Last Man Talking is my name for a debating style that some commenters on this blog use. It is where you out-talk everyone and then claim victory once they all lose patience and give up. “See! No one can prove me wrong!”
The point is not to deepen your understanding or seek the truth or learn from others, but to make it into an argument that you “win”. If you can win on debating points, wonderful, but if all else fails you can always “win” by being the last man talking.
The trick is to wear out other people’s patience so that they drop out one by one, like in Monopoly.
Important skills and qualities:
- Passion – pick a subject you care enough about that you can read and write about at great length.
- Knowledge – read books, blogs, articles, etc.
- Patience – this is not an approach that works quickly. On a blog like this it could take days to win. The battle often goes to the one with the most time and patience.
- Derail the thread into a pet subject – one where you have more knowledge, experience and interest. That will make it easier for you to win.
- Miss the point – of what others say, no matter how many times or how clearly they try to lay it out for you. The aim here is not understanding but to wear down their patience.
- Miss the forest for the trees – or the trees for the forest, depending. This allows you to talk past others, a good way to miss the point.
- Make lame excuses – to shore up your side of the argument. The more the better since they take more time and patience to knock down.
- Split hairs – this bores most people and they will drop like flies. Split hairs over something you probably know more about than they do.
- Write long comments – this drives away people too. Big time. The longer your comment, the less likely anyone will read it all the way through, so the less likely anyone will comment on it. And those who do make it to the end will forget much of what you said. When they do forget, accuse them of arguing in bad faith. In your long comments try to make four or five subtle points, the better to wear out other’s patience.
- Question other’s knowledge or good faith – to drive them away. Use this to shake off those who are not “serious” – those who rarely write a comment of more than one paragraph, those who do not try to knock down all your points.
- Use ad hominems – but try to save these for the end when there are only one or two people left. If you use them too liberally early on, people will not take you seriously. At the end few will notice or care, at which point you can use them to break the patience of those who remain.
- Practise, practise, practise – like most things, the more you practise the better you get.
See also:
Yeah, I never realized this was a debate “style” but now that I think of it, its very effective.
I know I have dropped out of debates because I dont have the patience to read through a winding post and make a counter-post.
This happened to me at another blog whether I was arguing with someone. I was accused of “missing the point” and “arguing in bad faith” for arguing the key points I remembered, rather than dressing the whole 6-8 paragraph long post.
Not everyone has the patience, or cares enough, to dissect comments the legnth of term papers, only to say they “won” the argument.
LikeLike
“The trick is to wear out other people’s patience so that they drop out one by one, like in Monopoly.”
Lol! Funniest post to date.
I sometimes have long back and forths with people, but it’s usually only when the person is misconstruing my points/me, which is irritating, to say the least.
The best thing to do when you spot someone who uses this as a regular form of discussion: stay away. Far away. Because once you engage, there’s no turning back.
LikeLike
I noticed a new entry in derailing for dummies that reminded me of a certain recently banned commenter.
http://www.derailingfordummies.com/#youcando
LikeLike
Makes sense…and good points, Y!
LikeLike
I can think of a few people that this would apply to… They’re always the pseudo-intellectual types who pretend to be an expert at something, or try to turn every conversation into an argument where everything must be “proved” — but only to their random standards.
When it comes to Last Man Talking, the wannabe debaters are like amateur gunslingers. All they do is just point & shoot. But whenever they come trying to shoot that sh!t at me I always go for the heavy snark because in a full-on blast the guy (or girl) with the bigger gun is more likely to leave a smoking bullet-ridden avatar on the ground. And besides, at that point I know the convo is over, so might as well have some fun ; )
Good post Abagond!
LikeLike
I gave up online debates long ago. I think debating from a keyboard instead of face-to-face makes it easy to use the ‘last person standing’ type of debate style. It’s much harder to use this when the person or persons are standing right in front of you.
LikeLike
LOL – Abagond; how could you?
Miss the point – of what others say, no matter how many times or how clearly they try to lay it out for you. The aim here is not understanding but to wear down their patience.
Ding ding ding ding ding!!!
LikeLike
Not everyone has the patience, or cares enough, to dissect comments the length of term papers, only to say they “won” the argument.
Lol, I know–some of us have real homework/work to do!
