There is a discussion about using VR (Rift or Vive) with BMS in this thread on the BMS forums.

I'm currently in a discussion with a member called Wizard which is quickly going into the toilet. However, the topic itself is not what I'm concerned about but rather my ability to follow a train of thought and present an argument... would somebody be kind enough to give it a read and tell me if I'm missing something? Am I getting my point across? Am I not seeing his points? Or is it him that's refusing to see mine?

This isn't about Wizard at all or even the topic itself; let me just clarify that. I'm just worried that I may not be able to follow an argument or present my case.

Thanks!

You were arguing against the guys favourite hobby horse.

Since you do not in his camp he sees you as the enemy. In a way he is even right, He lobbies for VR, You lobby against it but if it would magically appear in F4 he�d gain something and you would loose nothing.

And as alwys, this is the internet and�pointless, The BMS devs are going to do wat they want to do and not what users tell them to do.

This reminds me of the time I went onto a Tiler's trade forum to ask whether Plasterboard should be sealed and if so what with, prior to tiling, or whether the seal would affect the adhesive properties or not.
Difference of opinion soon degraded into insults, contributors denigrating each other's work and was locked after threats of physical violence. I never did get an answer to my enquiry.

I've noticed that people will selectively address some of what you post and ignore other parts and will then argue themselves in circles. In other words, they don't address what you said but rather what they think you said/wanted you to have said so they can justify their response.

You can tell them over and over "that's not what I'm saying" but they don't care, because they KNOW what you were trying to say (the voices in their head told them I guess) and they will ignore your clarifications and protestations.

Also, some people can't believe that you can agree with them, at least in part, but think they suck at arguing. If I say your reasons suck, it doesn't mean I disagree with you, it means your reasons suck. I do not accept someone's opinion IF they give faulty facts as proof. Yet they won't refine their justifications, they will double down and usually counter with further irrelevancies.

Say you don't like The Rolling Stones because you don't like the music? That's fine. Lots of people like or don't like their music. Who can argue with that?

Say you don't like The Rolling Stones because Mick Jagger is a Satan worshipper and Keith Richards killed JFK? No, that's not fine. That's demonstrably false, so it does not suffice as reasoning. Telling me I'm a stupid Stones fanboi because I protest your assassin Satanist reasoning in response is also incorrect.

Saying you don't like The Rolling Stones because they were Brits who came to this country and took money away from good American musicians who got ignored, but that The Beatles were good, is likewise not fine. If your argument for why you dislike something matches the circumstances for something else you do like, it means your argument is crap.

You can't dislike A because of 1, 2, and 3 but then like B if 1, 2, and 3 also apply to it. That means either 1, 2, and 3 aren't actually important (because you like B regardless) or that you have no clue why you dislike A so you're pulling things from thin air without thinking the consequences of that through.
Either way, you're lousy at explaining yourself. I feel like debate should now be a required class in public school.



The Jedi Master

Welcome to the internet.

It ain't worth arguing with people most of the time. I do it for entertainment once in a while but if you're seriously bothered by an incident turn off the computer and go enjoy life for a few minutes

Remember, nothing will get accomplished and you'll never have to answer to a dillhole on the internet in person, so it's all just for the sport of it.

Jedi's post reminded me of this hilarious cartoon,

https://xkcd.com/386/

I too have largely given up on posting on the internets. I agree with Jedi.... I find I spend ages crafting a post and then people all read different things into it and it ends up in the toilet. or PWEC.
Mind you I'm like that in the flesh. I tend to argue myself into a corner and forget what my original point was. I would be crap as a politician or lawyer.
The internet also makes people say things that would earn them a punch in the chops in real life.

At least in person, you can get a feeling for when you're losing someone. They can interrupt you before you spend 20 minutes thinking out the rest that they will ignore because they HAD to respond after reading your first two sentences and then work themselves into a tizzy and never look at the rest.

Here, to post a sentence, wait for acknowledgement that it's understood, present the next one, rinse and repeat is far too tedious, but easy in person.

There are also facial expressions and other body language that make it clear how they feel without you having to read it, which depending on their own skill may be read by you totally wrong from how they actually feel.

Some people argue far better in person, some argue better with longer well thought-out missives, but if you have one of each type arguing together it's not going to go far, especially on the internet.



The Jedi Master

I used to be a major troll... hell, sometimes I think maybe I am the person who created Internet trolling. In any event, depression can make you into someone who gravitates toward negativity. And the Internet is a cesspool of negativity. And comment sections are where the saddest, most depressed, angriest people in this cesspool go to announce themselves.

