What is Douchebaggery?

[Elennsar]

It also becomes douchebag behavior when it is "You're an idiot." when the person saying it provides no reason to trust that it is based on something other than the neurotic thrill of hurting people buried deeply or not so deeply in the human psyche.

Someone who wants to communicate will say why they said whatever negative thing they said.

For instance, if we're playing a game together, and you say "You idiot! How could you overlook ____!", that's probably useful. It may be "rude", but you're trying to make a point, and saying "that was stupid" is for emphasis in a similar way to using oh, bold text. The point is the bit of stupidity you're calling to my attention, not the name calling.

If you walk into the room, or after watching the game without my notice say "You're an idiot!", that's entirely useless.

The former is to be encouraged. The latter is going in the other direction.

[EjoThims]

If you walk into the room, or after watching the game without my notice say "You're an idiot!", that's entirely useless.

Only if you're lazy and unable to be self-reflective at all.

Harsh, brutal, and insulting, sure; but unless there's no reason and no support after you've evaluated yourself and have seriously asked why instead of just sniping in return, it's not douchebag behavior.

The point is to make you aware that you are currently or have recently been being an idiot. And probably to laugh at you for it at the same time.

If my point was to instruct or educate or be constructive, then I would have offered constructive advice the first time. And I still may, if you prove you're willing to look constructively at your own stuff.

But for now, it's just to point out that you're being an idiot and without some changes to what you're doing, I'd be wasting my time trying to give you that advice.

[Elennsar]

No, only if I'm unable to tell what you're saying that about. Or do you honestly go about (offline) shouting at people "you're an idiot!" whenever they do anything that might resemble something stupid and expect them to comprehend what the hell you're talking about?

Harsh, brutal, insulting, and without any justification (or without any justification given, which is almost as bad) = douchebaggery.

It isn't "You need to work on this. Badly."

It is "I'm mocking you and I don't care what you think."

[EjoThims]

Or do you honestly go about (offline) shouting at people "you're an idiot!" whenever they do anything that might resemble something stupid and expect them to comprehend what the hell you're talking about?

Yes. Because I expect people to have the contextual intelligence to realize that if I don't mention something specifically, I am 99% talking about something they are currently doing or have just done.

And if they can't figure it out, I will gladly explain, provided they are able to do what I also expect of myself; reflect on what they have recently done or are doing, try to figure out why it's stupid, and then go "wtf? why so?" if they can't figure it out.

[Elennsar]

And of course, it is immediately obvious to anyone with any insight whatsoever as to what they did that could possibly have provoked that.

You are appearing to suggest that it is perfectly reasonabel and legitimate to go up to someone and shout "You idiot!" at them.

Not comment after something someone did that a reasonable person would understand went wrong...just go up to people and say "You idiot!" after they did anything that you could attack them over.

Specific example: Going up to people in the grocery store and saying "You idiot!" after they chose a particular brand of peanut butter.

Or peanut butter at all, for that matter. Or that particular store. Or who knows what, because there's no sign of where on earth that remark came from.

Now, if you say "You idiot!" if I dropped a jar, that would make considerably more sense, even if you don't say why, it is relatively clear what you are probably refering to.

Bold=edit.

[EjoThims]

even if you don't say why, it is relatively clear what you are probably refering to.

Exactly. And if it's not clear, you think about what it might have been, and then ask.

if that point, I just say "because you're a fucking idiot," then I'm being a douche.

If I go "because you're here." Then I'm not, even if that still doesn't clue you in. You think again, and then ask.

Repeat as above until you either realize that it's because the store next door offers the same shit at half the price or I actually tell you.

Just because I'm not being nice or even being rude doesn't make me a douche. Now, especially in a thread where you've asked for comments (or the invitation for them is implied, such as posting in the houserule forum), simply responded to me "No I'm not, go away." makes you the douche. If you were to instead, say "Wtf? What do you mean? I like this idea because X and Y and Z doesn't matter." then you are doing as you should and if I continue the conversationw ithout showing why you're an idiot, the douche is me.

