Linguistic

[rick.ca]

I'm not looking for an argument. I'm looking for other peoples views on this. If it is an issue that they have come across, would like it worked on in future versions of the software etc. Definitely NOT an argument.

Are we talking about the same word?

Argument: reason given in proof or rebuttal; discourse intended to persuade.

Like it or not, proposed changes to established software require proof the change is beneficial to most users and a worthwhile undertaking by the developer. Occasionally, it's so obvious the argument doesn't need to be expressed. Sometimes, a well made argument is unopposed and implemented with little discussion. But most often, some debate is necessary to refine ideas to the point they are worthy of implementation.

But I talk to much. I'll leave you to your discussion. Please don't forget I need a "no poster" filter for episodes, although I'm perfectly happy sharing it with season records.

[pencilhead]

Argument: reason given in proof or rebuttal; discourse intended to persuade.

I would like to remove the persuade. It shouldn't be necessary.
I still prefer:
dis⋅cus⋅sion
  /dɪˈskʌʃən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-skuhsh-uhn]
–noun
an act or instance of discussing; consideration or examination by argument, comment, etc., esp. to explore solutions; informal debate.

 

[rick.ca]

Note the definition includes "consideration by argument."

Without persuasion, there is no agreement. And without agreement, no action.

Argument, of course, has to be relevant. This might have something to do with us being banished to the Talk board.

[pencilhead]

Note the definition includes "consideration by argument."

Yes, "argument" is one methodology of achieving a result but it does not have to be the only way. The definition also includes "consideration, examination, comment" as other methodologies.

Argument: reason given in proof or rebuttal; discourse intended to persuade.

Infers a result and is adversarial . ie. Someone must win. I do not agree with this stance.
It is possible to have a discussion without winners and losers. I think in a forum such as this, it is better to not be adversarial. Let the topic wander with out stifling the debate. This will allow creative juices to flow and achieve better outcomes.

Cheers
PH

[rick.ca]

I made the simple observation: "argument" can be, and is—by definition—constructive and positive. You negate this. Your negation is—by definition—false. You then declare your disagreement with the false statement, which you project onto me. You have no argument with me—you're arguing with yourself. Again.

[pencilhead]

"argument"  is neither positive or negative by definition. It can be used in both positive or negative context. It comes down to the intent. If it is to purely win an argument, or put the other person down then that is not contructive or positive.

In modern society the term "Argue" is more often construed in a negative context than a positive one. The negative connotations largely come from "tone" and "context". In a text forum such as this, the "tone" of writing and the way it is used will largely determine if it is  seen as positive or negative. All writing should be viewed from the readers point of view as this is where it is directed.

NB:
Emoticons help a bit
 

[rick.ca]