You weren’t asking me, but this is an interesting question I seem to have stumbled upon.

My honest and wholly unsolicited answer is that sometimes it feels good to make someone else feel as shitty as their response made you feel. Tearing others down is a sport that I like to play on occasion. However, on the Internet, I play a very different game. Straight up rage never plays well. Hot-heads automatically lose any Internet nargument. Aloofness, wit, and redirection consistently win. Thems just the unwritten rules. I didn’t make ’em.

I have been retrained in my adulthood to think that emotions, even outrage, are fine to feel and express. I’m curious, based on the way you break things down, do ad hominem attacks and base reactions play a huge part in the courtroom or is it more like the Internet where you must numb yourself with indifference? I honestly have no clue. My only exposure to courtrooms are scenes from like My Cousin Vinny “Youts!” “I shot the clerk?!” “NOOOWUHHH. THE DEFENSE IS WRROOOOYYYNNNNNGGG!” and that one scene from A Few Good Men, “YOU WANT THE TRUTH? YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!” Is that Hollywood sensationalism or what it’s actually like? Do emotions run hot? At the root of every ad hominem attack is a raw nerve that was touched, ya know.

Trying to get people to argue at your level on the Internet has to be like herding cats, right?