One blog I really like has a “comments cannot be longer than the post” rule, and it makes a lot of sense once you see how some people dominate other people’s blogs. When a certain commenter, not the blog author or the post content, is driving people away, it’s time to lock it up.
LikeLike
lol. A lot of posts have more than 100 or 200 comments, but I always wonder how many individual commenters that number is composed of.
LikeLike
Thanks for the tips! Hahahahaha!!!!!
LikeLike
I think certain topics are by their very nature ones where quite a few different points of view and ancillary topics can and will come up, and as far as I’m concerned, its all par for the course. Internet discussions aren’t rigid discourses ala Roberts’ Rules of Order; it can and should flow with point/counterpoint and tangents, bringing related points which illustrates the point the commenter wishes to convey. Merely having a discussion where everyone essentially acts as an amen corner isn’t fun, nor is anything really learned by such an enterprise.
O.
LikeLike
I wonder what inspired this topic? 😉
LikeLike
Lol.
LikeLike
This is the kind of argument or debate style that Abagond uses. It’s his blog. “500 words a day on what ever he wants”. na nana boo boo
LikeLike
Luara Kinney:
You are way, WAY off topic. This post is not about Obsidian’s blog getting shut down.
LikeLike
The long hollow comments always get me.
LikeLike
Although the person who gets the last word believes they have ‘won’, I think the real winner is the one with the strength to walk away from a ridiculous argument and let it be. Almost everyone can see the ‘last man talking’ for what he really is, so often no real achievement is made in continuing to argue. Sometimes the person who wants to have the last word continues attacking long after the other one has left and only makes a fool of themselves.
jas0nburns – I LOVE that Derailing for Dummies site. I only stumbled upon it recently and it’s funny because it’s true. I have had every single one of those methods used against me.
LikeLike
Abagond-
Sorry, I thought it applied to the post because Obsidian frequently uses this style of debate
I thought he inspired this post honestly.
LikeLike
@ Ella
I only found it from people pointing out I was doing that stuff myself.
LikeLike
Considering what happened to the last thread it’s really not that off topic is it? This is your post you make the rules. I’m just saying, other people have said the same thing about him too. That’s why he no longer has a blog because he frequently uses this style of debate in the extreme.
LikeLike
Luara:
You can talk about a commenter’s debating style, yes, but blogs getting shut down for copyright violations or whatever has little to do with this post.
LikeLike
Who, by the way, should be arriving shortly.
LikeLike
His debating style
led to his violation of copy right.
“Your friend, Obsidian, was asked repeatedly to a) stop harassing Bene Viera on her site and elsewhere, and b) to cease & desist posting her photo and place of residence on his site. When he wouldn’t comply with either after being asked politely, he was warned that he was in violation of copyright.
It was reported once, and as he publicly noted on an internet forum, he consciously re-posted it after being 1) warned and 2) I brought it to his attention.”
And I don’t need to point out the obvious since he does it here ALL THE TIME. He had to, by any means necessary have the last word on a conversation that was long over.
LikeLike
Abagond, I want to kindly ask you to let the convo run between myself and Luara Kinney…
LK, you seem to have a problem with me, to such an extent that you can’t keep from discussing me or what i have or haven’t done. Yes, my blog was indeed shutdown for copywright violations. I don’t deny that. However, it is also very important to note that this was just a cover for the fact that I happened to disagree with the same level of vociferousness that Ms. Viera brought with her article, “Dumb It Down”. Moreover, she peppered my blog with all manner of really off the wall posts – her own version of cyberstalking – yet it never crossed my mind to report her or anyone else. Why? Because, where I come from, you learn to have a thick skin.
There are some Black Women writers and bloggers who seem to feel that not only do they have the right to voice their views and attempt to influence the public discourse, but they also have the right not to be challenged in any way on said things that they write – and if they do, those who challenge them have to be personally attacked, or failing that, silenced altogether. I think this contributes to the negative perceptions of Black Women if anything, because it shows them as kind of bullies almost.
For all your consternation Luara Kinney, my blog stats speak for themselves (more than 300K hits as of Oct 31), and like I said, it will be returning soon. I’m taking the time to make some improvements to it, along with other things that will make the blog bigger and better. It seems that you have a problem with me refusing to kowtow to the party line as it relates to things and especially Black Women. I love my Sistas but I won’t cotton to some of the truly ridiculous notions some of them hold, like the idea that there aren’t any good brothas out there, or that because White society doesn’t view them as beautiful, it’s the end of the world. Black Women have some really serious problems to takle other than timesucks like these, and I make no bones about addressing them.
