[chris_wot]

You literally said you’d tear people down in a pub when you were asked directly if you would treat someone in real life like that. There’s no speculation, and I’m not accusing you of anything, what I’m saying is based on your response.

[FortiDude]

I didn't literally say that and you are making things up. "Tearing down" someone has a strong and violent connotation, nothing to do with a few snarky comments.

[chris_wot]

I must have misunderstood something.

The OP wrote:

“Would you treat someone in real life like that?”

You responded:

“Yes, in a pub”

Your definition of snark seems very off. Snark is only ever used in a passive aggressive attempt to tear down another person. It is literally “critical or mocking comments made in an indirect or sarcastic way.”

Snark is never made for the edification of the other person, nor is it ever constructive.

[lzazz]

Society works on ridicule (and worse things) to ensure conformity. Nothing wrong with it.

[chris_wot]

There’s a huge amount wrong with that. It discourages participation because it means people are too scared they might make a mistake. Ridicule is designed to silence and prevent constructive dialog, and achieves nothing.

And I don’t see why conforming to society is always a great idea. Certain aspects of society needs people to conform, but most things are, when boiled down, not necessary.

[RamblingCTO]

I totally agree with that! We have enough evidence that ridicule etc. cause detrimental mental health effects.

[lzazz]

Ridicule is designed to prevent nails from sticking out, nothing more.

[RamblingCTO]

There is so much wrong with your statement.