mix of Greenhell ire and Stonehedge engagement and debate.

And maybe less mashton meta-conversation.

While all of that may be true, it's a long way from the default assumption many posters seem to have which is anyone with a divergent view is acting in bad faith

While all of that may be true, it's a long way from the default assumption many posters seem to have which is anyone with a divergent view is acting in bad faith

Thanks, you've explained my PoV better than I managed to.

I don't see "acting in bad faith". I see " are wrong".

But I take the point.

Can't wait to get my 2nd jab. Having it Thursday next week. I know its not a magical spell that will protect me but it probably makes it a bit less likely that I'll kill my Mum next time I hug her. Might even treat myself to a pint at some point.

I just find it odd (I know I shouldn't by now from experience) that the preferred response to someone who is wrong is derision rather than engagement.

Some of these same posters earlier in this thread were anti maskers and bashing those who were pro mask. The science and public opinion has changed and they are now pro mask and have changed their views but somehow don't believe others are capable of the same achievement.

vaccine hesitancy (from those that don't appear to have a legitimate reason to be) - it's kinda like driving while using a phone. sure you can find a million ways to rationalise it, but what you can't do is deny the danger it presents not only to yourself but, and this is super important, to those around you. It's frustrating as hell to even acknowledge these people exist never mind having to actually deal with their fuckery on here.

you engage all you like, i reserve the right to call these people out for being the dangerous, irresponsible, anti-social aresholes they clearly are.

you engage all you like, i reserve the right to call these people out for being the dangerous, irresponsible, anti-social aresholes they clearly are.

I suggest we come up with a new word to describe dismissing and insulting people because we disagree with their opinion but choose not to try to understand it or change it.

I suggest "Greenhelling"

Please see the dozens if not hundreds of pages full of civil discourse and understanding engagement just on this site. Mashton’s point about asynchronous replies is a good one, and I’m as guilty as anyone of rehashing the same point in the same thread; to assume and state that good faith efforts haven’t been made is inaccurate, ignores those same good faith efforts, and is bad faith in itself. But that’s the internet!

Speaking for myself, and possibly others, at this moment I have lost patience after countless hours reaching across the aisle, hoping to engage and understand instead of proselytise and shame, and having to debunk the same bunk over and over and over again. One party is not discoursing in good faith by not informing themselves and/or refusing to accept contradictory information when it’s presented to them. We keep having the same discussion.

The mNRA discussion is the only new argument I’ve seen in months, and it’s espoused almost 100% by the same cohort who have been clinging to their same tired other misinformation for months. Is there a single mentally competent adult who, based on civil discussions for over a year now, went from covid denier to covid accepter, to vaccine hesitant to vaccine proponent, and now is again vaccine hesitant due to new scientifically-founded concerns about mNRA? It’s definitely not the majority of people arguing against controls and vaccines.

I suggest we come up with a new word to describe dismissing and insulting people because we disagree with their opinion but choose not to try to understand it or change it.

Can you see through the irony from up on that high horse? You haven’t even enquired why they have that opinion but you’ve dismissed it and are now mocking Greenhell.

Catpissing, Shirley?

Have I got that right? Fucked if I can remember that far back...

🤷🤷🤷

Wasn't it catfood?

I guess that is the issue with threads that run for long periods of time, like you say you are tired of explaining it but for the new people that join to ask a question they aren't aware of that and lets be honest, no one starts reading a 905page thread from the beginning. I guess the only way around repetition is either stickys, FAQ's or copy pasta replies of where to go and look.

Is there a single mentally competent adult who, based on civil discussions for over a year now, went from covid denier to covid accepter, to vaccine hesitant to vaccine proponent, and now is again vaccine hesitant due to new scientifically-founded concerns about mNRA?

Probably only those that got very sick but I do think there is a large gap between those who don't believe in Covid to I am anxious about taking a vaccine with a new technology that was developed and approved in record time and the whole spectrum of beliefs in between

catfood?

you take that name out of your dirty whore mouth y'hear!

Heh

1 Attachment

Love ya GHell.