Would the Fluther lagoon run smoother if the questions were benign, beige, and did not ”stir the pot”?

It sounds like heaven. You know… really, really boring.

There is a difference between asking a question that you want to know the answer to and the discussion turns contentious and a question which someone asks just to stir the pot with a definite viewpoint and agenda.

The former is fine; the latter is not good.

Sounds really, really freaking D-U-L-L! Opinion questions are just that and everyone has an opinion,same as political, or religious, or sexual view points are going to be totally different from one an other and in those questions you can totally disagree but that doesn’t mean the other person is wrong.

Questions that are posted to intentionally stir the pot are wrong, but we all get sucked into them from time to time.

“A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for.”
—John Augustus Shedd

The lagoon might run smoother, but possibly only because everything in it would be dead. But as @marinelife notes, there is an important difference between asking a question that stirs the pot and asking a question to stir the pot. Disagreement and controversy are inevitable if we want to talk about anything important. Trolling and antagonism, however, need not be. As such, it is reasonable to request that askers be careful about how they ask their questions.

I answered this already, I think. If you are interested…
http://www.fluther.com/171841/what-does-stir-the-pot-mean/#quip2956200

Again?

Ugh! How boring. I wish more people would stir the pot.

@LornaLove I want to too, and I kind of used to, but it seems that I landed into trouble :p

Smoother? Perhaps. Fun or interesting? Nah.

Depends on if you have to clean up the mess.

It’s a question-and-answer site, isn’t it? That appears to be the format.
Or is it a “social” site? Some people, at least, seem to think that.

If we’re here to share information, then “stirring the pot” (that is, “trolling” to non-cowards) is counterproductive. Your dumb-ass opinions are not information and you should keep them to yourself.

If we’re here to socialize, then your dumb-ass opinions are content, and so are any trolling responses to same. Stir the pot and someone will piss in it. What’s the difference? Apparently it’s “stirring the pot” if someone agrees with you, and “trolling” if they do not.

Most of you are not the sort with whom I would choose to socialize. For the most part peoples’ opinions are not only stupid but also boring. I can easily predict what most of you will say on a given subject. The Web is clogged with boring “social” sites, and idiots can snipe at each other at any such. There’s also rather a glut of informational “Q&A” sites, dominated by Stack Exchange and its many variants.

Fluther is something different. It’s not Stack Exchange, and it’s not Yahoo Answers either. Social interactions are important here, so trolling (so sorry, “stirring the pot”) blows threads up into mounds of bullshit that readers have to either wade through or ignore (guess which one they will do? Think they will stick around after that?) and which result in piles of flags for the mods to deal with. Take up the mods’ time with deliberate bullshit, and they won’t have time to moderate the rest of the site. At that point, congratulations: you’ve successfully turned Fluther into Yahoo Answers.

@dappled_leaves (and the boring et al) It sounds like heaven. You know… really, really boring.
But no one would have much to argue about.

@marinelife There is a difference between asking a question that you want to know the answer to and the discussion turns contentious and a question which someone asks just to stir the pot with a definite viewpoint and agenda.
The former is fine; the latter is not good.
Where is the line between one and the other? I have seen questions directed at President Obama, Obamacare, Democrats, the wealthy 1%, liberals, etc. where the leaning of the question is so thick you can’t cut it with a diamond blade. One might think a question is a great thought invoking questions, and someone else will think it is trolling because they happen to be in a question and believe the OP is sneakily attacking them, instead of genuinely wanting to learn something, not intending to sneak attack anyone.

@SavoirFaire But as@marinelife notes, there is an important difference between asking a question that stirs the pot and asking a question to stir the pot.
Again, it begs to ask, where is the line? It is one thing to say ”Are lesbians who use a strap-on really just want a man but are afraid to admit it?”, and one that says ”Why can’t lesbians who use a strap-on just admit they really want a penis?”. Both questions deal with the same subject but come from different perspectives. However, a lesbian might see both as coming from the same place and that is an attack on their desire to sex up other women.

