Why Do Members Take Offense at Opinions?

[Obvio-0bvio]

It's quite fascinating how some individuals, with an abundance of free time, react so passionately to differing viewpoints. At the end of the day, each opinion mine included holds no ultimate weight. When I share my thoughts, it’s entirely within your rights to dismiss them. Yet, this forum seems to thrive on spirited debates, often escalating into unnecessary conflicts.

When someone voices their opinion, I believe we can engage in a respectful manner, sharing our agreement or disagreement without bias. There's really no need to launch into a full-scale attack on the individual who expressed a viewpoint. Personally, if I disagree, I either share my perspective graciously or simply choose to move on, accepting that the other person may be seeing things through a different lens.

Disagreement can be managed with the utmost professionalism and respect. It's perfectly normal for some comments to resonate with certain members while leaving others unmoved—this is the nature of diverse experiences. I base my feedback on my encounters, and it’s up to you to either take it or leave it as you see fit.

Just yesterday, I found myself at odds with someone’s opinion. However, I chose to respond with appreciation for their input on my initial comment, maintaining an atmosphere of respect throughout. Unfortunately, a few members seized the opportunity to nitpick minor details, diverting the discussion without ever having interacted with the service provider in question.

I’m not here to engage in arguments; I'm simply sharing my insights based on personal experiences. Yet, it seems there are those with too much time on their hands who are quick to debate without the relevant context. Couldn't we explore ways to collaborate instead of navigating toward contention? After all, we’re all part of this vibrant community, and a little unity might just enhance our discussions.

 

[Sylar]

Would you mind sharing said thread to provide context? Because "differing viewpoints" are great, but some stuff that I read on this board are blatant racism for example and should be called out.

 

[Obvio-0bvio]

In general, insinuating or explicitly stating, particularly with disparaging and condescending language, that a reviewer's negative experience with an SP is a problem that lies with them and them alone is contrary to trying to maintain an atmosphere of respect. There are some exceptions to this, such as when there are clear signs a reviewer is not making their review in good faith, obviously has an axe to grind, and has even revealed details in their own review that would explain to any logical individual why an experience did not turn out the way they were expecting (e.g., they refused to shower before FS or continued breaching a clearly communicated boundary). I completely agree that, as you so eloquently put it, "there's really no need to launch into a full-scale attack on the individual who expressed a viewpoint."

Attempts to delegitimize a respectful review made in good faith may discourage that reviewer and other potential reviewers from writing honest reviews in the future. This imposes a cost that is collectively borne by the users of the board, including those who deem it necessary to make editorial reviews of negative reviews. These users rely on the board to gather information and make informed decisions about which service providers to see and how to best spend their time and money. Therefore, I find it understandable that inflamed reactions to such attempts might arise.

Hey buddy, I want to start by expressing my gratitude for taking the time to share your thoughts on this topic. I truly appreciate the perspective you've provided regarding members' opinions. As you pointed out, criticizing a reviewer’s negative experience in a condescending manner ultimately undermines our mutual respect and challenging someone feedback can discourage honest sharing, which in turn diminishes the community's ability to make informed decisions.

My intention was never to undermine the reviewer’s honesty but to foster a respectful dialogue that uncovers the reasons behind their negative experience. After all, a poor review doesn't tell the whole story.I've actually found that many supposed "bad encounters" turned out to be some of my best experiences and quite the opposite of encounter for me.

Raising questions about someone's feedback is not an indication of disbelief; rather, it’s about seeking clarity to ensure that other members don't make the same mistakes with the same service provider. This is the essence of constructive discourse, and I wish it were approached with more understanding instead of defensiveness.

This forum is a space where we can challenge each other's views while maintaining respect, and that’s crucial for our growth as a community. What’s the purpose of sharing reviews if we can’t engage with them in a meaningful way? By discussing experiences even those that may seem négative,we can all learn and avoid similar pitfalls in the future.

I truly value your opinion and appreciate your honesty in this conversation.

 

[Sylar]

https://merb.cc/xenforo/threads/anastasia-vog-ex-elie-euphoria-ex-vog-sexpot.156157/

Thanks for the link. I also agree with your assessment of the situation.

 

[talkinghead]

In general, insinuating or explicitly stating, particularly with disparaging and condescending language, that a reviewer's negative experience with an SP is a problem that lies with them and them alone is contrary to trying to maintain an atmosphere of respect. There are some exceptions to this, such as when there are clear signs a reviewer is not making their review in good faith, obviously has an axe to grind, and has even revealed details in their own review that would explain to any logical individual why an experience did not turn out the way they were expecting (e.g., they refused to shower before FS or continued breaching a clearly communicated boundary). I completely agree that, as you so eloquently put it, "there's really no need to launch into a full-scale attack on the individual who expressed a viewpoint."

Attempts to delegitimize a respectful review made in good faith may discourage that reviewer and other potential reviewers from writing honest reviews in the future. This imposes a cost that is collectively borne by the users of the board, including those who deem it necessary to make editorial reviews of negative reviews. These users rely on the board to gather information and make informed decisions about which service providers to see and how to best spend their time and money. Therefore, I find it understandable that inflamed reactions to such attempts might arise.

Well written and spot on. Gasho.

