It just seems so weird to me, but first off, I always try to brown townyze something first before making any decisions, and I see so many people giving and getting flak from other members because of some action made out of emotion. At this point, before I continue, I would all readers to realize that I am not trying to single anyone out. This decision-making and convention method is just so foreign to me. If this is your method, well, that's your thing; I am not trying to lead you in any direction.
First off, I'd like to say a little bit about myself. I prefer to answer things logically and calmly and keep my emotions out of situations as much as possible. I am an emotional person; don't get me wrong. In my group of friends at school, I am probably the most outspoken person there- not in the obnoxious way, I keep my space. On this forum, as well as a few real-life examples, however, a short statement made in opposition, usually a simple maxim, is met by anger and frustration. I wonder how people are provoked by a simple truth or rule when it may be already stated.
A second personal rule to which I adhere is that I hate the action, not the person, if emotion does get involved, that is, if it stands against common knowledge and boundaries. When I point this out, people sometimes get frustrated with me, not my opposition. I don't just say "no," I say why not.
Anyone have any thoughts? Why are heavy evidence and proof met by so much flak directed towards the person that I am, rather than what I say, and often repeat?
