Is "Going against the grain" on a forum an act of bravery?

[The Curt Jester]

So recently it was brought up that taking the minority stance on this forum is brave, courageous, venture-into-Mordor heroic.  Given the recent trend toward starting polls, I thought I'd add another one so I don't derail the thread from which this topic sprang forth.

My own opinion on this is that there is very little courage whatsoever in taking an opinion that is at odds with most of the posters. Why?  The forum is anonymous.  While one may know or have met a few of the people here, the vast majority are unknown (and will remain so).  It's not like disagreeing is going to result in being beaten by a stick, drowned in a bathtub, or incarcerated in a cell full of baboons.  The worst that happens is that someone types a few pages of angrily-arranged symbols (otherwise known as letters) which might make the veins in your neck pop out.  And if that gets old, there's the magic trick of signing out from the forum, departing for a few hours, days, weeks, or light years and waiting for the waters to calm.  Odds are when you return, people will have moved on to new arguments (or new versions of old arguments) and your previous posts will have been forgotten.

Where is the bravery?

[Insanis]

So recently it was brought up that taking the minority stance on this forum is brave, courageous, venture-into-Mordor heroic.  Given the recent trend toward starting polls, I thought I'd add another one so I don't derail the thread from which this topic sprang forth.

Do people not use that function often? I started three and added one to a thread. That is not really a trend. That is someone using the obvious functions of the forum.

I've never been a trendsetter, and I don't want to be.

My own opinion on this is that there is very little courage whatsoever in taking an opinion that is at odds with most of the posters. Why?  The forum is anonymous.

Where is the bravery?

I wouldn't say it is bravery per se, but it should only be done if one is willing to accept the responses one will get. If one wants wholesome informative responses in one's "New replies to your posts", one should not go against the prevailing opinion.

However, in my view, forums are for discussions, so finding contrary opinions that are not in the realm of heresy or blasphemy is usually a good thing to help explore a topic.

For example, my recent thread about rosary centres was a reflection on my use of the same two types of centers for almost everything I make unless asked otherwise. The one I prefer is a medal from 1830, and a lot of Rosaries were made before then and other people would have different preferences.

I want to know what the majority of others think because I don't know.

(And I don't think anybody is going to find the Medal of the Immaculate Conception controversial.)

On the other hand, I don't want to deal with the sort of responses that starting a thread about my view on Vatican II might get.

(When I joined this forum, I had no intention of getting involved with Vatican II or Sede* debates and to focus on devotions, social interactions, and other things like that...little did I know that certain devotions had naysayers that I never suspected could exist in any Catholic.)

It is not brave in itself, but to be willing to deal with an onslaught of attacks, insults, and arguments against oneself is a form of "Internet bravery" if one is able to keep oneself composed in one's responses.

EDIT: I voted for the middle one with the lemon juice, because the last one seemed to equate having a different view as being automatically a willingness to argue, and I don't think that is true.

EDIT 2: Going against the forum is foolish usually (trolling). Pro-Windows posts on a Linux forum would be trolling. Going against common opinions within the forum, such as file system choices on the same Linux forum might be brave in a way if one is going to get some heat for it and one wants to test oneself in responding to it, but otherwise, it is just what discussion forums are for.

EDIT 3: EXT4 all the way. Down with Btrfs!

[maryslittlegarden]

You get points for the Eowyn/Nazgul reference in the poll

[Insanis]

You get points for the Eowyn/Nazgul reference in the poll

I deduct points for failing to mention Merry, who was most important than Eowyn in that confrontation. Merry was not a Man. He was a Hobbit. And he had a blade that was important in itself (given to him by Tom).

That is what was important.

[The Curt Jester]

You get points for the Eowyn/Nazgul reference in the poll

I deduct points for failing to mention Merry, who was most important than Eowyn in that confrontation. Merry was not a Man. He was a Hobbit. And he had a blade that was important in itself (given to him by Tom).

That is what was important.

That's why Merry was not included.  He had too much chance with an overpowered sword.

[Insanis]

You get points for the Eowyn/Nazgul reference in the poll

I deduct points for failing to mention Merry, who was most important than Eowyn in that confrontation. Merry was not a Man. He was a Hobbit. And he had a blade that was important in itself (given to him by Tom).

That is what was important.

That's why Merry was not included.  He had too much chance with an overpowered sword.

It was not overpowered. The Daggers of Westernesse were one of the few blades that could even touch him. Without that, no other weapon could be used.

The fact he had one and was able to use it is not being overpowered. He also did it at great risk to himself.

[Melkor]

It was kinda OP. It had powerful runes that were the bane of wraiths. Just sayin....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Insanis]

It was kinda OP. It had powerful runes that were the bane of wraiths. Just sayin....

Yes, but compared to other weapons, which were ineffective, and the fact it was hazardous to the wielder makes it less powerful than a normal sword/dagger fighting normal beings.

It requires extremely close proximity, and could only break a spell.

If it caused instant death, I agree, it would be over powered, but that is not what it did.

You have entities in your title.

[Melkor]

How is it hazardous to the one who wields it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Michael Wilson]

How is it hazardous to the one who wields it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Almost got his arm blown off by the dang thing!

[Insanis]

How is it hazardous to the one who wields it?

Don't get casual on me here.

Entities in the titles again.

[Melkor]

True, but if we consider the fact that the sword was probably not made to take on the likes of the Witch King, it seems to have been poor judgment on Merry's part (valiant but foolish).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Melkor]

Please explain the 'entities' in the title thing you keep saying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Insanis]

True, but if we consider the fact that the sword was probably not made to take on the likes of the Witch King, it seems to have been poor judgment on Merry's part (valiant but foolish).

Well, desperate judgement. When the chips are down, and the salsa has run out, you do what you can while you can. It wasn't like they had expectations of walking out alive after. What fear of death can their be when you expect it?

And I'd call it a dagger.

[Melkor]

It was a dagger to men, but a sword to Merry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk