New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 91 to 120 of 147
  1. - Top - End - #91
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Home

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yaksland View Post
    To me nice people are the best, imagine if the whole world will be nice to each other
    Quote Originally Posted by manojrao View Post
    Why you hate them
    Perhaps read the discussion in the thread? Or even the OP? There's some answers, and a clarification of what sort of behaviour the OP meant exactly.
    Last edited by CWater; 2016-12-28 at 10:11 AM.
    Alamryn Kven, a druid who tries very hard not to be useless.
    Celesta Halla, a fearless barbarian.
    Jheren Falconer, a drifter ranger.
    Rhenner Calami, a snarky medic with an untrustworthy memory.

    DMing Ljonarian Enigma: Imperial Affairs and The Pirate Dream: Sliced Heart

  2. - Top - End - #92
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    USA
    Gender
    Intersex

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by CWater View Post
    Perhaps read the discussion in the thread? Or even the OP? There's some answers, and a clarification of what sort of behaviour the OP meant exactly.
    Those are bots. They never read context, only the title. Technically not against the forum rules until they start advertising.

    Edit: which they've both done in a thread about espresso machines.
    Last edited by Siosilvar; 2016-12-28 at 10:58 AM.
    ze/zir | she/her

    Omnia Vincit Amor

  3. - Top - End - #93
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Home

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Siosilvar View Post
    Those are bots. They never read context, only the title. Technically not against the forum rules until they start advertising.

    Edit: which they've both done in a thread about espresso machines.
    Ah, I see. Their grammar structure has improved, though is still not spotless. Also, they really need to work on the input content
    Alamryn Kven, a druid who tries very hard not to be useless.
    Celesta Halla, a fearless barbarian.
    Jheren Falconer, a drifter ranger.
    Rhenner Calami, a snarky medic with an untrustworthy memory.

    DMing Ljonarian Enigma: Imperial Affairs and The Pirate Dream: Sliced Heart

  4. - Top - End - #94
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Solaris's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Neither here nor there
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peelee View Post
    Don't move to the South.
    I agree. The South seems to have a lot of that faux niceness/face politeness thing going on, with very little of the genuine empathy-driven niceness. Not exactly more or less than anywhere else, I suppose, but all the more galling for the pretenses put up about it.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    Anger is what you feel when you see inequality or injustice in the world. To view anger as just the by product of one of the seven deadly sins in a narrow minded view. Anger is Strength, Vitality. it gives you the power to fight the world and fix it for the better, it is honest. The only time you can truly tell what someone is feeling is when they get angry. As a former Actor I can fake cry but only my rage is genuine.
    Anger is weakness. When you get angry, you sacrifice your reason on the altar of emotion and permit others to dictate your reactions. There's no power in it, nothing worth respecting. The fact that people reveal what they really think while angry is not a good thing.
    And this is speaking as someone who is... prone to anger.

    Quote Originally Posted by pendell View Post
    Only if the anger serves a purpose and makes things better.

    Also, anger even in the service of a just cause has its limits. Does anyone ever listen to American talk radio? I used to listen to a fellow by the name of Mark Levin on my evening commute on my drive home. He spends three hours a night, every night, being angry, really angry, at all the injustices of the world.

    At some point, I just had enough. So I switched to audio books instead. Haven't looked back.
    I had a similar experience with Levin, too. The fact that he's so popular is a bit unnerving, given that he seems so furious all the time. It both makes the show hard to listen to (hey, I'm already prone to road rage, I don't need encouragement) and deadens the impact of the message if you're always angry.
    My latest homebrew: Majokko base class and Spellcaster Dilettante feats for D&D 3.5 and Races as Classes for PTU.

    Currently Playing
    Raiatari Eikibe - Ghostfoot's RHOD Righteous Resistance

  5. - Top - End - #95
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Solaris View Post
    Anger is weakness. When you get angry, you sacrifice your reason on the altar of emotion and permit others to dictate your reactions. There's no power in it, nothing worth respecting. The fact that people reveal what they really think while angry is not a good thing.
    And this is speaking as someone who is... prone to anger.
    While I am perfectly willing to go along with a general theme of "Emotions are Weakness" (and that "Weakness is Sin") if you have to sacrifice your reason by feeling something, Anger is second best (with Happiness being the best obviously). In most cases Anger is your best option. Sadness for example is just the "flight" of Fight or Flight with Anger being the fight and in a fight Anger is Power.

    If you have to feel something, if the world is forcing you to reacy and you can no longer just be happy, be Angry.

    Also, I see no reason why saying what you really think can ever be seen as a bad thing. Aren't we trying to live in a world that accepts everyone who they are and allows anyone to make the choices that they want to make? If you want to accomplish that you can't say to anyone "You shouldn't be saying what you really think". The sad fact is however that we still live in a rather opressive world where many people are told not to speak their mind because of the weakness, I mean feelings, of others. It is exactky those scenarios in which Anger Empowers. Surely anything that allowed you to break free feom the shackles of opression deserves respect?
    Remember: Offence is taken, not given



    Play-by-Post Characters:

    Sir Balduin of Buckwood (OOC | IC)
    High Priest Azrael (OOC | IC)

  6. - Top - End - #96
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Anger doesn't lead you to say what you "really think." It leads you to say the worst things you can think of. That's no more fundamentally honest than any other emotion. Anger can be honest, but that was no excuse with niceness, apparently, so it shouldn't be with anger either.