These days I look at angry Internet people in a different way. I feel for them. They're hurting so much they can't defend their position without resorting to personal attacks. And the more you try to reason with them, the weaker they see your position and the more they feel they can finally win.

Finally win... because most of their life is all about losing.

And then there are the narcissists who just think they're super awesome and that you're an ant.

It can be difficult to figure out which one you're arguing with...

Good to see you are alive and kickin RB.

But I'm still jealous that you were better with a grenade launcher than me.

Hey, Nix.

I was once very good with a grenade launcher. It was scary how good I was... like I missed a calling. I think I've lost the touch, though. I bet you're better at it than me now.

Ice, the best thing to do in a situations like this is to bid them a heartfelt "putang ina mo" and move on.

Thanks for the replies guys. Yes, I do know it's the internet. Yes, I do know I can just leave it be. Yes, I do know trolls exist.

Let me just repeat my concerns --- do you guys think that I am seeing his point and responding to it correctly? Am I getting my points across properly? The topic or the venue is of no concern to me, what I am asking for is verification that I am doing the process correctly. You can even see me citing post numbers in my responses.

Panzer, I love that comic!!

Crane, I would love to... I've held off calling him all sorts of terms for "stupid" but I'm too civilized for that! Plus no use dragging his mom into this... hehehehe...

Hi - Ice,

I just read the some of the post of the discussion (diagonally I admit) and "even I" advise you that's probably the right time for you to drop/leave that discussion.
And I say "even I" because just like yourself I'm a person that likes to discuss things in detail and willing to fully debate when I'm right but at the same time willing to accept when wrong.

Your counter-argument where you said something like it was puzzling that those other guys at BMS forum find TrackIR not "necessary" to have an excellent flight sim experience but having a VR set is, is a very solid and spot on argument. However the fact that those guys are "unable" to realize that somehow proves that it's not worth to continue with that discussion..

Also and for what's worth I posted my opinion on the subject but I'm sure that it won't do anything (it was only to support you).

The ability to follow a train of thought and an argument is dependent on how similar the other person's train of thought and argument is to mine.

If they are not similar, I can't follow the argument.

Thanks for the support, ricnunes! Actually, I don't mind it if those guys can't accept that they're wrong and go off tangent. That's their problem. It's just that I've had quite a few of these and I was starting to question whether it's me that has lost the ability to put forward my points and arguments properly. I **will** be leaving that discussion soon; I've made and supported my points and I've reduced the other person into "flank attacks," he's now trying to attack me from the side as I think he's realized he can't go head-to-head anymore.

jack72, you may have a different train of thought but if I can explain things from my POV, then at least you'd see my side.... assuming you were a reasonable and honest fellow. Obviously, some aren't and do everything they can to resist acknowledging a valid point. And that's all it is, really. You're entitled to your opinion, sure, but I still seek to at least get you to acknowledge a different viewpoint.

If I'm honest, I only really engaged this guy because of his attitude to other posters in that thread. Like I said, I've made my point and defended it.

To be honest, ice, you were trolling in that thread.

Indeed, I probably was in the later parts. We have taken the thread to a not-very-good tangent. Again, however, my question was whether I was arguing appropriately or whether I've lost my ability to communicate my point. As ricunes said, I am the type of person who will argue, but will concede a point if I am proven wrong. Heck, sometimes, I even hope to be proven wrong (such as in DCS) so that I may return and enjoy parts of the hobby that I no longer do. Most of my real-life friends are familiar with this discussion:

Friend: Hey -Ice, this new game is awesome!
Me: Oh no, not another [insert game type here]! It'll be just like [insert another game type here] and it'll suck!
F: No, no, this one is different!
M: Does it have [broken mechanic]?
F: No, it has [better, improved mechanic]!
M: Yeah, but what about [broken issue]?
F: No, that's been dealt with by [fixing broken issue]!
M: What does it do about [product feature]
F: Come here, sit down, and I'll explain....



Anyway, it seems like he's decided to spit out his dummy now and raise the white flag of surrender so I guess I **have** made my points... or maybe I've just confused him so much he no longer knows how to respond! Haha!

As an aside, can anyone tell me what "hurt-narcissistic tone" means? I don't know that one.

Good post.

Threads like these makes me miss Frugalsworld where I had a least 4 accounts that would sometimes argue or agree just to make things interesting. lol