Beginning with the understated observation that “The web is turning writing into a conversation,” Graham expands on Shirky’s themes on online communication. One consequence of dialogue is disagreement, which outpaces agreement online by a sizeable margin. He sets out a hierarchy of disagreement, stepping from the base of name-calling through layers of common fallacies (ad hominem, appeal to authority) on through more rarefied forms to ultimate direct refutation.

How to Disagree

After years of seeing the same patterns of low-grade argument used in email, Usenet, forums, and now blog comment threads, it would be gratifying to see any evolution of disagreement along the lines Graham describes.

(The related articles - “The Age of the Essay” and “What You Can’t Say” - are also both interesting reading.)