[amalcon]

I don't mean to pick on you a bit here, but this feels like a good place to express something I've been having trouble with.

My parents raised me to do my best to neither take nor give offense. Most of my peers as a child were taught the same way. Obviously we're not Vulcans; We will sometimes inadvertently give offense, or respond emotionally to something that may have been meant innocuously. Yet so much of what I see in public discourse is reveling in both sides of that equation: deliberately trying to provoke emotional reactions from others, intentionally adhering to uncharitable interpretations of others' statements even after they have explained themselves, and celebrating the drama resulting from these things.

Civil discourse simply cannot function if this is a substantial part of pubic culture. There is no way to have a productive discussion if even one of the parties is deliberately provoking an emotional response. There is no way to have a productive discussion if even one of the parties is deliberately misinterpreting another in order to justify their own emotional response. Yet the dominant forms of public discourse these days include heavy doses of both of these things.

[f1refly]

I think it just looks like this, mostly becuase of twitter. I've never seen anyone in real live interpret a statement in the most offensive way imaginable and not accept correction nor explanation. The chilling effect is undeniably though.

[nitrogen]

I've never seen anyone in real live interpret a statement in the most offensive way imaginable and not accept correction nor explanation.

I have. I can't share details, but the event forever damaged the whole group's trust in one another because one person decided to interpret something in the most offensive way possible, and lashed out viciously at anyone who disagreed, or even agreed but not as strongly as they wanted.

[vixen99]

Pubic culture? Should that be flagged?

[amalcon]

Oops, that's not a great typo. It's too late to edit, though.