    And sadness is not a "flight" option. That would be fear.

    Also, Inside Out would like to have a word.
    Last edited by Lethologica; 2016-12-30 at 01:44 PM.

  7. - Top - End - #97
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    Oh, yes, having empathy and tact, that's the oppression worth getting angry about. :eyeroll:

    And sadness is not a "flight" option. That would be fear.

    Also, Inside Out would like to have a word.
    Someone says something that gets to you, you can either cry mope and retreat into your shell (flight) or you can get angry and fight back (fight)

    I also only ever hear the word 'empathy' thrown around as something required for the the people who get sad. If something happens and you cry like a child, you deserve empathy, but if you stand your ground and get angry all of a sudden you're the bad one. Or how about Empathy for the people with the other opinion? After all, you don't chose your thoughts. You think what you think until someone or something convinces you to think differently, you can also pretend to be like everyone else but if it doesn't feel right you are basically asking someone to deny themselves in the name of 'tact' and 'empathy'. That entire argument basically screams for the worlds 'family values' when it comes to denying yourself.

    Sure everything is better if you don't respond, if you don't let things get to you. I am sure we can all agree on that, the moment someone says something and you show that it does something you, you have already basically lost but at that moment we should extend the same amount of respect to the people who get Angry as we do to the people who get Sad.

    (Also, I would like to have a word with Inside Out. There are a lot of things they could have done better IMO)
    Remember: Offence is taken, not given



    Play-by-Post Characters:

    Sir Balduin of Buckwood (OOC | IC)
    High Priest Azrael (OOC | IC)

  8. - Top - End - #98
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    Someone says something that gets to you, you can either cry mope and retreat into your shell (flight) or you can get angry and fight back (fight)
    Or you could get angry and walk off. Or you could get sad and let them know about it. Or any number of other outcomes. Just because you prefer to think about certain patterns of behavior doesn't mean you can simply assume them for the sake of your argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    I also only ever hear the word 'empathy' thrown around as something required for the the people who get sad.
    Then you have a highly limited experience of hearing about empathy. For that matter, you apparently aren't interested in how I was actually using it (since edited). You just want empathy to mean pretense and oppression, because it's convenient for your position that getting angry and talking **** is the better road.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    Sure everything is better if you don't respond, if you don't let things get to you. I am sure we can all agree on that, the moment someone says something and you show that it does something you, you have already basically lost but at that moment we should extend the same amount of respect to the people who get Angry as we do to the people who get Sad.
    I extend equal respect to anger and sadness. I don't give anger preferential treatment over sadness, as you have claimed to do. And I certainly don't assume someone has "lost" by feeling or displaying emotions--that is only true in the paradigm of the provocateur, which is a **** world to live in.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    (Also, I would like to have a word with Inside Out. There are a lot of things they could have done better IMO)
    I'm sure Inside Out will give your opinion the consideration it deserves.

  9. - Top - End - #99
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    Then you have a highly limited experience of hearing about empathy. For that matter, you apparently aren't interested in how I was actually using it (since edited). You just want empathy to mean pretense and oppression, because it's convenient for your position that getting angry and talking **** is the better road.
    I honestly had not seen that you edited your post, but you were using it to suggest that someone should just keep quiet for the sake of 'empathy'. If my experience is limited that isn't for the lack of exposure, people always throw it around in such a regard when it comes to other peoples feelings, being sensitive and so forth. Empathy only ever seems to be extended to person getting upset and being sad, never to the person who said that. How about for once we try and think about why someone felt the need to say X, why someone got Angry rather then just condemn for that fact and blame simply because someone else got sad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    I extend equal respect to anger and sadness. I don't give anger preferential treatment over sadness, as you have claimed to do. And I certainly don't assume someone has "lost" by feeling or displaying emotions--that is only true in the paradigm of the provocateur, which is a **** world to live in.
    You may not claim that but many many people have claimed, some of those people in this very thread, that to show the feeling of anger means lost. I am not entirely sure what you mean with "The Paradigm of the Provocateur" but I will just assume you believe it to be my position, in which case it is not only true in that world because people from different 'worlds' have attacked the display of an emotion : Anger.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    I'm sure Inside Out will give your opinion the consideration it deserves.
    Of course, anyone critizing this master piece of a movie is obviously wrong, there absolutely cannot be anything wrong with it.
    Remember: Offence is taken, not given



    Play-by-Post Characters:

    Sir Balduin of Buckwood (OOC | IC)
    High Priest Azrael (OOC | IC)

  10. - Top - End - #100
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    SolithKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Imo, emotions are way, WAY to dependent on context to be ranked in a general best/worst manner. Anger can be a great reaction or the worst possible reaction, as can fear, sadness, disgust, happiness, pride and what have you, all depending on what caused it, when, and how. I think it's how you are able to acknowledge, process and act on that emotion that determines whether you can make progress.
    "One need not hope in order to undertake, nor succeed in order to persevere."

  11. - Top - End - #101
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    I honestly had not seen that you edited your post, but you were using it to suggest that someone should just keep quiet for the sake of 'empathy'.
    Nope. I never bought into such a false dichotomy between 'getting angry and speaking up' and 'remaining quiet out of empathy' to begin with.

