Do you ask political questions in the hope of them being thought-provoking or in the hope of insulting others?

Question

I've seen both types on here.

The second kind will only alienate the people you claim to want to convince, so it's hard to understand the point...other than seeking like-minded people to make you feel right.

dstr~ good point.

Answer 1

I ask political questions so as to hear what others truly think, and to share my opinions. I try never to insult others, only argue others' opinions.

Answer 2

I prefer to ask thought provoking questions and to have thought provoking questions asked to me. However, having said that, there are times when I can answer a supposedly thought provoking question with an insulting question back or with an insult period. Why you ask? Because some of the thought provoking questions are really just loaded questions to get a predetermined response. That, in itself is an insult.

Answer 3

I usually don't ask questions. Most of what I see is the juvenile, "Faux News" style of question that is both idiotic and rhetorical.

What's the point of saying "yeah, and so's your sister?" To a reasonable person, there is none, just as there isn't any for those kinds of questions. Don't get caught up in trying to apply logic to a third grade mentality. It's a waste of useful energy and efforts.

Answer 4

Personally, I ask what I hope would be thought provoking questions. But I've seen most questions are of the latter kind.

Answer 5

Usually thought provoking, although I periodically catch a few insulting answers along the way.

Answer 6

My goal is to always be thought provoking, but in some instances even the most finely crafted question elicits a visceral response in people. I like to try to find out why people think the way they do, not necessarily just what their opinion is on a particular subject.

Answer 7

I've sent a request to Y!A to ban Q's that are obviously quasi 'chat rooms' for political types to vent their 'bile' and bestow the ten points on the so-called best 'like-thinker'.

I have suggested that either they be banned or that these Q's MUST go to a vote. Personally, I prefer the banning. It WILL get the point across.

I responded to the Q: "Whose got more positions - Hillary Clinton or Hugh Hefner ??"

I called the asker " another repubnut id**t".

Now anyone who would ask such a Q, with its innuendo, IS an id**t and I told Y!A so in the request and in response to the 'violation' I received !! Now who's right ??

Answer 8

It seems here that those questions "spiced" with inflammatory rhetoric attract more answerer's, this is a doubled edge sword however, because it also generates likewise replies.

EDIT: Here is an example:

Do you believe Bush's policies have helped the Mideast?

Now lets "spice" it up:

Do you believe Bush is going to hell for what he has done to the Mideast?

Answer 9

I ask questions to provoke thought.

I answer questions to provoke scorn.

Answer 10

considering the fact that thought provoking ends up insulting people who are set in their ways, or find it too hard to think for themselves, i would have to realistically say BOTH.