Credit Where Credit is Due

Not every conservative who comments on progressive blogs is a troll, nor is every progressive who comments on conservative blogs. Actually, for whatever reason, conservative comments on progressive blogs occur with far greater frequency than the obverse situation.

Non-trolls from the other side should be welcome, at least in my mind. Good intellectual debate is stimulating. And it improves the critical thinking skills of both parties to the debate.

I think BfAZ scores highly on this front, but perhaps not as high as it could. Still, by comparison, it does waaaay better than its conservative counterparts.

But that’s not where I’m giving credit.

One sure sign of a non-troll is someone who will concede a point. It’s incredibly refreshing. And it’s far too rarely seen, from either side. Why? I don’t know, but I wonder if too many American morons treat conceding a point as a sign of weakness, which means they themselves can’t concede a point. Truth is, conceding a point is a sign not of weakness but of strength, both in terms of character and self-confidence.

Thing is, we’ve reached the point where someone conceding a point is reminiscent of the old radio commercial (I think it was Amica Insurance) where someone does something that should be so completely ordinary it goes unnoticed is instead treated as if he did the exceptional.

I feel like the announcer in that commercial as I write this post.

Nonetheless, hats off to Steve, one of our conservative commenters. I’ve had several back and forths with him. I doubt either of us ever will adopt the other’s worldview, but our last exchange was so refreshing and the conclusion so rare, I had to share.

Steve commented to a post about an ad attacking Ducey on his Cold Stone record. His point was not a bad one: Lots of franchises fail, not just Cold Stone. Thus, he posited, Ducey wasn’t really the piece of garbage the ad depicted him to be. I happened to see a WSJ article showing that Cold Stone’s record was relatively bad on this front, compared to other franchisors, so I brought the article to his attention. He then retreated a bit, stating that Ducey shouldn’t be dwelling on his Cold Stone record, but reiterated that franchises are risky propositions. Even McDonalds, the gold standard, has a sizeable failure rate for franshisees.

His point was valid. Franchises are risky propositions.

But the point didn’t necessarily go anywhere. It didn’t mean Ducey was a non-sleaze. It could be, and based on my experience as an attorney, it is, that most franchisors are sleaze. And that sleaze factor has a lot to do with why franchises are generally so risky.

So, the ad’s point regarding Ducey was not necessarily denigrated by the generally risky nature of franchises.

Okay, long windup, but check out Steve’s response, which is incredibly refreshing, and so rarely seen:

You got me with that. I have no witty reposte’. I am on the losing end of this argument so I am going to pick up my marbles and go home…at least on this subject.

So, will I be more or less willing to engage with Steve in the future? Obviously, more. Do I think less of him because he conceded my point? Obviously, no.  Did he display confidence or a lack of confidence in his own intellect with his last comment? Obviously, confidence.

We should all be less afraid to concede a point. It’s absurd that it occurs so rarely. And that’s harmful. It become impossible to reach consensus or compromise when folks will not yield, even in situations that scream for it.

So, well done, Steve. And thanks.

Of course, being someone who never gets anything wrong, I’m channeling Richard Nixon here: “Do as I say, not as I do.” 🙂