I don’t know why its so very important for you to personally attack me instead of attacking the points that I make, but I guess you have no problem only adding to my popularity, not detracting from it – because if I was a person on the outside liooking in, I would be very interested to know who this Obsidian is, and what is it about him that has gotten Women like Luara Kinney all hot and bothered.
Rememeber Ms. Kinney: Ad Hominem, is the last refuge of Scoundrels…
Holla back – looking forward to the discussion with ya…
O.
LikeLike
@ Jasmin
Tell me about it! LOL, I cant be reading people’s essays when I should be writing mine!!!
LikeLike
Abagond-
See? I told you.
LikeLike
LK,
Last time I checked, there wasn’t a word limit here, LOL. Now, either you address me and what I said, since you seem so interested in me, or you stand down.
Your choice…
O.
LikeLike
Last time I checked the post said
“Last Man Talking is my name for a debating style that some commenters on this blog use. It is where you out-talk everyone and then claim victory once they all lose patience and give up. “See! No one can prove me wrong!”
The point is not to deepen your understanding or seek the truth or learn from others, but to make it into an argument that you “win”. If you can win on debating points, wonderful, but if all else fails you can always “win” by being the last man talking.
The trick is to wear out other people’s patience so that they drop out one by one, like in Monopoly.
Important skills and qualities:
***Write long comments – this drives away people too. Big time. The longer your comment, the less likely anyone will read it all the way through, so the less likely anyone will comment on it. And those who do make it to the end will forget much of what you said. When they do forget, accuse them of arguing in bad faith. In your long comments try to make four or five subtle points, the better to wear out other’s patience.*****
LMFAO missing the subtlety much? 🙂
LikeLike
Y,
Especially if I’m not getting anything out of it, like a good grade (or some money). What’s the point?
LikeLike
Oh and lets not forget
# Make lame excuses – to shore up your side of the argument. The more the better since they take more time and patience to knock down for example:
*LK,
Last time I checked, there wasn’t a word limit here, LOL. *
# Split hairs – this bores most people and they will drop like flies. Split hairs over something you probably know more about than they do for example:
*LK, you seem to have a problem with me, to such an extent that you can’t keep from discussing me or what i have or haven’t done. Yes, my blog was indeed shutdown for copywright violations. I don’t deny that. However, it is also very important to note that this was just a cover for the fact that I happened to disagree with the same level of vociferousness that Ms. Viera brought with her article, “Dumb It Down”. Moreover, she peppered my blog with all manner of really off the wall posts – her own version of cyberstalking – yet it never crossed my mind to report her or anyone else. Why? Because, where I come from, you learn to have a thick skin.*
LikeLike
It practically writes itself.
LikeLike
# Miss the point – of what others say, no matter how many times or how clearly they try to lay it out for you. The aim here is not understanding but to wear down their patience.
# Miss the forest for the trees – or the trees for the forest, depending. This allows you to talk past others, a good way to miss the point EXAMPLE:
*I think certain topics are by their very nature ones where quite a few different points of view and ancillary topics can and will come up, and as far as I’m concerned, its all par for the course. Internet discussions aren’t rigid discourses ala Roberts’ Rules of Order; it can and should flow with point/counterpoint and tangents, bringing related points which illustrates the point the commenter wishes to convey. Merely having a discussion where everyone essentially acts as an amen corner isn’t fun, nor is anything really learned by such an enterprise.
O.
🙂
LikeLike
O-
own version of cyberstalking EXAMPLE:
Now, either you address me and what I said, since you seem so interested in me, or you stand down.
Your choice…
Use ad hominems – but try to save these for the end when there are only one or two people left. If you use them too liberally early on, people will not take you seriously. At the end few will notice or care, at which point you can use them to break the patience of those who remain.
FOR EXAMPLE:
O.
I don’t know why its so very important for you to personally attack me instead of attacking the points that I make, but I guess you have no problem only adding to my popularity, not detracting from it – because if I was a person on the outside liooking in, I would be very interested to know who this Obsidian is, and what is it about him that has gotten Women like Luara Kinney all HOT and BOTHERED.