    The aggressive disregard for others' feelings that you advocate can be done at any volume, can be done with or without anger. And what it leads to is more ignorant, hurtful, and harmful expression--any truth or freedom therein is entirely incidental.

    Anger, too, can occur at any volume. It can occur with or without empathy. It can lead to truer or freer expression--or to false and forced expression. As with any emotion.

    And empathy can happen at any volume, with or without anger. There is nothing about accounting for the emotions of others that is inherently dishonest or oppressive, any more than accounting for hearing the words or seeing the actions of others is dishonest or oppressive.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    If my experience is limited that isn't for the lack of exposure,
    Indeed not--it's for lack of perspective. If you take every citation of 'empathy' as having this meaning even when it's being used in some other way, as in this case, then of course that's all you'll experience. But that limitation is purely your own.

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    You may not claim that but many many people have claimed, some of those people in this very thread, that to show the feeling of anger means lost. I am not entirely sure what you mean with "The Paradigm of the Provocateur" but I will just assume you believe it to be my position, in which case it is not only true in that world because people from different 'worlds' have attacked the display of an emotion : Anger.
    That's cool, other people can be wrong too. Or they may be speaking to one aspect of anger rather than the whole kit and caboodle, which is the same thing you've been doing. "Anger is strength" isn't any more correct than "anger is weakness."

    Quote Originally Posted by A.A.King View Post
    Of course, anyone critizing this master piece of a movie is obviously wrong, there absolutely cannot be anything wrong with it.
    Oh, I know there are things wrong with it, but nothing that overturns its basic message about the value of emotions. Your thesis that emotions are weakness is flat wrong.

  12. - Top - End - #102
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Warsaw, Poland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    First of all, big thanks to everyone who contributed to this thread. Reading some of the posts was really fascinating - although some were kinda baffling to me.

    The thread is a bit too long for me to pick every specific post I'd like to respond to, so I'll try to rattle off whatever comes to my mind, hopefully in an organized way. If someone finds whatever I write useful, cool.

    In no particular order:

    1) The definition and meaning of "nice".

    There seems to be little consensus regarding what is meant by "being nice" and I am, in particular, curious as to what the OP means. OP, could you please provide examples of a person being nice and when it angers you? Because you explain what you mean, but I don't think I get it. Maybe several examples would make things a bit easier.

    2) Being your "true self".

    This was discussed in the context of anger vs other emotions. Alright... I have a problem with the whole idea of "being yourself". This is not to say that it's not possible to be a fake person, or to pretend to be someone you're not, or to stifle yourself in one way or another. This absolutely can happen, and is a bad thing. But I don't like the idea that at least some people in the thread seem to have that there's a binary "being yourself" vs "not being yourself". There are multiple ways to be oneself. You are a different person to different people, a different person on different days, a different person depending on the mood, circumstances, as well as your decisions in life.

    And you do not necessarily stay more true to yourself if you go with what your gut feeling or first instinct tells you. Doing things in a calculated way, against your emotion or basic drives or even first judgment is not necessarily contrary to being yourself. I think a bit too often, going with what is easy emotionally is mistaken for somehow being more genuine or true. This is not exactly true.

    Personal story time. I spent a lot of my teenage years being rude, crude and blunt, because I believed in "being myself" as well as in honesty. This was stupid, but it took me time to realise that. Now, if I go with my easiest, most "natural" reactions, I tend to be an *******. I reject the notion that I'm being more "me" when I don't practice the kind of mental discipline that lets me rein in some of the ideas and reactions that I may have. If I get angry at, say, my wife, my first instinct is to yell at her, but I'm no more "me" than when I take a deep breath, calm down, and don't let the situation devolve into an ugly fight that makes both me and her miserable for the next hours or days.

    And that goes for everything. I can't speak for everyone, but I can be very different, even in similar situations, on different days. The professional me at work, the long-winded me at Internet forums (hi! ;P), the depressed and mopey me that I sometimes becomes are all "me". And I have some control over what kind of me I want to be. Since the same person can behave in a lot of different ways, have a lot of various responses to the same situations, "being true to yourself" is a construct that is, in my opinion, effectively meaningless. No matter what I do, I'm "me". Putting on a facade is also "being me", it's part of being a thinking person. There is no elusive "true" version of me behind the various ways I act or behave. Putting on a social "face" is not necessarily not being oneself, that's called being an adult.

    3) Whether emotions are a strength or a weakness.

    First of all, yes, obviously being emotional can lead a person to making bad decisions. But the idea that reason is somehow opposite to being emotional, and that arriving at an action via reason vs via emotions is better... that's just not true. There are a few problems there.

    Firstly, pretty much all our decisions are informed by emotions. There is ample scientific evidence that we make a lot of decisions emotionally and devote a *lot* of mental capacity to rationalising what we ended up doing, after the fact. A lot, usually most, of our "rational" decisions are rationalisations. Humans are very good at analysing what we do, but our decisions are based on our experience and our wants, and not on cold analysis. If a person thinks they did something because they weighed all facets and all circumstances impartially, chances are they are lying to themselves.

