Things I'm thinking about and a question

[feuervogel]

Pursuant to a discussion I was told I'm not allowed to have in comments on someone else's facebook post because I'm "imposing my opinions in [their] space" and I "must" pursue it in my own space (see question below), I'm thinking about writing a post about the gross assumptions of economic and able-bodied privilege in the slow food movement. And, yes, for fuck's sake, I want fucking comments on it; it's not a fucking imposition to discuss something.

Also thinking about organizing all my ho-shit and planning stuff for Operation: Move to Berlin in a single post for future reference, rather than having a bunch of random shit bookmarked (or not bookmarked at all, leaving me to try to remember which terms I put in google to get the link I'm looking for).

Question: Is it "imposing your opinions in someone else's space" to comment disagreeing with an article they linked to, or a post they wrote? Is one obligated to comment on one's own facebook or LJ, rather than use the fucking convenient "comment here" button?

I have always believed that it is passive-aggressive sniping to, for example, write a post for the sole purpose of disagreeing with someone, even if you don't say "Person X says blah." You can twist their words, especially if you don't link back (because that person's journal is f-locked, or because 95% of your friends aren't friends with them on facebook, or whatever). If you sit back and don't engage someone directly, but passive-aggressively snipe them through posts similar to my first paragraph*, that's just not cool.

Aside from that, it results in a very disjointed "conversation," which some of the people who read LJ A but not LJ B (and both are locked) cannot participate in.

*which I did on purpose

Comments

[smarriveurr]

I tend to avoid having discussions with people on Facebook posts, but mainly because Facebook is a horrible medium for holding discussions. The lack of threaded comments alone is problematic, but the way that it limits posts to a paragraph out of the box makes holding intellectual discussions more unlikely still.

I think everyone has a right to a "safe space" in their blagoblogs, of whatever sort. It's sort of like free speech; you have to defend the free speech you don't like, or find icky, because speech people dislike or find icky is the only kind that needs protecting. Likewise, if I want friends to be able to shut down discussions that make them uncomfortable, I need to acknowledge that others can shut down discussions that might educate them. That's part of how I see it, anyway...

[feuervogel]

shift-enter lets you make paragraphs in nu-fb comments.

The idea of expanding the definition of safe space to include "making my blog a nice echo chamber where I don't have to hear anyone challenge my beliefs" makes my skin crawl. Then again, if you're the type of person who sees everything in black and white, all or nothing terms, a discussion of the nuances within the topic isn't going to be well-received.

There's always a few people who take a good idea to a completely illogical extreme.

[smarriveurr]

Oh, I know how to do multiple line FB comments. In the average FB post, though, I seem to be the only one who does. In most posts about issues of politics, privilege, etc, etc, I also seem to be the only one familiar with the shift key and the various fascinating dots and dashes we call "punctuation." My point isn't that it's not POSSIBLE to write a long post in FB, but rather that that's not at all what it's designed for. FB is designed to tell folks stuff. Really, it's designed to make folks AWARE of stuff. Not really to discuss it, or understand it. It's there primarily for "LOL YUO GAIZ CHECK THIS OUT". LJ and DW have a robust system for discussing a topic. FB is a way to update people about shit. Trying to use it for more than that is about as painful as trying to repurpose any other tool.

Likewise with safe spaces... if I acknowledge that no one should have to defend their reasonable conclusions in "their space", then I have to accept that people are going to demand not to have to defend unreasonable conclusions in "their space".

Ultimately, though, I've just come to accept that arguing anything that matters on Facebook is pigeon chess. I'll stay in my echo chamber, and they can stay in theirs. I may debate with posts by friends, but mostly I ignore any comments I disagree with. I know my friends are mostly reasonable people with whom I can discuss things I care about; this is not necessarily commutative to the people who fit their definition of "friend" for FB purposes.