this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
8 points (78.6% liked)
Actual Discussion
272 readers
1 users here now
Are you tired of going into controversial threads and having people not discuss things, circlejerking, or using emotional responses in place of logic? Us too.
Welcome to Actual Discussion!
DO:
- Be civil. This doesn't mean you shouldn't challenge people, just don't be a dick.
- Upvote interesting or well-articulated points, even if you may not agree.
- Be prepared to back up any claims you make with an unbiased source.
- Be willing to be wrong and append your initial post to show a changed view.
- Admit when you are incorrect or spoke poorly. Upvote when you see others correct themselves or change their mind.
- Feel free to be a "Devil's Advocate". You do not have to believe either side of an issue in order to generate solid points.
- Discuss hot-button issues.
- Add humour, and be creative! Dry writing isn't super fun to read or discuss.
DO NOT:
- Call people names or label people. We fight ideas, not people here.
- Ask for sources, and then not respond to the person providing them.
- Mindlessly downvote people you disagree with. We only downvote people that do not add to the discussion.
- Be a bot, spam, or engage in self-promotion.
- Duplicate posts from within the last month unless new information is surfaced on the topic.
- Strawman.
- Expect that personal experience or morals are a substitute for proof.
- Exaggerate. Not everything is a genocide, and not everyone slightly to the right of you is a Nazi.
- Copy an entire article in your post body. It's just messy. Link to it and maybe summarize if needed.
For more casual conversation instead of competitive ranked conversation, try: !casualconversation@lemm.ee
founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I guess I distinguish between "entertainment" and "fun". I, too, am entertained by things, and being entertained is an important part of enjoying life.
As for the "sports ball" fans, the ones I know seem to know the rules, the players, player stats, team stats, the pros and cons of various plays under different circumstances, etc. As much I don't get it, I would hardly call something passive when time is put in doing what I can only call study. There are probably a higher percentage of "critic-level" sports fans than "critic-level"movie fans. How many people can name 5 directors, 1 editor, 1 cinematographer, and 1 costumer? Contrast that to the wealth of knowledge of the average sports fan.
Well, I answered the questions to the best of my ability, enjoyed thinking things through enough to feel comfortable contributing, enjoyed seeing what others had to say, and feel good that I have both more awareness of the characteristics of those things I find most enjoyable and what other people think.
I deliberately left out the words "entertainment" and "fun" in that paragraph, but let me return to them now.
I don't know enough to either agree or disagree with your contention that my separation of entertainment and fun is generally unproductive. You write of objective measures, but I don't know if you've considered whether those measures might be improved. Maybe there are better terms than mine to distinguish between active enjoyment (what I call fun) and passive enjoyment (what I call entertainment). And maybe there is truly no difference in outcome.
That doesn't change the fact that I at least think I get more enjoyment out of active engagement, even if the activity is as slight as trying to understand the specific reasons a particular movie was watched through to the end while another was turned off after 10 minutes.
I hypothesize that a complete set of measurements that captures magnitude, not just a binary state, would be able to distinguish between the passive enjoyment I get from funny animal videos, the somewhat more active enjoyment I get from analyzing a movie, and the much more active enjoyment I get from building a boat or writing a new story or writing a new program. But that is a mere suspicion and actual research would be necessary to determine the validity of that hypothesis.
You could be right. I have no access to any formal study of sports fans, so I have no idea what "average" might be. As with most casual "analysis," I'm limited by my personal experience and am projecting from that. It's not scientifically appropriate, but if I always limit myself to the scientifically appropriate, I have no opportunity to learn from those who know better.
A much better phrasing would be "here is what I've learned from the sports fans I interact with..."