[Elennsar]

No, then you say why, instead of expecting me to figure out "OH! Of course! It is so obvious!"

Assuming that someone's foolish mistake is always obvious to them is a little ridiculous. If it was obvious that X was a bad idea, unless I genuinely am an idiot (as in mentally deficient, not just rolling a natural 1 on an Int check, so to speak), I presumably wouldn't have done it.

As for "Go away..." if you're not interested in working on an idea, then you probably shouldn't be taking part in a thread discussing working on an idea.

Going into Robby's rebalancing threads and insisting that something like oh, Pendragon's trait system be added to the game  would be very bad.

Or going into a thread discussing limiting multiclassing insisting that multiclassing is a GOOD THING and that anyone who thinks otherwise is a control freak or the like.

You're welcome to say "I don't think this is a good idea." in any "what do you think" context, but you're not welcome to say "This is a bad idea and you suck." and attack the person.

[EjoThims]

No, then you say why, instead of expecting me to figure out "OH! Of course! It is so obvious!"

That would be helpful. There is a middle ground between helpful and douchey. And that is stating my observation. An observation doesn't need an explanation; but when the observation is also an insult, one should be given when asked for unless you want to be a douche.

As for "Go away..." if you're not interested in working on an idea, then you probably shouldn't be taking part in a thread discussing working on an idea.

Unless I'm just pointing out that it's a horrible idea. Like trying to put diapers on goldfish without the water making them too heavy. That's idiotic, and I really don't have to explain why to call you out on it.

"This is a bad idea and you suck." and attack the person.

The two are very, very different. It is quite easy to say "This is a terrible idea" and call someone an idiot for thinking it up without actually attacking the person. We can all be idiots from time to time. Just because we do stupid things occasionally doesn't mean we are stupid in general.

And that's my point, which you still cannot grasp.

Attacking someone's actions/ideas, so matter how rude, is generally not douchey unless you continue to do it with no support after the person has genuinely tried to bring those actions/ideas in line.

Attacking a person simply to attack them, independent of their ideas or actions, is always a douchey thing to do.

[Elennsar]

That would be helpful. There is a middle ground between helpful and douchey. And that is stating my observation. An observation doesn't need an explanation; but when the observation is also an insult, one should be given when asked for unless you want to be a douche.

I think we loosely agree here. Correct me if I am misreading:

If you say "You're an idiot.", you're obligated (if you don't want to be a douche) to make it clear why you're saying it. It is still my responsibility to get your point, but you need to make your point clearly.

Unless I'm just pointing out that it's a horrible idea. Like trying to put diapers on goldfish without the water making them too heavy. That's idiotic, and I really don't have to explain why to call you out on it.

However, you are obligated to point out that what I am doing is like putting diapers on goldfish if that is indeed your point. I have finite knowledge, so I may or may not recognize that what I am doing is essentially that. So if your goal is not to be a douche, you need to explain that this is the case. Whether or not you need to explain how it is like diapers on goldfish is another story. (Good metaphor, by the way.)

The two are very, very different. It is quite easy to say "This is a terrible idea" and call someone an idiot for thinking it up without actually attacking the person. We can all be idiots from time to time. Just because we do stupid things occasionally doesn't mean we are stupid in general.

And that's my point, which you still cannot grasp.

Attacking someone's actions/ideas, so matter how rude, is generally not douchey unless you continue to do it with no support after the person has genuinely tried to bring those actions/ideas in line.

Attacking a person simply to attack them, independent of their ideas or actions, is always a douchey thing to do.

Attacking someone's actions/ideas, especially if rude, is generally douchery when that person (the attacker) is not giving any reason for his/her insults, only insults.

Saying something is a terrible idea and calling the person an idiot is only valid if it is clear that the natural 1 is being mocked, rather than the individual. We all do stupid things. Saying that someone is a stupid person is not always a good way of saying that a particular idea is stupid.


Brief point:

Douchebaggery for purposes of this site is trying to make it so unpleasant that someone goes away, I would say/repeat.

