reading 8/29/11

The first reading "Why I like vicious, anonymous online comments" was discussing the types of speech, language, and beliefs people us in commenting on basically any type of online post if they are anonymous. The author states towards the end that commenting anonymously is like hiding behind a mask to most people, but he believes if it weren't for consequences it is actually their true selves.  This is a statement that i really agree with and haven't actually thought much about it until coming it in this reading.  I do think there are many people who take advantage of there right to freely comment on ones opinion by bashing it with there on beliefs in a very negative way.  Arguing or opposing an opinion is fine and should be done but in a respectful matter, which brings me to reading number two.

In reading number two "Make Our Ugly Discourse Better: Join the Civilogue" the author talks about how people go about disagreeing or responding to thoughts, actions, or beliefs other might have.  The author talks about being polite when disputing something with another and how you can still get your point across without insulting ones thoughts or ideas when in their mind they think the same thing about yours. The difference between this article and the first one is there not speaking directly about one type of communication such as disrespectful comments in a blog post.  This author is talking about arguments everywhere whether is online, face to face, in the news or even if you were just making comments to your self while sitting at yours house.

So after reading both of these articles i strongly agree with both of them and feel they are real issues that need to somehow be cleaned up in our society, but as both authors stated that wont be easy but it is possible.

Two Wars

I believed Two Wars to be a pretty interesting story because it is actually a topic that me and friends of mind discuss quite often at random times.  I thought that the Iraqi Haider had a very good idea and reason to do what he did because the questions he asked are not just a mystery to most people, but if you have never been there you probably dont know the truth.  I think Haider wanted to hear peoples opinions and then try to give them some insite on what is really going on and what is really important.  It seemed like When Haider went to all the different places he kind of expected all the people to have certain answers about the war and what life was like over there, so that didn't really phase him at all.  the majority of the people he interviewed seemed pretty close minded and not willing to except the truth from a person who has been in the middle of it all, and i believe for certain people that it might have been because he was an Iraqi himself.  Myself personally believe in a lot of the question Haider was asking and the comments he was saying sense i am not a huge believer in the war, but at the same time i dont disagree with the people who have family and friends over seas and want to fight for our country.  One event i did find very interesting was the two soldiers who were together but both had very different views.  The one who had already been over seas did not want to be there and did not agree with our reasons for being there, but the soldier who hadn't gone yet was willing and ready to go to defend our country for any reason.  I thought that was a very interesting part of the story.

New English 2

start here!