Gameboy70
Member

Registered: Oct 1999
Location: Metro Station, Hollywood and Highland
Posts: 1018 |
quote: Originally posted by Toby
Some people tend to write in such a way that each sentence addresses a different subject all within the same paragraph (or sometimes even make one sentence address two or more subjects). In such a case, following up to an entire paragraph (or even on rare occasions a single sentence) would make my reply read as disjointed and chaotic to me.
I look for the main thrust of the paragraph, even if the writing within it is somewhat discursive, and respond to the general theme. Occasionally I'll split a paragraph when I think it's important, but I try to keep that to a minimum. I let a lot of stuff go that I could easily rebut, including entire posts (or entire threads), when I think it's insignificant in the scheme of things.
We draw the line at different places. I brought it up in the first place because it was relevant to quote formatting, not the substance of your debating style.
quote: WRT surgical strikes, I think others tend to interpret them as such far more often than such an intent actually exists. Unfortunately, I don't always have time to make my replies 'nicey-nice', so only a dry rendition sometimes has to suffice. If somebody wants to take that as an attack, that's their prerogative, but it's usually not.
Not what I meant. By "surgical strikes" I was referring to the finer granularity of your point-for-point replies to people's posts: you tend to rebut every sentence or two, where most VC members (like me) reply to paragraphs. I don't read your responses as attacks, and besides, I'd rather read a direct response than a cloyingly "nice" one.
|