User:John Reid/Opinion

I have opinions and I'm not ashamed of them. I have biases, gut feelings, even whims. Not only do I not hide these; I think it's my positive responsibility to exercise them whenever opportunity presents itself. We're all human beings; if we don't feel as well as think then we might as well hand over all control to cold, logical robots. If Wikipedia is ever to have true merit it will be because thousands of living, breathing men and women allow their opinions to circulate freely.

Facts can be debated. A fact is true, false, or undecidable. If it is true then other facts can be called upon to support it. If false then perhaps it can be disproven. Opinions can neither be debated nor proven true or false. They simply are. That's not to say that they can't be changed; they can. It's very rare, though, that they can be changed by logical argument -- and impassioned rhetoric doesn't always do the job, either.

Here and there, I comment. Since most proposals (of whatever nature) are not statements of fact but of opinion, I respond in kind: with my opinion. Frequently I find my comment challenged. Or, perhaps, an attempt is made to discredit my opinion by treating it as a factual statement: supporting argument is demanded. I find this mildly annoying. On the one hand, I think it's important to engage in dialog with my fellow editors; it's not enough to drop shit and run. On the other hand, I don't think it adds value to most discussions for me to reiterate my position or try to correct deep-rooted misunderstandings. I'm confident that most editors who read my comments are able to interpret them for what they are. This leaves me with the responsibility of responding to my critics without distracting the rest of the community from our business. Perhaps that's why you're here on this page, now.

I'm slow to comment on any issue until I have formed an opinion. Once formed, you'll find I'm highly resistant to attempts to sway my opinion. After all, there is usually little to be added to an argument at the last minute. We all have (mostly) the same access to the same world. I tend to think this kind of discussion goes nowhere.

I may not agree with you. For some of us this is a bitter pill. I'm quite sorry that I can't agree with everybody but this is how the world turns. For what it's worth, I take your personal reputation into the balance when weighing the merits of your argument. Editors who defend their positions too strenuously tend to damage their reputations with me. I simply feel that stating a case clearly and steadily is a mark of maturity; attacking every objector is a sign of immaturity. When I see this I tend to lose confidence in the argument put forth. If I opposed before, I will probably oppose very strongly after being badgered about my opposition. My feeling is that any proposal or position put forth by someone who is that insecure is probably without merit.

Allow me to leave you with one very important point: I'm just me. I have no power. My opinion is worth very little by itself. It's not really worth your while to try to change it. You might do well to think about the reasons why some people hold their opinions; you might want to alter your own position. Who knows? A slight alteration in your position might cause large numbers of editors to come to your side. It doesn't matter what I say.