"We're done."

If you ask me this isn't a good comback at all. It very controlling to the debate. You should represent yourself in an argument and that is all, unless you are given the conscent to represent others unianimously. The problem with saying "we're done" [with this argument] is that you are speaking for your opponent. It would be more respectful to say, "I would like to end it here". Or even, "I'm not going to continue". —Preceding unsigned comment added by PeachyPanda (talkcontribs)

"We're done" is an example of setting a boundary. No person needs any other person's consent to set a boundary; it's a human right. To provide another example of this, I'm about to block your account. Monadic (talk) 16:03, September 21, 2014 (UTC)

I think I'd have to agree with the first comment. Labeling the ability to converse as a boundary seems a little strange. Assuming two people are having a conversation, ending it with a "we're done" comes off as rather rude. I think that any attempt to reach others is destroyed by walking out in such a manner thay irritates others. Was it really neccessary to block their account for questioning the validity a specific comeback? If I was talking to someone and they announced they were done in such a manner I would really be stopping to think about what I said. I would be thinking about how rude they were and how unwilling they were to have a discussion which is key in my opinion. If anyone else disagrees that's fine I just hope you won't you won't block me for merely stating a personal opinion.

Stop concern trolling. Responses to disrespectful behaviour are not required to be pleasant. In fact, breaking the "Play nice" rule in and of itself it a rather powerful message against what just transpired even if it wasn't a winning pearl-clutcher choice. People reading this page will know that "we're done" is rude without you holding their hand. --Pecc (talk) 11:52, August 10, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.