Anti-Disagreeable 30 Days

 With this sort of thing, quitting cold turkey is correct. Just plain stop for 30 or so days. That is, more than 1-2 days but you don't have to go a whole year or anything. 

 "Learning to be less disagreeable is friggin hard. 

 "A 10% improvement seems like I'm ignorning all kinds of important "false" stuff. 

 "It's so....ingrained.

 "Many more failures than successes."
https://nitter.unixfox.eu/EricMorganCoach/status/1722827264922960035

 

 In this case, simply shut your trap. It's not hard to be silent, especially as a temporary experimental measure.
Also, do a rep. "If I speak up, I will prevent X." Then, don't speak up. Look at what actually happens. (Did X even actually occur?)

 It's far easier to make a stable, long-lasting decision when you have a good set of data in front of you. If you really are preventing stuff, after the trial you won't be speaking up because you're disagreeable anymore. It will be because you have work that needs done.

 

  Engineering details problem: is this talking about [somebody is wrong online] or is it being abrasive in-person or what's the deal here? Is he talking about folk he's discussing his wage work with or perhaps it's a private pontification club?
 You may be very surprised to hear I used to have a very serious [someone is wrong online] issue but it had nothing to do with me being disagreeable. As, indeed, I'm +A not -A. 

 A lot of this stuff is simply failure to be a father. Your body wants to be telling your son things he doesn't know. Much the same way women go weird about cats. In this case it results in telling strangers or acquaintances how to live, even though their own father already did (or didn't). If folk were educated they would ask to speak to your Pope or mention explicitly that they're not looking for parenting at this time.

 If you acknowledge that it's a son-related instinct, it's way easier to control the impulse when it's directed at a non-child. "Is this my son? It isn't. Right, I really need to work on that whole girls thing...."

 

 If he's talking about a discord channel, I would recommend Socrates. However, assume failure. Ask them all about their statement and/or decision. As if you're, like, interested in them or something. If they're at all open to correction they will quite likely notice the discrepancy on their own.

 Or, perhaps they're, like, not totally uninterested in you and will ask about your own experience. 

 If the topic doesn't matter and they just want to LARP as the local priest, of course they're not going to be open to correction and indeed odds are good they don't even believe whatever BS is coming out of their mouths. 

   If you're strangers passing in the night, why do you give a damn if they're wrong? If they're false how is that any of your business? 

 

 P.S. My [somebody wrong online] thing was about a combination of excessive faith in humanity + entitlement, for anyone who was wondering. I was told homo sapiens was the rational animal, and like a dumdum, I went and believed them... Although it's mostly fixed I still have to simply not read the replies sometimes. Prevent the bad behaviour by avoiding the driving stimulus.