@josie I answered this already, I think. If you are interested…
I did, and thought it very spot on. I would have given it 10 GA if I could have.

@LornaLove Ugh! How boring. I wish more people would stir the pot.
I don’t think many share your enthusiasm on that, they would rather have all of their sandwiches with mayonnaise than horseradish.

@rexacoracofalipitorius If we’re here to share information, then “stirring the pot” (that is, “trolling” to non-cowards) is counterproductive. Your dumb-ass opinions are not information and you should keep them to yourself.
As you say, this is a Q&A site, so no one should be surprised if though questions come up. Instead of seeing it as some soapbox moment read the question and look at it as a call for information, and then use your comment to educate, not belittle, insult, or whine, then things would be a lot better overall. Some people just see though questions or comments as trolling because it goes against what they believe and they have no defense of it or rebuttal. A question in itself is not an opinion, if it is, one can usually tell; or that might just be me.

@Hypocrisy_Central There is no line. The distinction I drew has to do with intention, not wording. Trolling is a matter of asking a question with the intention of causing disruption or controversy. Trolls aim to upset and annoy. However, just because a question upsets or annoys someone does not mean it was an attempt at trolling.

The issue of wording is a separate issue, though one related to the problem of antagonism. Consider @josie, who consistently asks loaded questions for the purpose of pushing an agenda (and who has never once had a counterargument whenever I have pointed out what he was doing). Such questions don’t count as trolling in my opinion. What they are is simply logically impoverished (loaded questions being one type of logical fallacy).

But even if one does not have an agenda, their question could still be loaded due to ignorance or carelessness. Consider your own example: “Why can’t lesbians who use a strap-on just admit they really want a penis?” The question presupposes that lesbians who use strap-ons wish they had penises, which is both false and—more importantly—not something that should be just assumed for the purpose of the question (which is revealed by your alternate rendition, which does not include the presupposition).

Questions with objectionable presuppositions are loaded questions (by definition). Therefore, the question is itself objectionable in virtue of being fallacious. Even if it was not intended to express an opinion, it has done so—and in a way that is objectionable. It’s just a matter of simple logic. If you want to have an honest discussion, you must provide arguments for the claims that others are likely to dispute. If you presuppose them in asking your question, then you must be prepared for the discussion to veer wildly off-topic (since the first order of business would have to be challenging the question until we have something reasonable and non-fallacious to answer).

Note: I’m perfectly aware that @josie is not the only person who likes asking loaded questions to push an agenda around here. I’ve called others out on it, too. But as they are not participating on this thread, it would be bad form—and against the rules of Fluther—to name them.

^ Consider @josie, who consistently asks loaded questions for the purpose of pushing an agenda (and who has never once had a counterargument whenever I have pointed out what he was doing). Consider @josie, who consistently asks loaded questions for the purpose of pushing an agenda (and who has never once had a counterargument whenever I have pointed out what he was doing).
Guess I have not been following many of his questions to know of the “loadedness” of his questioins.

@SavoirFaire Could you remind me what my agenda is?

@josie It depends on the question. But you didn’t need me to tell you that.

This loaded question I missed, was that “stirring the pot” for the sake of shaking things up, or did it just shake things up because people did not like it?

@Hypocrisy_Central Like I said, the issue of loaded questions is separate from the issue of trolling. One can use loaded questions as a way of stirring the pot, but I don’t think that’s what those questions were trying to do. In fact, most jellies seem to ignore them—so they don’t actually shake things up at all.

@SavoirFaire Like I said, the issue of loaded questions is separate from the issue of trolling.
I guess there are some Flutheronians that doesn’t measure trolling questions from loaded questions from others. I have seen questions that make you go ”ummmm…….” attacked as trolling questions simply because it put a less than gushy spotlight on something the masses championed.