    Secondly, emotions may lead to bad decisions, but they are an important tool in the decision-making process if used properly. After all, there's a reason we have emotions in the first place. They're a heuristic for analysing a situation simply and making decisive action, and a strong motivator to do things or to avoid things. The idea that reason without emotion is somehow perfect belongs to Spock from Star Trek: TOS and has little basis in how people actually work. In fact, people whose ability to process emotions or feel them (including due to brain damage) tend to experience crippling decision paralysis. In most situations in life, we pick one course of action and go. Without emotions, we are not equipped to act. When emotions are suppressed, in simple situations or complex, out come the mental spreadsheets, and we freeze. There is simply not enough time to analyse everything. Would you really want your brain to analyse everything about the situation when you're buying toothpaste? When that happens (again, in extreme situations like when the part of the brain responsible for processing emotions is malfunctioning), this simple decision can take literally hours to make.

    Of course, emotions can be destructive, but the remedy to that is to understand one's own emotions and understand their impact, not ignore them or suppress them or try to make every decision by reason alone.

    4) Anger being the most "real" emotion, or being a particularly useful emotion.

    A.A.King - could you please explain how you arrived at this conclusion? In my experience, this is simply not true. I'm very prone to anger, but I do not experience it as any more emotionally "real" than other emotions I feel. Nor do I find it to be more useful for life than other emotions.

    I know various people who react to situations in different ways. Both me and my wife have a strong tendency towards depressive moods as well as explosive and extreme anger. That motivates our actions, sometimes in a good way, often in a bad one. I know other people, who experience low-intensity, boiling, long-term anger. But I also know people who are relentlessly positive and rarely get upset at all - two of my best friends are like that. I know people who are driven by ambition, or anxiety, or joy, or fear, and anger is simply not something that registers as more than a brief blip on their radar. Some of those people are more driven, successful, genuine and focused than people I know who are angry often, strongly, and indiscriminately.

    Coming back to my earlier point - anger is useful, because it's an emotion developed as an evolutionary tool for overcoming obstacles. And it can work pretty well. But there are situations where being angry is counterproductive. Anger is good for getting things out of the way that stop us. It's good for creating ambition, or for reacting to something negative that needs to be fixed. But it's not very good at promoting cooperation. It's not very good for maintaining something stable and positive. It's terrible for setting long-term goals.

    Again, A.A.King, what's your evidence or reasoning for anger being either more useful, or more true, than any other emotion? For different people I've known, different emotions are the strongest and come to the front. I have seen literally nothing to indicate that anger as an emotion is in any way unique or special.

    5) Regarding nice people and why they are annoying.

    If we're talking about super-positive, always friendly, always having-good-things-to-say people, I think part of why they may be off-putting is that such people, without even meaning to imply it, make others feel like the negative things that matter to them are not that important. Part of being open to other people involves acknowledging that things may go wrong for them, and positivity is not a good response. This in turn may make it seem like the person is ignoring what deserves a reaction of shock, disgust, anger or sadness. And since most people tend to focus on the negative things in their lives, a person who does not express negative reactions seems like they don't care.

    That being said, it's important to note that a super-friendly, super-nice person would probably be willing to listen if told "you're being too nice, your round-the-clock positivity rubs me the wrong way". They are usually people who want to spread positive emotions around, and they are probably more likely to be happy than sad/angry/anxious/whatever, so they may or may not need to be TOLD that things are not so rosy for someone else.

    On the other hand - I like the attitude of the nice people that OP seems to hate so much (if I understand the meaning of "nice" correctly). Being nice is difficult, and many people are not nice when they should be. People for whom it's natural to act like that bring a lot of positive energy into the world. If they're being genuine, I see no harm in that. I am pretty sure they are better-received and overall more useful to those around them than I am, with my natural tendency to act like a rude *******. I try to be nice, not to keep a decorum or to pretend to be what I'm not, but simply because I really want others to feel genuinely good. I am pretty sure most people who act nice all the time have the same goal. So, again, if that bothers anyone, it might be a good idea to simply tell them that their behaviour is annoying and explain why. They might tone it down. They are very unlikely to be nice to spite someone.
    Last edited by oddtail; 2017-01-20 at 11:49 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #103
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Earth
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cozzer View Post
    Personally, I hate how the Internet manages to logic-twist even "being nice" into apparently being bad.
    Yeah, and in the "Friendly Banter" section of the site even. Nice people rule!
    The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.

  14. - Top - End - #104
    Colossus in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Viewing any sort of emotion as weakness is beyond absurd. Emotions are the very foundation of human existence and indeed our cognition. For instance, our memory system is inexorably linked to emotions; we recall things best in the same emotional state as where we first experienced them for instance (hence why the current procedures for acquiring eye witness testimony involve reproducing the scene in as much detail as possible). Similarly, what mental links and what thoughts we can acquire depends on our emotions. Emotions produce our drive and ability to act and do things. Emotions are also intrinsically linked to the production and appreciation of art in its infinite manifestations - something that's at the very core of life and could be argued to be the only real plausible purpose to our existence (essentially what Nietzsche concluded, anyways). And there's the whole mirror neuron thing; we broadcast and copy others' emotions so our own emotional state has a direct influence on everybody around us and it's at the very heart of every kind of social interaction. This, of course, makes influencing and accepting our own emotions the heart of such actions.

