Agreeing to disagree, even when you fully agree. Rule 1 of internet forum users...

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1still_waters
  • Start date Start date
  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
1

1still_waters

Guest
I'm convinced there is a major population of Internet forum users who follow a simple rule. That being...

I must never fully agree/approve/appreciate anything online or in Internet forums and blogs, even if I do fully agree/approve/appreciate said thing. I must find some tiny shade of nuance in something and point some amount of disapproval/disagreement at it, even if I am in full agreement/appreciation/approval of it.


Have you ever seen this type of person in forums or blog posts or whatever? It's as if they're on a mission to agree to disagree, even if they agree! There is something in their psyche that can't simply see something, state their agreement, and leave it at that!

Anyways, just an observation.
 
Yes, I agree!


No really, i do know what you're talking about and have seen it. If its bad enough I think that they are trying to troll.
 
Last edited:
I have to confess that i may be the person you describe :o

I dont agree competely with a person. Sometimes i agree with the half of things that a person say but disagree with the other half and thats why i post my half/half opinion, because i think that i may contribute with something else that has been already said in the thread.
But my intention is not to make feel bad anyone.

Or.....maybe...i just dont agree :D
 
Sometimes I disagree for the sake of argument. :) Most times, though, if I know the person is right, I'll agree. I am glad there is a 'like' option here now. Makes it easier to agree. :)

There has been times when others have disagreed with me boldly no matter how much truth and logic was presented. Quite frustrating. In that instance, I just had to decide to not look at that post again. Yup.
 
How can you possibly disagree...and fully agree...at the SAME time?

And Liz01...that's me too. I almost NEVER fully agree. So, if you don't want my acknowledged agreement...WITH its subtle little variants...then why ask?

Whoever said that great minds think ALIKE just made it up. No two people are exactly alike..it's that whole fingerprint thing. LOL.

images
 
Ya know Stilly, I tend to agree with the third phrase of the second part, but the second phrase of the first part I tend to disagree, yet at the same time the last phrase in the fourth part I have to vehemently disagree with because it is in complete incompatibility with the first section of the last phrase in the first part. :D:D
 
I agree to a degree, but I personally prefer to disagree to agree than to agree to disagree but maybe thats just me.
 
When I read posts by the gag @ a gnat/swallow a camel - nitpickers, I just think...It could be worse. I could be married to them.
This alone makes me smile. :D ;) If I find them reeeally annoying after a couple of posts, I just stop reading their posts. They're usually way too long anyway. :)

I don't feel the need to agree with everyone. I hope they don't feel the need to agree with me all the time. I think it's pretty cool that we don't all share a brain. That would be boring.

The only time it really bothers me is re: scriptural decisions that can be life changing or life/death matters. I often pray that they are seeking wise counsel where they live rather than online in those cases.
 
Jullianna said:
When I read posts by the gag @ a gnat/swallow a camel - nitpickers, I just think...It could be worse. I could be married to them.
This alone makes me smile. :D ;) If I find them reeeally annoying after a couple of posts, I just stop reading their posts. They're usually way too long anyway. :)
Click to expand...

But but but.....it's iron sharpening iron...Sure it may be sharpening with a wood chipper...or by swinging a chainsaw back and forth while blind folded...but surely it IS iron sharpening iron.:P
 
LOL! :p That iron sharpening iron thing has gotten as old as the heart scuba diving cliche, hasn't it?? I know it annoys you too! :)

Iron can only sharpen iron if it makes contact. Those folks aren't even listening to one another. They are just trying to see who can be the loudest and most annoying for the longest period of time. :)
 
Jullianna said:
LOL! :p That iron sharpening iron thing has gotten as old as the heart scuba diving cliche, hasn't it?? I know it annoys you too! :)

Iron can only sharpen iron if it makes contact. Those folks aren't even listening to one another. They are just trying to see who can be the loudest and most annoying for the longest period of time. :)
Click to expand...

I picture it as the Christian equivalent of gorillas beating their chest...

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u53q8J7GHg[/video]
 
Now you've done it :) Next time I heard that, I'm grabbing the mic and doing a Tarzan yell!!!! ;)
 
You do know the internet was created for the sole purpose of disagreeing with others right? The official rulebook of the internet (Interwebs Manual V1.5) rule 1.1.A is always valid and must be used at all times when replying to a post on the internet. Failure to follow rule 1.1.A will result in a loss of internet privileges, and the user will be placed on probation. For quick reference I copied the method to get your internet privileges back. Taken from Interwebs Manual V1.5 Section 12, Rule 12.2.B (page 156)

1) First offenders will have their internet usage suspended for thirty (30) days.

2) Repeat offenders will pay the Interwebs Manual committee $100, and have thier internet usage suspended for 60 days. (Extra $100 and 30 days for repeat offenses)


You have been warned.












:p
 
adekruif said:
You do know the internet was created for the sole purpose of disagreeing with others right? The official rulebook of the internet (Interwebs Manual V1.5) rule 1.1.A is always valid and must be used at all times when replying to a post on the internet. Failure to follow rule 1.1.A will result in a loss of internet privileges, and the user will be placed on probation. For quick reference I copied the method to get your internet privileges back. Taken from Interwebs Manual V1.5 Section 12, Rule 12.2.B (page 156)

1) First offenders will have their internet usage suspended for thirty (30) days.

2) Repeat offenders will pay the Interwebs Manual committee $100, and have thier internet usage suspended for 60 days. (Extra $100 and 30 days for repeat offenses)


You have been warned.


:p
Click to expand...

That manual is more strict than the law lol
 
Jullianna said:
When I read posts by the gag @ a gnat/swallow a camel - nitpickers, I just think...It could be worse. I could be married to them.
This alone makes me smile. :D ;) If I find them reeeally annoying after a couple of posts, I just stop reading their posts. They're usually way too long anyway. :)

I don't feel the need to agree with everyone. I hope they don't feel the need to agree with me all the time. I think it's pretty cool that we don't all share a brain. That would be boring.

The only time it really bothers me is re: scriptural decisions that can be life changing or life/death matters. I often pray that they are seeking wise counsel where they live rather than online in those cases.
Click to expand...

This almost made literally roll on the floor laughing my head off.
 
adekruif said:
You do know the internet was created for the sole purpose of disagreeing with others right? The official rulebook of the internet (Interwebs Manual V1.5) rule 1.1.A is always valid and must be used at all times when replying to a post on the internet. Failure to follow rule 1.1.A will result in a loss of internet privileges, and the user will be placed on probation. For quick reference I copied the method to get your internet privileges back. Taken from Interwebs Manual V1.5 Section 12, Rule 12.2.B (page 156)

1) First offenders will have their internet usage suspended for thirty (30) days.

2) Repeat offenders will pay the Interwebs Manual committee $100, and have thier internet usage suspended for 60 days. (Extra $100 and 30 days for repeat offenses)


You have been warned.




:p
Click to expand...


You know, I'm really going to have to disagree with the manual on this issue. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back