A simple rule can help with this - rephrase all your assertions as questions. Questioning instead of asserting is inherently less argumentative, is less threatening and more likely to cause the other side to seriously consider your point instead of reacting defensively automatically. It also signals that you respect their opinion, making them more likely to respect yours. You accomplish almost all the same goals as asserting, but in a gentler, more mutually respectful and ultimately more effective way.
Are you sure about this? Do you really believe that merely restating an argument as a question will make it more friendly? How do you expect anyone else to believe that?
Just kidding! Please forgive me, my friend. I only wanted to illustrate in a hopefully humorous way that just changing an assertion to a question isn't an guaranteed fix.
You did mention some key points: Don't be argumentative or threatening. Be gentle, kind and respectful. Look for ways to make your communication effective instead of triggering defensive reactions. Respect others' opinions and recognize that you may not change their views.
I would add that when someone's comment triggers something in you (I mean any of us, not you specifically), that's a good time to step back, get away from the keyboard, and go do something completely different. And really do something different that occupies your mind in a different way - don't be fuming over the online conversation the whole time.
There is a chance that when you do get back to the conversation you will have a new perspective or will at least have calmed down. You may even find that you simply don't need to reply at all.
These are all matters of the heart, and even if asking questions instead of making assertions won't automatically fix everything, it may be one good place to start. As long as you don't ask questions like the ones in my first paragraph!
So I am sorry you got downvoted for your valuable comment. I hope some of the downvoters will reverse their votes.
Fwiw, I've been practicing this for years, it's effective, and I didn't just pull it out of my arse.
That said, it requires some nuance and subtext awareness to ensure it comes across as authentically asking, rather than coming across a know-it-all with delusions of being Socrates, or a trial lawyer in a courtroom drama.
And if you're a recognized expert on some factual topic and are correcting some incorrect statement of fact, just assert. However very few people meet that bar, and often argue vehemently for something that later turns out to be embarrassingly wrong. Better to have just started with questions instead, especially if the topic has any degree of complexity to it.
Oh, I agree completely, and I hope my lame attempt at humor wasn't too offensive.
I only meant it as a caution: it's all too easy to take one point out of a message ("ask questions instead of making assertions") and neglect the many other wonderful points you mentioned about being calm and respectful and all that.
And this excellent suggestion, which really works well if you're not an expert (= most of the time for most subjects for most people), has got downvoted. This is just the actions in HN which make me want to quit.
Don't be too discouraged. You may note that SkyMarshal's comment is back in the black, no doubt partly due to your and my upvotes. (Or at least it was, now it's gray again! <sigh>)
It often happens that a comment gets some initial downvotes and then bounces back. In some cases, this can even be from fat-fingering on a mobile device. I've accidentally downvoted comments more than a few times, so I always try to remember to check whether the header line changes to "unvote" or "undown".
> A simple rule can help with this - rephrase all your assertions as questions.
Don't you get pretty irritated when people do this? Don't you think just rephrasing an argument as a question is a pretty poor way of making your point? See what I did there?
If you know the domain then by all means assert (and explain why), but real expertise is rare so stray from that and you should be questioning.
Questioning, or leastwise buffering with caveats, indicates one's own limits are recognised, which I find a positive trait as it shows an open mind.
Also if I question something instead of stating it, it invites kinder answers from experts, and I feel less of a fool when said expert demonstrates I'm wrong.
Adding caveats is no way to get people to engage with you. You want to be as concise as possible. Due to the exact same tendency OP is trying to control, it's better to baldly assert something as confidently as possible. Then people can't resist responding and telling you when you're wrong.
Because you expected exactly those responses, it's easy to not get emotionally invested and it's a much more likely way to learn something.
Adding caveats and exceptions directly in the post usually just obfuscates your point and makes it harder for people to understand you. Sure, in a formal publication absolutely recognise the limitations of your argument. But when having an internet discussion, the time for elaborating and explaining limitations is either in an appendix or a follow-up post.
This doesn't apply to exceptions which are material to the main point you're trying to make though. Just things which, if asked "Give me the bottom line," you'd omit.
> Adding caveats is no way to get people to engage with you.
Shrug. Works for me.
> it's better to baldly assert something as confidently as possible
Oh Noooo! That misleads people who don't know better and pisses off experts who do, and makes you look stupid when you're told you're wrong - which in my case I don't mind but for some people public embarrassment will cause them to double down, driving them into a corner, igniting long chain posts based on ill feelings, and wasting everyone's time. Happened between me and another just 7 days ago - check my postings.
I know the bit about the best way to get a right answer online is to post a wrong one, but I don't find that so, in fact the opposite. Maybe it works best in toxic communities?
> Adding caveats and exceptions directly in the post usually just obfuscates your point
OP is asking for ways of being less argumentative. You're telling him to continue doing the same thing he's been doing. Not an invalid response, presuming you have new reasoning for why that he may not have considered, but neither are other suggestions of how he might do things differently.
My goal with that response was to demonstrate the effectiveness of the exact approach I suggest within that same comment. A "form enhances function" kind of thing. Compare this comment which has multiple replies with my other comment in this thread which is less direct: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20790765
No responses, as there's nothing particularly objectionable to bait people into replying. The simple fact is, online people will almost always only respond when they disagree.
For the purpose of actually getting people to engage in a discussion or when you want to learn something, I stand by the approach I said. I didn't say you had to be argumentative or negative when you do it.
