So why exactly is "tone" or "approach" more important than actual issues that affect us all?

[Shandris]

39. I can't speak as to how often tone is used as an excuse; I can only safely speak for...

...myself, and I am more than happy to admit that I hold myself (or try my best) to rules that I don't necessarily expect from other people. But that said, when I speak of tone, its never being used as an excuse and I would strongly denounce anyone that uses it as such. That's a tactic not worthy of our side of the aisle imo.

I agree, to some extent, that perhaps the words written alone would be better to stick to. But I don't think, in practice, that human nature will allow such a thing. Redqueen spoke of passion in a post earlier today, and I would think that those who -are- passionate about any topic are sure to have it noticed in their posts; its a quality that speaks for itself in most cases.

I guess its easier to say that I'm ambivalent about 'words only'. I know I for one would have a very difficult time with it; I have always write, and read, in a conversational tone. Our experiences do tend to color how we read things though (which is one reason I try to present my posts as clearly as possible, at the cost of often being overly wordy), and conversational to one is argumentative to another. An interesting conundrum, but one that we owe it to ourselves to look at further for the future. The topic of 'tone', and how it is perceived, is invariably what comes to my mind every time we see a thread asking why conservatives/midwesterners/southerners/etc don't see how the Republicans are treating them: in the place I live, you will find that the answer often comes down to how the tone (of many various topics) is perceived. Not always, of course...but often enough to swing an election. Indiana -has- gone blue in the not-so-distant past, after all. And that thought -- future elections and policy -- tend to guide my response to things that might, on the surface, seem unrelated.

Whew! Sorry so long!