Not complaining about things I don't enjoy and just enjoying the things I do has made life easier.

It seemed to me a serious and mature discourse, aimed at the debate on politics, society, morals, customs etc. Instead it ended to my surprise and disappointment with the expression "our respective games." So that's all you were talking about?
How disappointing...

I probably should have elaborated that it does go further than games, so please do forgive me if my message was too simplistic.

Was just feeling good about growing a bit as a person and I guess I didn't put it into words quite right.

you should do what makes you happy, realize what you like and dont, but its most important to stay in your lane.. of movies/games/media they are personal, so no one is "right" but when someone comes in to say how great the united states did for the people of iraq and afghanistan, though un-fun, its your moral duty to tell them to wake the fuck up.

@sith As far as considering correcting obviously incorrect people your moral duty I can't say I agree, simply because you're often wasting your time on people who won't respond well to a simple "You're wrong." I usually try to establish a rapport with people before telling them why I disagree with them, it establishes mutual respect, as well as the understanding that simply agreeing to disagree is an option.
Some people just aren't online all the time, or as well informed, or are just generally living their lives away from internet comment sections. In that way, I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt, as I would like others to do when I am similarly uninformed.

Certainly nothing wrong with being ignorant of something, as long as you are willing to learn and grow. But so many people stick to their bias-confirming one sided media that tells them what and how to think without forming proper arguments(late night shows?) so sometimes the way to open people up is just to ask them about the basis for their reasoning, hell if you cant explain to someone the premises to support your conclusions then do you really believe in it? Most would appeal to authority. (we went to the moon cause neil desrasse said we did)

As an example, how many people have preached about how 100% safe the covid vaccines are while not understanding even the basic biology/chemistry, ask them about climate change and they will be more ignorant than david sazuki.*

I love to be told I'm wrong and explained how/why, people like jordan petterson, thomas sowell, russel brand, ray kurzweil, glenn greenwald, ed snowden and others have changed my opinions on things a great deal, years ago I was quite the leftist liberal, but facts>feelings and if we allow the ministry of truth to censor inconvenient information/discussion it will be a quick descent to authoritarian dystopia.(look how eric clapton was treated when he had vaccine side effects)

hopefully this post may help someone grow and if you want to see an example of this growth in real-time check larry elder and dave rubin 2015 here

*edit: not saying climate CHANGE not real or vaccines unsafe.. its complex and i dunno.

It's funny how much I agree with your second post compared to your first, the contrast is kinda crazy to me.
I appreciate where you said to ask people questions, the Socratic method is probably my favorite way of figuring out someone's beliefs, partly because of how inoffensive it is. It's fair enough if someone doesn't want to answer them, but it demonstrates either an unwillingness to help someone understand, or non-understanding on their own part.
At the end of the day I still don't think it is my moral obligation to correct anyone, but I am perfectly willing to talk to them and figure out what makes their ideas tick. I think the world needs more of that, and I'm glad that there are others out there willing to do so amid the hyper polarization and extremism.
Also, a small nit pick but something that annoys me:
A leftist and a liberal are two different things.
Many of the leftists you will see today are authoritarians, (or in the service of authoritarians, whether they know it or not.) which is antithetical to what a liberal is. Liberals are moderates, and the main part of their political philosophy is that they love liberty. I consider myself to be a liberal, but I am certainly not a leftist. My guess is that you would likely consider yourself a liberal as well under this definition.

Yea just cause i think you should me brave and tell someone they are wrong doesnt mean you have to force them to see it your way, with patience and good logical arguments you sway minds, maintain some moral high ground and help find a common truth. We know the adage of evil flourishing when good men say silent right?

Like shawn RBK micheals said life is a lot easier when you arent critical and just tell everyone you love them and everything but I hate to be pandered to like that because someone thinks they know what I want them to say/think, I have much greater respect for someone who can be critical and kind. People who complain all the time suck, but critical people rock, the difference is in the explanation of the problem.

i dont really subscribe to labeling/pigeonholing people in politics but your paradigm explanation is good.. I used to be like those left authoritarians and think only of common good, but now as you said, I just want liberty and my former friends are doing everything to legislate/take that from me so I am more aligned with conservatives atm. (not the political parties of those names, they are both terrible)