> I'm just wondering if you apply silence=agreement in the rest of your life
Oh it mostly applies to online interactions where I can tell what someone is trying to do by asking pointed questions and not acknowledging the response.
In that situation, it is almost 100% always because a good point was made and the other person has no way to respond to it, so they don't acknowledge it.
Even what you did just now was a similar type of pattern of behavior, where you ask a question meant to imply an attack on my personal relationships (thus the "in the rest of your life" statement) instead of acknowledging the content of the post.
The reason, of course, that it is much easy to switch things up to a personal attack or switch up the topic, so that you don't have to acknowledge correct responses.
Its an extremely common behavior in online conversations when someone else doesn't want to admit that the other person is correct.
> How important is winning perceived arguments
Whoa. There doesn't have to be any fighting here! You can just say that you agree with my statements. Thats not a fight! If you agree then you agree. Problem solved. There is no need to say that you lost anything if you just admit that you agree with me.
Although, that would be repeating yourself, because you already did agree with me effectively by not responding to the content of the post. That is the most common form of internet agreement and it is pretty much the only way that anyone can effectively get some to admit to agreement, like you just did.
Also, I didn't bring up winning or losing at all. Nobody has to lose if you are just in agreement with me.
Furthermore, I would say that 2 people coming to an agreement is a win for everyone, including you! So now that you brought up winning (I am not sure why you wouldn't want people to win. I want everyone to win, myself!), I am glad that we both get to win, although I don't think there was any "fight" to begin with.
Oh it mostly applies to online interactions where I can tell what someone is trying to do by asking pointed questions and not acknowledging the response.
In that situation, it is almost 100% always because a good point was made and the other person has no way to respond to it, so they don't acknowledge it.
Even what you did just now was a similar type of pattern of behavior, where you ask a question meant to imply an attack on my personal relationships (thus the "in the rest of your life" statement) instead of acknowledging the content of the post.
The reason, of course, that it is much easy to switch things up to a personal attack or switch up the topic, so that you don't have to acknowledge correct responses.
Its an extremely common behavior in online conversations when someone else doesn't want to admit that the other person is correct.
> How important is winning perceived arguments
Whoa. There doesn't have to be any fighting here! You can just say that you agree with my statements. Thats not a fight! If you agree then you agree. Problem solved. There is no need to say that you lost anything if you just admit that you agree with me.
Although, that would be repeating yourself, because you already did agree with me effectively by not responding to the content of the post. That is the most common form of internet agreement and it is pretty much the only way that anyone can effectively get some to admit to agreement, like you just did.
Also, I didn't bring up winning or losing at all. Nobody has to lose if you are just in agreement with me.
Furthermore, I would say that 2 people coming to an agreement is a win for everyone, including you! So now that you brought up winning (I am not sure why you wouldn't want people to win. I want everyone to win, myself!), I am glad that we both get to win, although I don't think there was any "fight" to begin with.