Adding an intelligent comment is useful … then again most people who get the chance to “be” online take it as part of their 15 Minutes of Fame to talk about themselves, or worse, play The Fool to get attention.

I suppose one can suffer fools gladly, I personally would moderate them into cyberhell…

One final comment worth note … if a fool can write like a sage, then it’s the readers who suspend disbelief who are the fools.

I generally skim them, categorise the responses and decide what I can take away. For this stream, for instance, the three categories I took away from this were
- “Bravo: dead right!”
- “Yes, but you can’t just let the bad guys win” and
- “You have a duty to probe the apparently foolish ideas to test their merit”

This is of course a subjective process: different groupings may work better for different people.

But if I want the Sure and Certain Truth, I talk to my children.

I do agree there’s no “winning” an arguement like this one way or another with someone determined to stick to their contrarian views. What troubles me is the idea of leaving an well thought out post, then having some “fool” leave an insulting comment below it. Why give them the “airtime”?

I’m not sure how this gives me credibility?

Aside from that, there’s the added issue of liability. What if a commenter insults another business or person - could we not be held liable for that?

This ia good post, that raises interesting questions.

Correcting potential fools once to try and get the conversation back on track will usually clear up a miscommunication or validate their “foolishness”. Those that are deliberately looking to throw a wrench in with no other reason than to cause trouble will continue to do so!

It’s a good point. I would never argue that we should ignore dissenting voices, nor would I argue that we shouldn’t have a healthy debate. When I speak of “the fool” I’m speaking of that person whose only goal is to draw attention to himself and derail the conversation. It happens again and again, and I’ve spent more time than I care to admit trying to debate and/or engage those folks. The truth is that they don’t want the debate, they only want the attention and the controversy. The best way to deal with those people is to give them the space to speak and let them have the last word. The important issues — the issues you’re hinting at — will ultimately be worked out elsewhere.

-How can one move on if the point of discussion is to come to a conclusion about an action?

Foolish ideas need to be challenged in the open.
Zen Faulkes mentioned above that “errors left unchallenged gain the perception of truth.” On the other hand, many seemingly foolish ideas in the short term turn out to be game-changing in the long run.

Ignoring the fool brings to mind children sticking fingers in their ears. Maybe its ok to ignore the fool if the subject matter didn’t matter to begin with. If the communication never mattered, then you were probably talking with yourself all along.