Between The Lines

[OzyWho]

If you compare the act of responding to a written/said text directly versus responding to the thought process that went behind it - what differences do you see? In terms of benefits and proper use.
Which do you prefer and when?
Do you agree that the latter is mostly only found in FM's?

I myself think that in any social interactions, the latter would tense up people while the former would give them a sigh of relief. But I believe people do the latter regardless?

You'd think that only the former is what you need to construct arguments in debates, yet I think on TV debates I see the latter often. Especially when lacking the knowledge for direct talk. Is that even a debate at that point?


I'm not sure if it's this topic related, but what 3rd option (if) causes this sort of misunderstanding?

Spoiler : Quotes :

bro you can't complain about site toxicity and then be a dick to ppl for their religious beliefs. It wouldn't matter if the dude advocated sharia law and stoning adulturers. He's still just some guy on the internet and winning an argument won't dEstRoY rEliGioN. Have you never heard of embodying the change you want to see?

-1

Nah you aren't going to blame me for how your friends behave here.

Your post is a little ambiguous, but no I'm not trying to suggest you're responsible for site toxicity. Not even half of it. That would be ridiculous.

Sarcasm?

He pointed out your hypocrisy, explaining reasonably how a certain behavior is part of the problem.
He never claimed you to be the only one at fault, that'd be ridiculous.