Being extremely critical is not douchebaggery in and of itself. But criticism needs to be delivered carefully, if not necessarily politely, in order to avoid being an act of douchery. If I think that your house rule would make barbarians too strong or too weak, I should say that "it makes them unbalanced" first, not "you're totally ignorant and need to shut up and/or go away."

Bold=edit.

[Ubernoob]

Why shouldn't BG be exclusive?  Really.  Give me one reason we should accept everyone.

[Elennsar]

Well, if Meg and the other people paying for this site want to be exclusive, that's their right, but the rest of this site doesn't have that right.

Beyond that, group think tends to produce group suck. "All generalizations are false etc.", but that one holds up pretty well, as generalizations go.

[Omen of Peace]

I really dislike "you're an idiot"-style calling out. I realize many people don't care but - whether or not you think it's douchebaggery - what does it bring to a post, really ?

Compare post 1)
"You're an idiot.
<related (or not) arguments/thoughts/...>"

with post 2)
"<arguments/thoughts/...>"

The only advantage I see to post 1) is that it makes the poster feel better about himself.

[Elennsar]

That's pretty much it, I think. It doesn't help the other person, it doesn't help the site, it doesn't help the discussion...

It helps nothing but the insulter's own ego.

Stuffing your ego isn't douchebaggery, but it is not good behavior on a site where "a frank exchange of ideas" is valued...arrogant people rarely acknowledge any good ideas but their own or those of their "kind".

Even if they can tell good ideas from bad otherwise.

[EjoThims]

It helps nothing but the insulter's own ego.

I don't give two cents about my own ego. But I'm a firm believer that any education has to be done through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement.

I will call you an idiot for being an idiot, offer improvement advice if you seek it but can't figure it out on your own, and then pat your back when you make it better.

I hate the principle of solely trying to browbeat or punish people into performing (that's why the current education system in America does so poorly), and all the feel good idiots who never frown on a poor idea or put a fool in his place (like so often happened over at the WotC houserule sections; got jumped for any critique that didn't amount to 'this rocks') are just as bad.

[Elennsar]

I don't give two cents about my own ego. But I'm a firm believer that any education has to be done through a combination of positive and negative reinforcement.

I will call you an idiot for being an idiot, offer improvement advice if you seek it but can't figure it out on your own, and then pat your back when you make it better.

And this is a good thing. Point out that someone did something stupid, what the stupid thing is (either directly or not, sometimes its obvious, but assuming something is "obvious" is rarely reliable for some reason in this world), find out if they can figure out how it is stupid without help, offer help if necessary/possible, etc.

Good negative feedback is better than medicore positive feedback. Vastly better. But negative feedback has to be informative to be capable of producing anything.

[EjoThims]

Good negative feedback is better than medicore positive feedback. Vastly better. But negative feedback has to be informative to be capable of producing anything.

That's simply wrong.

Good negative feedback should be capable of being informative. But the initial evaluation of why you incurred the negative feedback is a wonderful learning opportunity and should be done by the person receiving the negative feedback, not just simply handed to them.

"What did you do wrong there?" is a much more effective learning tool them simply telling someone what they did wrong, even when it's phrased rudely.

[AfterCrescent]

"What did you do wrong there?" is a much more effective learning tool them simply telling someone what they did wrong, even when it's phrased rudely.

So True.

Also

Why shouldn't BG be exclusive?  Really.  Give me one reason we should accept everyone.

Because BG is open for anyone who wants/listens to the podcast and wants to post here. None of us are valid judges of that, so none of us can make the site 'exclusive.'

[Ubernoob]

Why shouldn't BG be exclusive?  Really.  Give me one reason we should accept everyone.

Because BG is open for anyone who wants/listens to the podcast and wants to post here. None of us are valid judges of that, so none of us can make the site 'exclusive.'

That's still exclusive.  Unless EVERYONE is welcome then the site is exclusive in some manner.

[Blade2718]

Near as I can tell, EVERYONE is welcome, though listeners get preferential treatment.

[PhoenixInferno]

Until there is a way to force forums members to listen to the podcasts, anyone is welcome to join the forums.