    Now then, whether one can rank emotions is a different matter. I don't even find the hard categorizations very useful; whenever I hear someone state their emotion in a clear, simple word, that just seems excessively simplified to me. I usually find myself experiencing a couple of different emotions at least at any given time at varying intensities and if I really delve into it, they're a lot more nuanced than those surface labels we try to communicate them with. I doubt I'm in any way special in this regard. Either way, every emotional extreme has a purpose and a function - and mostly they can be harnessed, experienced or opposed. Of course, given the state where our emotions developed vs. the current world and the abilities of our cognition, they often come up outside their intended function and in this case it comes back to consciously influencing our emotional state and finding the one to suit a given situation. I wouldn't say there's anything wrong with the emotions themselves or that we should seek to eliminate certain ones entirely, it's just that our body has certain triggers that will launch them at inopportune times (the most typical example being the fight-or-flight response in a stressful problemsolving scenario, such as a door jamming on you with you locked inside).

    Of course, controlling our emotions begins from physiology (hence why meditation generally begins from rhythmic breathing and ways to acquire a balanced physical state - decent, if superficial video on the topic), so to accomplish influencing our emotions we're really just influencing our body, which influences our emotions. But yeah, consciously harnessed emotions for problemsolving combined with free emotions at when needed (such as when empathizing with somebody - that's pretty much a requirement) is probably the ideal state.
    Campaign Journal: Uncovering the Lost World - A Player's Diary in Low-Magic D&D (Latest Update: 8.3.2014)
    Being Bane: A Guide to Barbarians Cracking Small Men - Ever Been Angry?! Then this is for you!
    SRD Averages - An aggregation of all the key stats of all the monster entries on SRD arranged by CR.

  15. - Top - End - #105
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    South East USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    I'd like to throw in my own worthless 2 cents. On 2 examples, actually.

    I have one friend; she's everyone's best friend, she's always trying to lift up others; she'd survive a zombie apocalypse just because she gets on the good side of basically everyone she meets.

    I have another friend. He's an extremely positive dude. Always wishing for the best, always proselyting to the highest heavens, always trying to wish well; just the most pleasant dude ever.

    And there's subtle differences in how each acts that makes one the kind of person who cultivates friendships (and crushes), and the other almost a parody of himself because he tries to sweat sunrises and rainbows, and I'd feel less bad for talking about him behind his back if he wasn't so damn insufferable about it.

    I feel like the difference is that one sees you are you are, and talks to you are you are. She's so intuitive when she gives advice, it actually -does- help, even despite her being the younger of the two, because she's legitimately that wise, and it's impossible to hate her inspite of it. She's still got things she dislikes, and she's got her buttons, but she's still just the best person to be around. Rather than just parroting what sounds like self-help lines and spouting biblical references and relying on the "Goodness of the human spirit" to lift you up, she speaks with a grounded, fairly realistic optimism that helps give her words weight.

    The other... I applaud him for trying. I -really- do. Naive and sheltered as he seems (despite having claimed to have gone through some ****), I'd prefer the world with more good people than bad people, so I'd sooner not hate him for it. At the same time, he's always speaking as if he knows you more than you yourself do, but without any of the wisdom to back it up to make his words have the same meaning. He farts puffy clouds and vomits rainbows, and comes off like a damn cartoon character. The type that nasty people on the internet intentionally do deconstructions off (if not outright images that destroy your childhood). It's annoying and irritating, and he can't take a ****ing hint about others getting turned off enough to stop giving a **** when he gets into "self-help" mode without any of the awareness needed to actually do any good. I'd feel bad about how I see him when his back's turned or how other coworkers talk about him if I didn't have to continuously drain him out with my music just to keep my mind on track without wanting to inject Death-Metal into my veins just to balance out the disgusting levels of positivity, bordering pretentiousness.

    I don't think someone can't be nice for the sake of being nice. I'm somewhere between Cynic and Optimist, maybe even a bit more on the Optimist side of things when my emotions aren't dragging me into Edgelord Territory. I think someone can be genuinely nice without it having any double-meaning. But a niceness without the intellectual depth to make it and the conversations behind/around it does occasionally come off as shallow, and subsequently less valuable because of it.

    On a random note, both are heavily devout and youthful members of their respective religious point of view, and the general color of their interactions are quite complementary. But the shape of the broadstrokes and the design of the detail of the paint produces -VASTY- different results.

    Not letting yourself be bogged down by the darkness of life: Commendable.
    Not being affected at all by the darkness of life as if it didn't exist: Inhuman and Offputting.
    Massive difference between the two.

    One last comment. I won't touch on the "anger" thing directly. I think everyone should be able to feel every emotion to varying degrees, if only to have the best chance of surviving and relating to our fellow man. But unrefined Anger is a damn curse. Not being able to control it or channel it just leaves you full of toxic fire, and more likely to hurt yourself or someone around you for its presence. Anger -can- be used for good, but by that point it's more "Determination" or the like than Anger.

    Or at least, that's my take on it. Probably different from other's, but while some of us may agree on things, no one's view can ever be exactly the same (unless we get clones in here, and even that branches into other questions I'm not qualified to answer but would make great scifi techno games/songs for. ).