LikeLike
😉
LikeLike
LK,
All you’ve done is an elaborate cut and paste as to why you don’t like me, not the things I’ve actually said. I’m merely asking you what you find so objectionable about what I’ve said. This is a discussion blog, and you seem to want to shutdown those you take issue with. Fortunately, Abagond doesn’t agree with you.
😉
O.
LikeLike
I like this topic! It perfectly describes the types of ‘debates’ I’ve seen on some news sites (TV news, local or national; newspapers), in their comment sections. Most people will make a statement about the story and move on, but there are some who will write novel-length posts, utilizing every ‘Last Man Standing’ tactic mentioned, and crow with delight when people get sick and tired of the endless, repetetive litanies. People like that seem to take great delight in playing stupid, getting people to parse and dissect specifics, then telling them “Well, that’s not good enough! You missed what I said here, so let me point that out to you!”
‘Control freak’ is one of many apt descriptions for that type of loser. When you consider the amount of time and energy it takes to learn and apply the LMS tactics, one can easily come to the conclusion that those types of losers really have no lives to speak of.
Just my $0.02
LikeLike
I guess this post is principally inspired by our recently-banned friend Thaddeus.
It also describes no_slappz perfectly; readers who don’t know who he is should check some of abagond’s posts around late 2009/early 2010, before he got banned.
No_slappz was far worse. Thad’s arguments were at least based on some academic knowledge; no_slappz seemed to just lift all his arguments from Fox News talking points.
LikeLike
“Write long comments – this drives away people too. Big time. The longer your comment, the less likely anyone will read it all the way through, so the less likely anyone will comment on it. And those who do make it to the end will forget much of what you said. When they do forget, accuse them of arguing in bad faith. In your long comments try to make four or five subtle points, the better to wear out other’s patience. ”
yep this is a winner…
LikeLike
Obsidian said:
“Abagond, I want to kindly ask you to let the convo run between myself and Luara Kinney…”
I would have deleted it, but Luara made it into an example of the post, so I let it stand.
LikeLike
This is awesome and describes one of several comment samurais that can kill a discussion at anytime. I’ve been guilty of this when it’s commentary that is so blatantly wrong I can’t help but troll it to death. The long comment is normally my killer weapon of choice but nowadays with bloggers commenting as much as they write, it can be an endless battle of 3000+ words.
(proudly displays his thread-killer badge)
LikeLike
I would have deleted it, but Luara made it into an example of the post, so I let it stand.
Abagond, you’re something else, carry on!
LikeLike
One blog I really like has a “comments cannot be longer than the post” rule
Maybe I should stead that one…but then again, I practice strict comment sterilization.
LikeLike
Heh. The point of debate is not to win, but to discover the truth. So there’s really no need to reply to anything that’s not worthy of it.
LikeLike
“I guess this post is principally inspired by our recently-banned friend Thaddeus.”
I was wondering if that was the case, Eurasian Sensation. It reads a bit like one of those Facebook updates that go: “X is really mad with certain people who had the nerve to diss me the other day and who always makes out like she’s smarter than me [et cetera] “
LikeLike
^^^ I never would have guessed that, based on the first sentence (“some commenters on this blog use” not “used”), but that makes sense. Otherwise it wouldn’t seem worthy of a post–doesn’t make much sense to complain about how people comment on posts if you are the one allowing the comments.
LikeLike
I was not aware that Thaddeus was banned.
I acknowledge he could be a pain in a @ss sometimes but overall I considered him a good commenter.
LikeLike
@Eurasian Sensation:
When I first read this post, I was immediately reminded of Thaddeus and no_slappz. Thaddeus’ posts were so long that as soon as I saw his name, I simply moved on to the next post. 😉
As for no_slappz, he was beyond ridiculous with his assertions. Another one I skipped over. 😀
LikeLike
Abagond. I like this post timely as it is. As a few posters have already pointed out. It would seem to apply to more than a few people I’ve noticed regularly commenting here: Thaddeus, No_slappz and more recently Obsidian. To name a few.
Often it can provide insight and entertainment but often also (as this thread outlines) it can incite needless argument, disrespect, name calling, ignorance and disinterest.
Now don’t get me wrong. I personally believe in freedom from censorship. I do believe a balance has to be found and struck though. I suppose it depends on the level of tolerance of the refereeing. And yes a fair, open and declared bias of interest is essential for this.