 

[Flyingby]

Which opinion are you talking about?
You taking offense to a negative review about the sexpot and then challenging said negative review?
Or me challenging your opinion on the negative review?
P.s. i saw Anastasia.
Post in thread 'Anastasia @ Vog, ex-Elie @ Euphoria, ex-Vog ~ Sexpot!'
https://merb.cc/xenforo/threads/anastasia-vog-ex-elie-euphoria-ex-vog-sexpot.156157/post-1307386

 

[Obvio-0bvio]

Which opinion are you talking about?
You taking offense to a negative review about the sexpot and then challenging said negative review?
Or me challenging your opinion on the negative review?
P.s. i saw Anastasia.
Post in thread 'Anastasia @ Vog, ex-Elie @ Euphoria, ex-Vog ~ Sexpot!'
https://merb.cc/xenforo/threads/anastasia-vog-ex-elie-euphoria-ex-vog-sexpot.156157/post-1307386

I want to clarify that I did not take offense to your opinion, nor was I trying to challenge the reviewer. My intention was to gain a clearer understanding of the unfavorable experience so that other members can avoid making the same mistake. As I pointed out, questioning a review doesn't imply disbelief; rather, it demonstrates my desire to understand the reasons behind the negative encounter.

Are we in a forum where constructive dialogue is permitted, or are we bound by some sort of dictatorship where we must monitor our words? This is a platform for open discussion, and it's important to seek clarity regarding negative experiences, provided that it's done respectfully and thoughtfully.

One of the issues I see in this forum is that some members appear to focus on minor missteps, seizing the opportunity to argue rather than engage in meaningful exchange.

 

[urquell]

There's a lot of directions you can take this, based on the variety of topics on this board, so just for clarity's sake and notwithstanding the fact there are self promotion threads, political threads, etc etc, at its heart this is a review board. Since everyone's experience is subjective the reviews are all going to be somewhat different, or vastly different, at least if the reviews are done properly, there's bound to be points of discussion. Again, for simplicity's sake I'm going to boil the groups down to two within this space. The ones who are interested in providing and receiving information and the ones who are looking for validation of their review and viewpoint. Both sets of people provide information, but the former set of people are looking to take the aggregate of the information and to build a profile or an idea of the person or place being reviewed. The latter are trying to convince people that their viewpoint is the only reasonable viewpoint. People that are looking for validation of their viewpoint take offense with those who disagree and will argue as to why the contrary viewpoint is wrong. In this case the people looking for information will include the self-validators review into the information bank and ignore the rest. The self validator will ignore anything except that which supports his narrative, regardless of the preponderance of the information available. They thrive on conflict and may even be looking for it. Outisde of the reviews the lounge and the politics areas are just microcosms of the outside world, which polarized arguments are the norm, especially in politics. People who love politics love to argue about politics. If there were theology threads here it would be the same thing. The areas probably need to have different understandings as to what is both normal and acceptable, because engaged discussion and back and forth over a topic is not the same as reviews and review discussion.

I honestly don't give a shit about anything except reviews here. TBH there are better places to discuss social and political issues than here, with people who are generally more deeply involved and more knowledgeable, if not more reasonable, on the topic. lol. This is a monger review board and this is the best place to discuss monger issues, amongst those who are the most locally knowledgeable and expert. I always believe in consulting the experts and I'm interested in hearing everything that everybody has to say on the subject. What I don't get is why people insist on having conversations like Y saying "My favorite colour is blue" and X saying "No, you're wrong". Since a review is so subjective there really isn't any wrong or right, which doesn't mean you have to agree with it, but you do have to respect it. My bitch is never about what the review says, and people disagree with my reviews all the time, which bothers me not at all. What bothers me are badly written or uniformative reviews. If we could get those straightened out then I'd be a happy camper.

 

[Obvio-0bvio]

I appreciate your noble intentions and don't attribute malice to your pattern of leaving editorial comments behind negative reviews and questioning their originators. I'll also note that I appreciate your reviews on this board (you are undeniably a prolific contributor of them) and attempts to better the community.

While your intentions may be noble, the way you question reviewers can come across as interrogative and what you're strongly implying when you challenge them on the facts and circumstances of their negative experience is that they lack credibility and/or are in some way deserving of the experience they received. Good faith contributors to the board should not be treated this way if we hope to continue benefiting from their insights during our adventures in the Montreal SP scene. I understand the noble intent behind your questioning and I would personally indulge it but others may not and some may even be turned off from writing further reviews, which, again, ultimately hurts us all. Furthermore, the back-and-forth that ensues after your questioning is, more often than not, unproductive and a distraction from the purpose of the review thread.

When a reviewer is making a review in bad faith or is themselves personally responsible for the experience they received, it's either already apparent to any reasonable person reading the review or it's hidden and unlikely to be revealed through questioning by even the most talented, righteous MERB self-appointed investigator (sometimes an Agency or the SP herself will step in to enter new information into the record to clarify the situation). In the latter case, it's still just one review and prospective clients are going to weigh it against all the other ones available (in Anastasia's case, it's a negative review in an ocean of positive ones, including one I myself recently contributed). Yes, I'll grant that for a lightly reviewed SP, the impact of one negative review is greater and there is probably a recency bias at play where the most recent review can have a disproportionate influence over a decision. Even so, in most cases, for all the reasons I've pointed out in this post and my last one in the thread, questioning and challenging reviewers does more harm than good. Ultimately, we all recognize that reviews are subjective and treat them as such.

I, too, appreciate your opinions and honesty on this matter and I'm open to having my mind changed.

Thank you for your thoughtful kind words . I also recognize the concerns regarding the adverse effects of certain questioning styles I may approach . While clarity is undoubtedly important, your point about how these approaches can diminish the credibility of other reviewers is well taken. I also understand they may inadvertently discourage future contributions, which ultimately undermines the pool of shared knowledge and experiences that benefit all of us.

I appreciate your call for a more constructive dialogue that honors the subjective nature of reviews, and I wholeheartedly agree that we should strive to foster a supportive environment for all contributors. Moving forward, I will make an effort to be more direct in my inquiries rather than beating around the bush. Thank you again for your honesty; they’re truly valued!