  16. - Top - End - #106
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by INoKnowNames View Post
    I have another friend. He's an extremely positive dude. Always wishing for the best, always proselyting to the highest heavens, always trying to wish well; just the most pleasant dude ever.
    This is a good example. The positivity is there, there's a veneer of niceness, and then there's some really pushy behavior and underlying hostility.
    I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.

    I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that.
    -- ChubbyRain

    Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.

  17. - Top - End - #107
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Starbuck_II's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Enterprise, Alabama
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keltest View Post
    I think I would probably be leery of somebody who, in private and when asked directly, claimed not to be bothered by things like people standing in their way in the grocery store. Normal people get annoyed, so theyre either lying to me when they have no cause to, or don't think the same way I do and I cant understand them.
    No, if they have a visible reason then no. If they are just talking and blocking the way, when they could move to the side so traffic can get through, then sure, because they are being rude.
    I am bothered by rudeness. Being rude is bad manners.

    Manners are not this magic thing you do to be cool or look professional. They signify whether you are worthy of respect: respect is earned. We give free passes to elderly or pregnant people (well, women because few men get pregnant) because they have conditions, but respect is normally earned.
    Treat others with respect to let others know you should get it.

  18. - Top - End - #108
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    On the tip of my tongue

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    This is a good example. The positivity is there, there's a veneer of niceness, and then there's some really pushy behavior and underlying hostility.
    Hostility? I'm not reading any ill intent from the description, just a grating level of confident ignorance. Like, he's a Dunning-Kruger nice person. It's not really the same.

  19. - Top - End - #109
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    Hostility? I'm not reading any ill intent from the description, just a grating level of confident ignorance. Like, he's a Dunning-Kruger nice person. It's not really the same.
    Overtly proselytizing is pushy by nature, doing it at work is generally a social display of institutional power*. Constant advice giving when there's nothing to back it up (and where it can be safely assumed to be unasked for, given its tendency to be useless) is generally an attempt to show social or intellectual dominance. The constant dropping of self help slogans is a thinly veiled way of insinuating that people's problems are minor and only exist due to their failings, the constant dropping of bible verses a way of signaling that one perceives themselves as more moral* or literally holier than thou. All of this is subtle enough that it avoids the sort of reaction that outright saying "I'm better than you and I want you to know it" provokes.

    *This is regional, but IKnowNoNames lists their location as the U.S. south, so that's where I'm working off of here.
    I would really like to see a game made by Obryn, Kurald Galain, and Knaight from these forums.

    I'm not joking one bit. I would buy the hell out of that.
    -- ChubbyRain

    Current Design Project: Legacy, a game of masters and apprentices for two players and a GM.

  20. - Top - End - #110
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Most Goths I know are happy bloody bastards. Awesome, but too damned chipper on the best of days. Personally I'm in agreement to a large extent. "nice" people, as opposed to people who are genuinely content. Nice people are... annoying... to say the least. But in the end it's up to me to avoid them. I'm happy, not nice. I'm honest, not P.C. I stand up for what I believe in the face of overwhelming odds, and often that means not being nice but rather being forthright and steadfast. Nice doesn't mean good, it just means that the persons words don't always match their deeds. Just my opinion though.

  21. - Top - End - #111
    Troll in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    South East USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    This is a good example. The positivity is there, there's a veneer of niceness, and then there's some really pushy behavior and underlying hostility.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lethologica View Post
    Hostility? I'm not reading any ill intent from the description, just a grating level of confident ignorance. Like, he's a Dunning-Kruger nice person. It's not really the same.
    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    Overtly proselytizing is pushy by nature, doing it at work is generally a social display of institutional power*. Constant advice giving when there's nothing to back it up (and where it can be safely assumed to be unasked for, given its tendency to be useless) is generally an attempt to show social or intellectual dominance. The constant dropping of self help slogans is a thinly veiled way of insinuating that people's problems are minor and only exist due to their failings, the constant dropping of bible verses a way of signaling that one perceives themselves as more moral* or literally holier than thou. All of this is subtle enough that it avoids the sort of reaction that outright saying "I'm better than you and I want you to know it" provokes.

    *This is regional, but IKnowNoNames lists their location as the U.S. south, so that's where I'm working off of here.
    Hm.... you know, at first, I wouldn't have thought about it as something hostile, either, but after reading out the presented theory, I can't say it's not a possibility. I'd optimistically like to err on the side of "he's just that bad at taking a hint" (hell, he could have a few social problems of his own that might make it hard for him to percieve things; wouldn't be the first person I've met that does), but Knaight might have a fair point, if I'm speaking realistically.

    And yeah, I live in Georgia. At the very least where I live, Religion gets a lot of play in one's standing.

    Little bit of additional context with a few examples of how he acts and we differ:

    Despite the fact that I can produce walls of text the size of a Spirit Bomb, and that when I'm around friends or playing games or even acting the part of the goof ball it's near impossible for me to shut up, I think I'm at the very least socially challenged, and have been told by those who get to know me that I'm a lot shyer than I like to act. Comfort Zones and all. The learned can see the Sad Clown hiding behind the mask. He's recommended multiple times for me to come to his church on Sunday mornings and enjoy the non-standard service he does there, and that I'd be able to get out of my social anxieties by having more practice at doing so.

