[19Yzerman19]

Originally Posted by Major Major

To say that the Engelland deal is objectively terrible and therefore anyone who disagrees with that is a homer (idiot) is absurd. Argue that it is terrible assertively all you want, but that is not what you've done. You have used a style of rhetoric that is lazy, ineffective, and that makes you seem like a bit of a rod.

See, this, for example, is much more aggressive and personally insulting than anything I've said.

Incidentally, "homer" does not mean "idiot". It means someone is biased and their opinion is influenced by that bias to a point where it is not particularly credible.

Originally Posted by FurnaceFace

I feel there are lots of us who crave the days in the past where good hockey discussion was the norm and the internet fights were at a minimum. If more people took that "I'm sorry but I believe you're mistaken" approach I feel we'd have better discussions here and the varied opinions wouldn't be vilified.

This isn't the sense I get at all. Unconventional opinions are easily, and usually pretty snidely, dismissed.

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

2) The bolded is what is abrasive (didn't have to read the rest of your post).

I think you did, or there's very little chance that you would have gotten the point I was trying to make.

Calling someone 'wrong' makes someone else defensive. You feel this isn't enough. Why do you feel the need to tell someone they are wrong?

The need to call posters wrong (or worse!) is what causes many fights, not discussions. The sooner you learn that, the better off you will be on all boards, not to mention your personal life.

Because it's a discussion board with a quote function. The title of a thread sets a topic for discussion. People then say what they think about that. Then other people say what they think about what the first people thought, and so on. This is how a message board works. You really believe that the standard should be not to disagree with anyone?