I must admit my tolerance for this debating style is medium – high. But then there are a few tactics that can be employed to help break up such two sided “monologues”. (because neither side is really listening to each other – just responding)
The obvious one which most people take, particular those who avoid or shy away from confrontation and self – examination, is to leave the two to get on with it. Or walk away from the discussion.
I prefer a different approach which is to respond by making timely interventions with appropriate comments out of sync with the engaging dialog. Obviously it helps if you believe you have something of merit to contribute to the conversation. And humour can help here!!!
Such comments can be ignored or responded to. It doesn’t matter which option the protagonists take. At least they become aware other people are watching/listening but not necessarily agreeing with their excesses.
Who says you have to respond right away? What do you loose if you don’t? What do you win if you do?
But of course some people are just born to have the last word in something. My view is so what? Let them have it.!!! Move on to something else. Remember you can always return again in your own time if its that important. (Often forgotten)
A skill Abagond appears to have honed well!!
Sadly, sooner or later the inevitable will tend to happen either one or both commentators adopting this approach gets banned. But, just as someone regularly says to me: “Hey Ho!!! Thats how life goes…”
LikeLike
This post doesn’t seem to be inspired by one commenter, but by a few commenters, as stated:
“Last Man Talking is my name for a debating style that some commenters on this blog use.”
LikeLike
@ Dahoman X:
I was not aware that Thaddeus was banned.
I acknowledge he could be a pain in a @ss sometimes but overall I considered him a good commenter.
Agree. He brought a lot of good sense I think, but unfortunately didn’t like to express it in a respectful way.
LikeLike
As a student many years ago I worked for Industrial Psychologist PhD candidates who were studying the effects how a talker in a group affected the decisions of others. It did not really matter if the talker was truthful or not, but it seem that the one who talked the most could quite often convince people that their view was right.
LikeLike
I suppose because I’ve witness this employed by several people that it never crossed my mind that it could be in reference to one. I mean I can think of almost five folks immediately on this board alone, not including those who were banned.
LikeLike
If it was just one person doing it I would not bother writing a post about it. I would just see it as a personal quirk. Everyone is different and everyone has their odd little ways. But when several do it, on and offline, then I start to wonder.
LikeLike
I’m to the point now where I try to state my opinion as clearly and as succinctly as I think another intelligent person would need in order to get my point. That’s all. I don’t need people to agree with me (I used to, but not any more.) I just want you to grasp what I’m saying.
LikeLike
Wisdom is better than knowledge. Definitely interesting thread here. I like what another blogger posted on his page several weeks back. “More people need to admit that their worldview is just their worldview. It’s important to them, but that doesn’t give it any special degree of importance to the rest of the world.” -RBL
LikeLike
Often it can provide insight and entertainment
Entertainment is the operative word here!
LikeLike
Once someone has established that this is their method of debate, it’s effective to drop out after the first extremely large post…the first moment you feel your eyes glaze over.
LikeLike
This is good post. 😀
Well, Thad was pain in the butt sometimes but at least he was funny sometimes. Ok, not many times but still. This obsidian guy reminds me of him 😀 except he is not that funny.
As for the last man talking, if I’m not interested, I just walk away and don’t give toss about who gets the last word on any subject. When I was younger I usually was the First man talking. That got me into trouble sometimes 😀
LikeLike
Sagredo says,
“Heh. The point of debate is not to win, but to discover the truth. So there’s really no need to reply to anything that’s not worthy of it.”
That is absolutely correct.
LikeLike
I must admit this post reminds me of a recently banned commenter, but now that I think about it, he’s not the only one. It can apply to several people that (used to) comment here, as well as those who visit other blogs. The more serious debate is, the better (or is it worse?)
On the other hand…
Write long comments – this drives away people too. Big time. The longer your comment, the less likely anyone will read it all the way through, so the less likely anyone will comment on it.
I hear you, but I must note I have nothing against long comments per se. Maybe because I’m the one guilty as charged here (and one blog owner even called me “the queen of long comments” <- hopefully in a good way).
In fact, I prefer long comments… When they make sense. I like when people take time to fully explain what they mean and when they take an effort to present their point of view.
But it all depends on WHAT they actually write. If it used for "last man talking" technique, then it's no good.