    I've tried very nicely to put him down gently, and maybe it might help me, but right now I have 0 intention of doing so. For one, I do my religious stuff on Saturday, and usually with my family. For another, I frequently spend my Sunday mornings with my family in cleaning the house, and Sunday evenings either making things up with friends, going to game competitions that do help me emotionally de-stress, or when the old church that started helping me out of my suicidal-ness had an afterschool program that was actually fun and interesting I volunteered there and helped guide the kids, if only as a sarcastic example of "what not to do" for them to learn off of. And lastly, if the service didn't differ from how most of the ones I've tried out were, it'd probably end up causing a decent rift between us that would make even working in his presence a emotional chore, given how the "standard" church service just leaves me bored at best and somehow hits my mental issues at worse, and since a good deal of my physical strength comes from my emotional drive I've good reason to stay a bit guarded, just so I can keep doing my job as well as I have.

    It took about 6 months for him to stop suggesting it near daily. I describe him to friends on the forum as "A low level Cleric underestimating a mid level Vampiric Barbarian". It really doesn't help that on certain social issues, I couldn't oppose his standing any harder, and that even on religious ideologies my personal views clash with that of the religion I'm apart of, let alone his.

    Second anecdote: I'm the kind of person with more than a few mental issues clunking about in my noggin'. And I sometimes cope with feelings inside of me by making (stupid) jokes at my own expense. Some people laugh, some people groan, some people get offended. He seems to fall in the later category. When I then go on to explain to that 3rd type of person that I'm not a masochist and that "beating myself up" has a bit of a purpose, some of them (including my Birthmother) take a bit but eventually do get it, and try to play along. He's still swearing that I shouldn't talk that way and that I need "[...] more love in [my] life, brotha! Keep talking like that and [I'd] start thinking it's true for real!" Funny, you'd think the therapist I go to would condemn my actions, rather than appreciate a coping mechanism to make light of my problems while still acknowledging them while I try to fix them, and just warn me to take the good with the bad and remember I've got all the time in the world to become comfortable with myself. Huh.

    What makes me think Knaight has a point is how much that sort of experience contrasts with how those, like the girl from my previous example, would respond. When I joke that I'm an obese sack of jello, she'd remind me that I'm strong enough to support her body with one arm and that I'd dropped a quarter of my body weight just a scant bit of time before I met her, and that I'm doing better than a decent chunk of the population physically. And I can't even argue with that, so I begrudgingly chuckle and smirk.

    Quote Originally Posted by Viathon View Post
    Most Goths I know are happy bloody bastards.
    Wait, what? It's been a minute since I've even -seen- a Goth in person, but I thought the stereotype was the reverse there!
    Last edited by INoKnowNames; 2017-01-27 at 08:53 AM.

  22. - Top - End - #112
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    vitaminbillwebb's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by NightDweller View Post
    #FalseStereotypes
    It's true enough unless you're a woman, not white, non-Christian, or LGBT. Then you have a rough time.

  23. - Top - End - #113
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Australia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    I can understand the OP. There's a type of "fake" niceness and genuine niceness. I'd claim I'm extremely good at body language in RL, and it constantly makes me rubbed-wrong by people I can tell aren't being honest with me such as salespeople and "fake" nice folks. It is extremely relieving to notice that someone is being honest in their behavior.

  24. - Top - End - #114
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Dr.Samurai's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    ICU, under a cherry tree.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    I don't know if "nice" is the best word to use here, but I think I get what the OP is referring to.

    And I think part of the reason it bothers people is because you feel you can't be honest with these people because they're probably not being honest with themselves.

    Whether they are or aren't, I'm not here to say. But that's the impression people get; you're maintaining that non-stop cheer/optimism through some sort of self-deception, and I have to participate in this delusion or burst the bubble.

    EDIT: The overly nice aspect is where some people think that by being overly nice, they are drawing a line of "politeness" that cannot be crossed. And this too comes across as dishonest. It's a protective measure to avoid discomfort or displeasure.
    Last edited by Dr.Samurai; 2017-02-10 at 04:34 PM.

  25. - Top - End - #115
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DrowGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Putting aside the ambiguity in the word 'nice', the below article cites a study that suggests that nice people are more likely to betray you, so maybe the OP is right:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/we...-to-betray-you

  26. - Top - End - #116
    Titan in the Playground
     
    golentan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bottom of a well

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liquor Box View Post
    Putting aside the ambiguity in the word 'nice', the below article cites a study that suggests that nice people are more likely to betray you, so maybe the OP is right:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/we...-to-betray-you
    I am shocked that people in a competitive game based on strategic elimination of rivals by the formation and breaking of alliances would use misleading social cues to attempt to disarm a victim prior to attacking. SHOCKED. Clearly all nice people are evil. EVILLLLLLL!!!
    Spoiler
    Show
    My motto: Repensum Est Canicula.

    Quote Originally Posted by turkishproverb View Post
    I am not getting into a shootout with Golentan. Too many gun-arms.
    Leiningen will win, even if he must lose in the attempt.

    Credit to Astrella for the new party avatar.

