That's generally how internet arguments work.

That's the unfortunate nature of the Brony beast.

It's a whole new meaning to "herd mentality".

oh god i'm so sorry, the pun was too perfect

That's the unfortunate nature of the Brony beast.It's a whole new meaning to "herd mentality".oh god i'm so sorry, the pun was too perfect

LOL

Xaer, at least in that case back there, I think maybe you were a little too controversial and seemed genuinely angry and upset from the get-go. I was cool just discussing the maybe and maybe-not with you, I hope that didn't make you upset. But I did see how some people filtered in and got all "haters gonna hate" on you when really, they should've just left it alone. While you do have valid points (I didn't know about Hasbro's construction line before you told me), the way you spoke just invited an argument. And people are always gonna bite on that kind of thing. The message of MLP and the fans is to love and tolerate, but instead of loving and tolerating the people who don't like it, they get after said people who wander into their view and criticize. Fans of other things do that, and it sucks. But I would say, maybe try a calmer approach, speaking less in absolutes, and you might get a healthy debate instead of a hating fest.

Though for anything involving bronies, I can't even recommend crossing into that territory without a lot of careful measures. I like MLP but I rarely stray into their discussion areas or fan-made content sites. It's just not my thing.

HH has it pretty well. I'd really say that it doesn't matter much what your argument is about (be it where ponies belong or what-have-you)--but how it's about it [/ebert]. In any discussion, one side or another is practically bound to be demonstrably right or wrong, and if you can't support your ideas without falling back on cyclical arguments based on what is supposedly basic truth, you're not going to go far.

Take that "Next Generation of Kids" topic. One side was really wrong based on both fact and opinion, so they weren't taken very seriously, and people fell on them like dogs on a bone. The question was never whether they should have posted--they had every right to! However, people on the less reasonable side would have greatly benefited from backing up their arguments with fact and more than hearsay and opinion. The quality (or lack thereof) of their points was what hurt them--not the quantity of posters on either side.

You can win any debate as long as you make the right points. If you're correct, winning shouldn't be a matter of whether people trample you with their posts; it should be a function of your ability to defend and explain yourself.

There are great arguments to be made for and against! the project on CUUSOO (and really anything), and that alone defines whether a brigade will correct you.

In other words, don't worry about which debates you pick to participate in--just as long as they're based on good arguments. How>what. Always.

[...]Xaer, at least in that case back there, I think maybe you were a little too controversial and seemed genuinely angry and upset from the get-go.[...]

Yeah, I'll definitely agree there. The week's been kinda rough, and, while I'm not going to pretend that's an excuse, it's most likely the reason I was so peeved at the topic. Just releasing my pent-up irritation at a handy target.

Sorry you've been having a bad week. It always sucks when that unconscious anger manifests itself--I'm sure we can all agree there.