<<Even when one does nothing more than criticise another’s claims, that person is still expressing a view of their own: that being that either they believe the other is wrong, or that they are sceptical of the other’s claims. This view of theirs could, in turn, be countered by providing sufficient evidence and/or reasoning for the opinion originally stated.

Sounds like a rather productive mode of discussion, to me.>>

Firstly if people took the above comment down to the dot point, I could argue this website address be changed to: www.onlineopinionthatisproductive.com.au

Secondly what is productive and taken into context regarding this website?

Definition of productive, at a basic level:

1. Doing or achieving a lot
2. Working hard and getting good results
3. Producing or able to produce something especially in large amounts
4. Causing or resulting in something

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/productive

A better option than a 'productive mode of discussion', is for people to have well defined position put on this page, and this includes well defined points if someone is to start a new discussion, leading to people wanting to put down a position of their own for example.

I know there are plenty who could create a well defined discussion, for the betterment of this website.

To put defined into perspective, in terms of a well defined position:

1. To determine or identify the essential qualities or meaning of

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/defined

So to those who choose not to put forward a well defined discussion topic on this page, it is clear this does create a very unproductive environment to discuss matters on this website, simply because a person may put forward a position, that isn't well defined. This is where those who don't put forward a new discussion point, have an important role to play.

Help fill the void!

Not_Now.Soon,

I made it abundantly clear for a few years there that I support marriage equality. Plenty of people on OLO (one individual in particular) tried countering the reasoning behind my support. They were fun times.

--

Not very easily, NathanJ.

<<… if people took the above comment down to the dot point, I could argue this website address be changed to: www.onlineopinionthatisproductive.com.au>>

Because at no point did I suggest that opinions had to be productive.

<<Secondly what is productive and taken into context regarding this website?>>

This question makes little sense, so I’ll assume you’re just asking what constitutes a productive discussion on OLO.

A productive discussion could simply be defined as one in which at least one participant learns of a new way of viewing something - even if they still don’t agree with it. This adheres to your fourth definition of ‘productive’.

<<I know there are plenty who could create a well defined discussion, for the betterment of this website.>>

Stating that one is sceptical of another’s claim is both well-defined and incites discussion. But I don't know what you mean exactly by a "well-defined discussion". There are plenty of discussions started on OLO that are not well-defined, and the first few responses are consequentially spent seeking clarification or testing the boundaries of what the OP is wanting to discuss.

If you don’t like people challenging your opinions, then don’t post them. But there is no rule on OLO that states that participants must start the occasional discussion thread. In my experience, the expectation that certain others start their own discussion threads on the odd occasion is only used as an ad hominem attack by people who have grown tired of having their arguments discredited:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=7795#240102

<<Sounds like a rather productive mode of discussion, to me.>>

Was this well defined as a point, something put very simplistically, something very general or a throw away line?

So how any initial point is put, is important. How a person then sees, reads, views and assesses the words put, will be defined by that individual.

So you don't have to suggest anything. A person's position or words put, that are not well defined or clear enough, will lead to statements or questions being put.

So is this productive in terms of any debate? Some of it yes, but a lot of it no, when one assesses the high levels of the same people putting a lot of new discussion topics on this website.

So with a lack of new opinion pieces from others, this often leaves people in an environment such as the following:

1 : to ask a question of or about
2 : to interrogate intensively : cross-examine
3 a : doubt, dispute
b : to subject to analysis : examine

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/question

This unfortunately leaves people who may wish to put forward a position, opinion or viewpoint in an environment full of excessive and petty questioning, with a limited focus on opinions, and a turning of this website into a de-facto courtroom.

<< In my experience, the expectation that certain others start their own discussion threads on the odd occasion is only used as an ad hominem attack by people who have grown tired of having their arguments discredited>>

That's your own spin on this topic and completely irrelevant here. So I'm making a judgement and ruling that one out of order.

For example Yuyutsu, only puts new discussion posts, on this page rarely, but ttbn puts forward a lot, leaving others who post no new discussion topics at all.

A new discussion post on this website, will not see the website crash or fall apart. Think about it.

To NathanJ. I still like your idea to have more people post discussions, but that isn't what I'm focused on here. Essentially what I'm seeing is that there are certian people who do nothing to show what they are for, but are ready on the keyboard to put someone else in their place. As well as argue about what they are against.

It reminds me of a meme I saw. Saying
"Arguing with a fool is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how well you argue and how well you play, the end is the same. The pigeon craps on the board and struts around like it won anyways."

Challenging and critizing isn't an issue if that's not all they do. If there is a point where they say what they are for and accept any challenges coming back at them then they are filling in the other half of the discussion that they usually put so much effort to tare down.

Filling the void is more then just ripping a new one into another. That should be the rarity is ever at all. Not the norm and only piece of conversation one contributes.

To AJ.

Good to hear what you are in support of. I fully expected you to pass this small challenge. (I actually expect everyone to be able to pass this small test. But surprisingly it's apparently more difficult then I assumed.).

As I said to NathanJ the challenges aren't the issue if that's not the only thing they contribute to any discussion.

For anyone interested. This is how easy it is to answer the topic challenge.

•I believe ...
-In God
-That trust initially isn't earned it's given freely, then can be grown or taken away depending on the other person.
-That habits are a good thing if they help people behave the way they want to be, as well as to provide structure to a person's life. For the same reasons traditions can be good and serve the same purpose.
-That all people have a bit of good and evil in them, but we all reap what we sow.

•I support...
-Adoption
-Young parents holding on to their children even though it'll be harder.
-Test what you know or others know, but give it a chance to pass before discarding.
-The Olympics
-Living within your means instead of accruing debt (even student debt).

•I am fond of...
-Board games, video games, friendly competitions, soccer, pingpong.
-Science fiction, crime/detective shows, history, and shows that say how something is made, or how it's done.
-My wife, and both of our families.
-Dogs, cats, birds, fish, .... Most animals.
-The things that make people smile.

ttbn,
I don't think I've humiliated anyone on the forum ever. Usually I let the egotistical fools dig their own holes, but sometimes I'll give them a nudge to start digging as well.

Sometimes people continue to stand behind flawed logic but will continue to defend their egos because I said something which makes them look and feel stupid.

NathanJ

It's "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."

"Don't interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake" also comes to mind.