So what if it is? And what are you defining as an "insult"? And who's objectively determining "bad faith", which is a term you often use?Generally, when one discusses music, it's not for the purposes of expressing disdain for others or screaming at each other on the level of personal insults.
There's absolutely no need to get mad at other people for having differences of opinion. I do respect your views too, btw. I don't think they're objectively wrong or unreasonable. Just different ways (to look at things) from mine.Rudeness to you can be honesty to someone else.
There is a difference in expressing an opinion and rendering a judgment. I am only really interested in discussions of opinions and find judgment based statements to be presumptuous and disrespectful. It is probably at the root of why people think of Classical music fans as snobs.Sorry but I'm detecting traces of some kind of objectivity in statements like that. It's somehow objectively true that nothing is really "garbage". I'm just following the logic of "every vote is equally valid".
It's not a derail at all, it's getting some definition.This seems like a bizarre derail.
Well if "one side" suspects that (another form of "you can't possibly really like that stuff") then you in your subjective wisdom know that it's not possible to prove your true devotion to this music, and you just pass it by like any other subjective opinion. But "the music you like is stupid" isn't the same as "you're stupid". Also it's interesting that apparently only one side is susceptible to such "bad faith".Just to try to answer for the sake of making things more social, hopefully, the type of bad faith accusations that tend to be bad for discussion, which thankfully haven't been happening a lot lately, are accusations that one side in a discussion does not genuinely like the music they say they do, and only are saying so to look smart/cool/progressive/trendy/etc. Once you've gone into claiming that one side of a discussion is lying, further discussion isn't possible.
Well who's judging what an "A" is? I don't think etiquette demands that if I think this music is "bad", and my opinion is solicited, then I must remain silent.There's a long and probably boring discussion that could be had about the subjective values of etiquette, social tact, etc but I think the acronym "DBAA" sums it up.
Calling someone a liar is extremely confrontational. There are areas where being extremely confrontational may be appropriate but the discussion of musical tastes tends not to be one of them.
Well my valid reason, using the Strange Magic rulebook, is that every vote is equal and valid. Surely you're not going to start circumscribing these valid votes with objective restrictions, are you?No valid reason. You, however can and will do what you like, including mocking others' musical tastes.
This is a music discussion message board. This is not Fight Club, or a drunken screaming match. I would hope people at the very least have a shared goal of discussing music, otherwise I would question why they are on a music discussion message board.Well who's judging what an "A" is? I don't think etiquette demands that if I think this music is "bad", and my opinion is solicited, then I must remain silent.
Opinion = expressing like/dislike, always interpreted as a subjective, personal, viewWell you really didn't define either. Just "opinion good" "judgement bad".
I don't see how the statement "hip hop is crap" can't fit into both.Opinion = expressing like/dislike, always interpreted as a subjective, personal, view
Judgment = expressing value or worth, usually implying some objective basis
So "it's all subjective, but your subjective reaction should follow these guidelines".Opinion is neutral, respectful of others' opinions; judgment presumes the superiority of a personal view stemming from an elevated opinion of oneself.
Tact and diplomacy in expressing an aesthetic opinion? Why would it be necessary at all, since it's understood that all such opinions are subjective anyway? If someone says they hate Baroque music, that's a valid response. If someone says they hate avant garde, that's a personal attack.is it really necessary to re-create the concepts of tact and social diplomacy from first principles via discussion