LikeLike
@ Mira:
I disagree, I’m not such a fan of the overly long comment. Obviously, “long” is subjective, but I think if it takes up the entire screen it is probably too long. But I will add that you’ve left comments on my blog that were quite long, but were actually interesting and worth reading. Most of the time though, long comments could be trimmed by half and still have the same value.
LikeLike
Eurasian Sensation,
It’s a rule of a thumb that anything you say can be said using less words… You must know how to do it, though. I know I don’t. (Still working on it).
On the other hand, there are long posts/comments and there are long rants. There’s a difference.
LikeLike
Some of the long Last Man Talking comments can be interesting and well worth reading. Just do not fool yourself into thinking that they are interested in honest debate.
LikeLike
Of course, not everyone who writes long comments is necessarily trying to pull a Last Man Talking. Some people have much to say, especially first-time commenters. Some are just long-winded by nature. But those who write them frequently and have a hard time admitting they are wrong are most likely up to no good.
LikeLike
I will say that I have can understand some people writing comments that are longer than necessary. I know that many people have written succinct comments, here and elsewhere, that seem to the author to be perfectly clear, yet get misinterpreted. So it might be tempting to include every single detail to make sure that nothing is misunderstood, but it doesn’t make it easier for most readers.
LikeLike
i always wondered…do you read every comment that is said on your blogs abagond? cuz that’s alot.
LikeLike
If your writing long a** comments, it’s a sure sign that you think what your saying is really interesting. That in itself requires no small measure of arrogance so it’s no surprise that the ones writing long comments are also talking down, over, and past everyone else. It fits the profile.
LikeLike
Abagond, this post was the proverbial stone thrown into the pig pen. Just sit back and see who’s squealing!!!
Peace!
LikeLike
Hmm..
I just checked myself and Obsidian seem to have posted the two longest comments in this thread.
So I am wondering what it says about either of us?
Together as well as individually of course!!!
LikeLike
Kwamla,
I might be alone in this, but I don’t see anything wrong about long comments. I don’t think they are sign of bad behavior, malice or “last man talking” strategy. It is true many people who use this tactic would write insanely long comments, but long comments per se are not an automatic sign of it.
It is when you write long comments, repeatedly, to split hairs and over-analyze somebody else’s comments in order to prove them wrong (and make yourself seem super-smart)… That’s when it gets nasty.
LikeLike
Hmmm…
Well. I can agree with that Maria. For me the justification of a long comment should stand or fall on the nature of its content. If it adds more to the discussion or your argument then diligent reading will eventually bring this out.
Conversely, if it simply regurgatates what has been said before or detracts from the converstation then it begins to border on self indulgence or self opinionated arrogance.
But still this too can be seen as entertaining…!!!! For a while that is…
LikeLike
Lol!
This is true. Thadeus loves this argument. He just had to prove he knew more than you about everything.
By the way, is he coming back?
LikeLike
This, in my opinion, is one of Ababgond’s top 5 topics ever.
LikeLike
The first rule of the game of internet is: “You lose sir. You get nothing.”
LikeLike
I just realized why I hate this tactic so much. It’s exactly what one of the owners of my company does!
I work for two equal partners who will disagree over what direction they want me to take on any given project. The unspoken rule is that I’m to follow the directions of the last one talking, even if they never reach consensus.
One woman is more forceful than the other so what she says usually goes even though her reasoning rarely follows any logical path whatsoever.
So yeah, last man talking works in a way. Unfortunately it works equally well whether your an idiot or a genius.
LikeLike
The last man standing debate style!
Is simply quantity over quality.
People that usually have this type of debate style are far from intellectualy honest!
They usually engage in ad hominems (Thad was a master of this), question begging (Thad and no_slappz), Sophistry (Definitely no_slappz) rarely do they prove their own arguments (Thad and no_slappz) and more importantly they rarely admit when they are wrong (Thad and no_slappz ftw!)
I am glad that you banned them Abagond. Any good blog, forum, website etc has to maintain a standard so that honest debates can be engaged!
I don’t why a lot of people on this site are saying that they’ll miss Thad. I say good riddance. The two debates that we had only confirmed just how intellectualy dishonest he actually is.
I’ll admit he knew anthro science but everything else……….. sophisty!
LikeLike