Hi there.
I'm assuming you're here because you either agreed with this sentiment, or the sentiment pissed you off. I don't have much to say to those in the former category. To those in the latter category, thank you for helping to illustrate my point. That headline up there...kind of a shitty lead off, ain't it? Doesn't leave much room for dialogue, attempts to pre-emptively block any and all dissent, and sets the stage for a combative exchange instead of a constructive one.
And yet, across multiple topics, on multiple boards, I see the repeated insistence that tone doesn't matter (particularly not in online dialogue).
As someone who tries to be a logical individual, this belief makes me want to take the decidedly illogical action of shoving my head into a brick wall until it either smashes the wall or collapses in on itself. This belief is completely antithetical to the concept of true, constructive dialogue. True, constructive dialogue is increasingly difficult to find on the internet, and is even harder to maintain in the face of various onslaughts such as stubbornness, adversarial attitudes, flat out trolling, and others.
Here's my main, overriding issue with Americans: we are some of the most illogical, dialogue-averse creatures on the face of the earth. If anyone would like to disagree with this statement, I genuinely would appreciate reading your reasoning. As of now? I'm calling it as I see it. We HATE objective fact. We HATE being challenged. We LOVE jumping whole hog into the rush of emotional response. We LOVE echo chambers (i.e. hearing viewpoints that validate our own, and/or the chorus of cheers that comes with stating ours to a group of like-minded individuals). And, above all, we bask (or wallow, in some cases) in our senses of personal pride.
Now, add in the veneer of anonymity (and, to be fair, the benefit of being able to construct one's words more deliberately through text as opposed to speech), and what you get is a bunch of overly-emotional, shamelessly proud, armored keyboard warriors prepared for the battle that is a conversation.
It is stupid on the face of it. Mind-numbingly, punishingly, depressingly stupid.
Now, full disclosure, I'm not immune to this. At all. I'm certainly part of the problem, though I have earnestly tried to course-correct and improve my conversational skills, particularly around "hot button" issues. I understand and accept that "hot button" issues are going to skew more toward the realm of emotion than the realm of logic. It is what it is.
It is NOT what it SHOULD be (IMO).
I do not care what your ideology is. Ditto skin color. Ditto political affiliation. Ditto "-ism" of choice. If you cannot manage to discuss matters of grave sociopolitical import without at least TRYING to remain logical, let alone cordial, then you are hobbling yourself before your sentence can finish passing your lips. Furthermore, if you present your point as an attack, then you aren't having a conversation. You aren't having a dialogue. You are, quite deliberately and irresponsibly, starting a fight.
A conversation should not be a fight. A challenge to a viewpoint or a question of clarification should not be seen an attack. What seems like someone "throwing the gauntlet down" can be deescalated with a simple question or civil redirect (unless you're dealing with a real asshole, in which case blocking/disregarding them isn't out of the question).
We, at least online, do not operate this way. We're primed and armed for the fight, and strictly for the rush and good feels that come from the fight (if we're being at all honest with ourselves), with little to no regard for message, endgame, or a constructive enterprise in any regard.
Sorry, rambling at this point. Suffice to say that the internet is unquestionably the most powerful communicative tool we have at our shared disposal. We are squandering that power on bullshit. Maybe, one day, we'll stop doing that.
/rant