No. Being overly hostile against smartphones because you don’t do much in your life is having a low-effort life. You’re basically saying soap is useless because you don’t shower.
I saw no hostility except from you toward OP. Don’t take it as a personal insult if someone isn’t into smartphones as much as you are. Let’s not treat attitudes towards phones as if they are attitudes towards the people who do or don’t use them.
Hostility doesn’t have to be rude, just antagonistic. OP is dismissing everybody’s valid points and just flat-out ignoring a bunch of them when it doesn’t suit his preconceived point of view. That’s literally the definition of antagonistic.
I guess it depends on how you take it, could be vice versa. I see a lot of posts that could be taken as other people dismissing OP’s valid points that don’t suit their preconceived points of view. Downvotes on most of OP’s posts that aren’t saying anything offensive, just expressing their POV.
Have we gotten to where everyone has to agree with the majority or they get piled on? Even if the opinions seem antagonistic to you, could that you be feeling personally attacked because you do like smartphones. They’re just opinions of phones, not opinions of people who use them. It just seems weird how strongly people are reacting to someone who hasn’t done anything wrong or insulted anyone, but is just not conforming to the norm.
Getting downvoted isn’t getting piled on, it just means that people disagree with your post and OP made several antagonistic posts; of course people are gonna disagree. You’re seeing violence where there is none.
OK, you thought their opinions were antagonistic and we may have different definitions of antagonistic. But read the thread. There are a lot of aggressively antagonistic posts telling OP they’re full of shit, lying, a troll, etc. Apparently they just couldn’t believe someone didn’t think their smartphone has made their life better, and attacked. Maybe I missed something, I didn’t see any posts from OP calling anyone names, accusing anyone of lying, or telling anyone they’re full of shit.
Those responses are not because OP doesn’t like smartphones, they’re because people correctly called out their disingenuous bullshit. Imagine I make a post saying I can’t think of a single way tractors have improved my life. People tell me all the ways tractors have improved everybody’s lives and I go “well, I buy my vegetables from the supermarket so tractors are still useless to me”. I’m basically announcing I’m not interested in having a good faith conversation and am just here to be antagonistic. People don’t like that.
For example, I am being overtly hostile to OP and not to you, even though you’re both arguing the same point. The difference is that you’re doing it in good faith.
No. Being overly hostile against smartphones because you don’t do much in your life is having a low-effort life. You’re basically saying soap is useless because you don’t shower.
Was i being hostile?
Yes.
I saw no hostility except from you toward OP. Don’t take it as a personal insult if someone isn’t into smartphones as much as you are. Let’s not treat attitudes towards phones as if they are attitudes towards the people who do or don’t use them.
Hostility doesn’t have to be rude, just antagonistic. OP is dismissing everybody’s valid points and just flat-out ignoring a bunch of them when it doesn’t suit his preconceived point of view. That’s literally the definition of antagonistic.
I guess it depends on how you take it, could be vice versa. I see a lot of posts that could be taken as other people dismissing OP’s valid points that don’t suit their preconceived points of view. Downvotes on most of OP’s posts that aren’t saying anything offensive, just expressing their POV.
Have we gotten to where everyone has to agree with the majority or they get piled on? Even if the opinions seem antagonistic to you, could that you be feeling personally attacked because you do like smartphones. They’re just opinions of phones, not opinions of people who use them. It just seems weird how strongly people are reacting to someone who hasn’t done anything wrong or insulted anyone, but is just not conforming to the norm.
Getting downvoted isn’t getting piled on, it just means that people disagree with your post and OP made several antagonistic posts; of course people are gonna disagree. You’re seeing violence where there is none.
OK, you thought their opinions were antagonistic and we may have different definitions of antagonistic. But read the thread. There are a lot of aggressively antagonistic posts telling OP they’re full of shit, lying, a troll, etc. Apparently they just couldn’t believe someone didn’t think their smartphone has made their life better, and attacked. Maybe I missed something, I didn’t see any posts from OP calling anyone names, accusing anyone of lying, or telling anyone they’re full of shit.
Those responses are not because OP doesn’t like smartphones, they’re because people correctly called out their disingenuous bullshit. Imagine I make a post saying I can’t think of a single way tractors have improved my life. People tell me all the ways tractors have improved everybody’s lives and I go “well, I buy my vegetables from the supermarket so tractors are still useless to me”. I’m basically announcing I’m not interested in having a good faith conversation and am just here to be antagonistic. People don’t like that.
For example, I am being overtly hostile to OP and not to you, even though you’re both arguing the same point. The difference is that you’re doing it in good faith.