  27. - Top - End - #117
    Colossus in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Liquor Box View Post
    Putting aside the ambiguity in the word 'nice', the below article cites a study that suggests that nice people are more likely to betray you, so maybe the OP is right:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/we...-to-betray-you
    Well, that study doesn't seem to prove very much. Even the abstract states that "But remember, this study focused on a game that is centered around betrayal – it's really the only way to win." It makes sense that socially adept individuals use their social skills within the context of the game to their best ability to further their own chance at victory. Similar results would most certainly emerge when analyzing e.g. Werewolf, Risk, Battlestar Galactica or Mafioso or in general, games centered around manipulation. All this really tells us is that there's a plausible correlation between niceness and social expertise, and that socially adept individuals are like to have an advantage when it comes to games built around manipulation. Note that the study measures niceness through the expression of politeness - which in an online environment is easy to fake for personal gains.
    Campaign Journal: Uncovering the Lost World - A Player's Diary in Low-Magic D&D (Latest Update: 8.3.2014)
    Being Bane: A Guide to Barbarians Cracking Small Men - Ever Been Angry?! Then this is for you!
    SRD Averages - An aggregation of all the key stats of all the monster entries on SRD arranged by CR.

  28. - Top - End - #118
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DrowGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eldariel View Post
    Well, that study doesn't seem to prove very much. Even the abstract states that "But remember, this study focused on a game that is centered around betrayal – it's really the only way to win." It makes sense that socially adept individuals use their social skills within the context of the game to their best ability to further their own chance at victory. Similar results would most certainly emerge when analyzing e.g. Werewolf, Risk, Battlestar Galactica or Mafioso or in general, games centered around manipulation. All this really tells us is that there's a plausible correlation between niceness and social expertise, and that socially adept individuals are like to have an advantage when it comes to games built around manipulation. Note that the study measures niceness through the expression of politeness - which in an online environment is easy to fake for personal gains.
    Agreed it doesn't prove anything.

    But I do think it shows slightly more (in the context of the game at least) than your post suggests. It doesn't just suggest that people use their social skills to their advantage, it suggests that the people who use their social skills to portray 'niceness' to the fullest (or when they use them to the fullest) they are most likely to betray you. It's not just that more socially graceful people are nice all the time, but that people who are presently demonstrating the most social grace are the most likely to betray. Of course it is in the context of a game where betrayal is a big part (but betrayal's counterpart, trust, is an equally big part).

  29. - Top - End - #119
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DrowGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2016

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    Quote Originally Posted by golentan View Post
    I am shocked that people in a competitive game based on strategic elimination of rivals by the formation and breaking of alliances would use misleading social cues to attempt to disarm a victim prior to attacking. SHOCKED. Clearly all nice people are evil. EVILLLLLLL!!!
    Taking all the pejorative sarcasm out of your post we get:
    "In a game people use misleading social ques to disarm a victim prior to attacking them".

    You use the phrase "misleading social ques" as a synonym for what the article describes as 'nice', so even by your own post niceness in the game is more often than not a precursor for an evil act (attack/betrayal).

    The question is whether the same "niceness precedes evil" outcome can translate into real life. Difficult to study, so we have to rely on our anecdotal experience I suppose.

  30. - Top - End - #120
    Titan in the Playground
     
    golentan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Bottom of a well

    Default Re: I hate nice people.

    I'm just saying, in a game focused on betrayal at the exact moment for it to have greatest effect, the fact that someone who is already planning a betrayal might use flattery to distract from the moment of the strike is no more surprising than the fact that two people who know they are fighting to the death might elect to ignore Queensbury rules.

    There's an axiom I live by which has never yet served me wrong: The more powerful a tool is to use, the more powerful it is to abuse. It can be very concrete (as in the difference between your fingers and a screwdriver, or a screwdriver and a power drill) or very abstract (the trust of an acquaintance vs the trust of a lover), but the more powerful/versatile something is, the more harmful it is in the hands of someone with malice, and the uses it is put to are rarely if ever a commentary on the tool itself, but rather on the benevolence or malevolence or carelessness of its wielder.

    Your article refers to a game about social combat: people who are already determined "I will win and the rest of these chumps will lose." The fact that they employ deception, flattery, misleading information, game theory, and coercion both hard and soft is to be expected. The fact that they find kind words an easily abusable tool in those circumstances is no commentary on the evils of kindness, merely testament to its power in social groups. If you find yourself in a situation where you're genuinely worried about people stabbing you in the back (or, heck, even if you're just playing a game of Diplomacy and want to win), bear in mind that lesson and keep an eye out for flatterers, or sudden friends. But if you pass me in the street and I smile nod at you, I promise that it's not because I'm trying to steal your kidneys. When I attend my friends' birthday next week, the sum total of my ulterior motives for being friendly will be "I like their company and want to keep it around." And when I'm nice to the cashier at the grocery store, it's because I'm hopeful that their day will be at least half decent, with maybe a little help from their customers and coworkers.

    Unlike Diplomacy, life is not a zero sum game. Hell, most of the time literal diplomacy is not a zero sum game.
    Spoiler
    Show
    My motto: Repensum Est Canicula.

    Quote Originally Posted by turkishproverb View Post
    I am not getting into a shootout with Golentan. Too many gun-arms.
    Leiningen will win, even if he must lose in the attempt.

    Credit to Astrella for the new party avatar.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •