Staff/members discussion thread. Report-free.

[ex-pat]

Perhaps an improvement for personal posting style is to respond dispassionately to the question being raised by a person we may have had "issues' with in the past is to treat that question as if another person had asked it...even as if one's best loved person in the world had asked it in sincerity. That might make it easier to answer in love.

 

[Conservativation]

Chaz, I think Sacerdote (and the other mods) are saying that posters concerned about how someone is posting on a thread should request 911 mediation. If staff then gently points out to them each time that some editing is needed, and helps the poster use less confrontational words, the poster cannot fail to notice that his posts are being worked with! Hopefully, it is then that they'll metaphorically scratch their heads and say "Gee...maybe I need to work on this...that's the third time this week Sacerdote has said something to me about editing my posts".

If, after the "third time" no such metaphorical head-scratching is happening, then small forum time outs will be applied.

We are supposed to forgive seven times seventy, and while we may feel that some folk are on seven times seventy-ONE, we need to remember that that was not a literal number, but an allusion to forever. Let's try to forgive, and let the mediation take its course, and see, as we post with a spirit of forgiveness, if others can't also come to post their ideas in peace, not defensive hostility.

Here again, it misses the point by a hair.

It has almost nothing to do with them being nice, or posting better so to speak. This is as Ive said, lipstick on a pig, its still a pig. You are seeing this as Mcs saying "well how will it help if I post nice when they arent gonna post nice". If that was what he was saying you'd be correct in the responses.

But over the past weeks as we have gone round and round here about this one thing...or tried to anyway....its gotten more clear that mods really do not have an idea what we are talking about, even though some have stated they really do. But then they say things like it depends on perspective and its shades of gray and the like, demonstrating that no, they do not see the point at all.

SO, somes an effort to gloss over it by wrapping it in ribbons. Im not suggesting conspiracy, that mods are knowingly trying to do this, I believe they think this is the answer, and they WE are being stubborn....and for this Im left feeling as I have been for weeks, extremely NOT optimistic about it.
Because cynically I would predict that if they did suddenly say ah ha we see it, the subsequent actions would pin it back on the victims, the very same way the discourse on generalizations did, wrongly IMO.

 

[Chaplain David]

What *I* can do is use the ignore feature. The problems with that are:

I may end up only being able to see half the thread.

You can still see posts if someone on ignore is being quoted by another member.


I don't want others to feel as if they don't have the right or are not welcome to post here. I don't share a lot of details publicly for personal safety reasons, but I do have experiences in my past that are not that different than some of the people who post here who have troubles in their marriages. So, I do sympathize/empathize and pray for those members regularly. I know what it's like to live day to day like that.

Some of the threads almost end up seeming like they have split personality disorder b/c there end up being two very different conversations going on, though. That is difficult to overcome no matter how *I* change what I am doing, since I can only change me and no one else.

If that part of the problem can't be addressed by staff (instead of just closing down a thread), then I am sorry to say that I don't hold much hope for this sub-forum at this point.

All good points IMO. I've used ignore and have both found it helpful and problematic. Sometimes I'd peek.

In general, my opinion is that ideally, we (and I'm using a nebulous we and not referring to anyone specifically right now), would develop the self control to not respond to certain posts or parts of posts. If a problem poster is not responded to then the negative things that result will simply not happen. Or?

 

[Chaplain David]

The people writing here now could post nothing but John Denver songs and it wont help. This is blinders chaplain, Im sorry it is some kind of blinders.

From my perspective it is not blinders and here's why. Ignoring problem posters or nasty remarks is the most prudent thing to do. Secondly, staff is working on educating and helping problem posters improve. Some of it is education. Some of it is punitive. Thirdly, and I'm not sure if thirdly is a word but you know what I mean, peer pressure also reinforces these things.

 

[Chaplain David]

Perhaps an improvement for personal posting style is to respond dispassionately to the question being raised by a person we may have had "issues' with in the past is to treat that question as if another person had asked it...even as if one's best loved person in the world had asked it in sincerity. That might make it easier to answer in love.

Answering in love is good.

 

[Chaplain David]

Here again, it misses the point by a hair.

It has almost nothing to do with them being nice, or posting better so to speak. This is as Ive said, lipstick on a pig, its still a pig. You are seeing this as Mcs saying "well how will it help if I post nice when they arent gonna post nice". If that was what he was saying you'd be correct in the responses.

But over the past weeks as we have gone round and round here about this one thing...or tried to anyway....its gotten more clear that mods really do not have an idea what we are talking about, even though some have stated they really do. But then they say things like it depends on perspective and its shades of gray and the like, demonstrating that no, they do not see the point at all.

SO, somes an effort to gloss over it by wrapping it in ribbons. Im not suggesting conspiracy, that mods are knowingly trying to do this, I believe they think this is the answer, and they WE are being stubborn....and for this Im left feeling as I have been for weeks, extremely NOT optimistic about it.
Because cynically I would predict that if they did suddenly say ah ha we see it, the subsequent actions would pin it back on the victims, the very same way the discourse on generalizations did, wrongly IMO.

Ed has mentioned that short term bans and other measure will also be used. Plus education in MSC. I don't think that is wrapping things in ribbons.

 

[Tannic]

From my perspective it is not blinders and here's why. Ignoring problem posters or nasty remarks is the most prudent thing to do. Secondly, staff is working on educating and helping problem posters improve. Some of it is education. Some of it is punitive. Thirdly, and I'm not sure if thirdly is a word but you know what I mean, peer pressure also reinforces these things.

WELL... it's hard to ignore the poster when they respond negatively to every post in the thread. They dominate the forum and than one of the other posters respond to them. It's too the point of where we mines well have a UFC forum fight. Left versus Right... FIGHT

 

[Chaplain David]

WELL... it's hard to ignore the poster when they respond negatively to every post in the thread. They dominate the forum and than one of the other posters respond to them. It's too the point of where we mines well have a UFC forum fight. Left versus Right... FIGHT

We are dealing with that. But back to the OP for the day, do you think there are things in your personal posting style that could be improved?

 

[FaithPrevails]

All good points IMO. I've used ignore and have both found it helpful and problematic. Sometimes I'd peek.

In general, my opinion is that ideally, we (and I'm using a nebulous we and not referring to anyone specifically right now), would develop the self control to not respond to certain posts or parts of posts. If a problem poster is not responded to then the negative things that result will simply not happen. Or?

There is more than one member here who can tell you that I solidly preached the ignore feature during my time on staff. heh. Yes, ideally, simply not responding would make a lot of the problematic posts (mind you, not posters) go away b/c they wouldn't be given any life by having a response to grow from if they were ignored. However, with regards to the bolded, I don't know that I have much confidence that this is achievable. Even if staff got all regular members on board with this approach, there would always be newcomers or people that drift in and out who would pounce on a problematic post and off the thread would go. KWIM?

Personally, I think forced ignores would go a long way for some of the issues around here related to dynamics. But, that's just me. I know staff no longer implements them. I say that b/c I do think that the problem would at least diminish greatly if this were employed, but never go away for the reasons I stated at the end of my first paragraph.

Oh, and I get that self-control is a driving force behind not implementing forced ignores. We should all be mature enough to either ignore a member or post and/or catch ourselves when we do let someone/something get the better of us and self-edit, if necessary.

 

[Conservativation]

Perhaps an improvement for personal posting style is to respond dispassionately to the question being raised by a person we may have had "issues' with in the past is to treat that question as if another person had asked it...even as if one's best loved person in the world had asked it in sincerity. That might make it easier to answer in love.

This again misses the point. They aren't asking questions. Countless simple examples have been given. Here is another:

Poster A (man): How do you and your spouse communicate about money

Poster B (woman): Men use money to control women, and abuse them and keep them down and its not right that women have to answer to men about money, I recommend women to take an account and get half the money in it every month because the minute he starts to want to talk about it he will start controlling you.

Poster B didnt say any words that are not nice, in fact, the statement in and of itself can even be shown to be 100% true in cases, so its not even incorrect, technically. A few minutes later poster C jumps in

C: yes my husband did that and I cant stand it, we went down that path for years and Id warn any woman to watch for this

then a D and an E jump in to offer their "support" and d some hugs to those who say they were hurt this way and suddenly the innocent guy either has to say "hey I dont advocate that"...which makes him suddenly look even more guilty based on the sheer volume of assertions

or

he can leave, and leave them to swirl and machinate and he will by association look like a cad.

How does posting nice or pretending its someone else fix that?

Someone please show me step by step how that works

 

[FaithPrevails]

Thirdly, and I'm not sure if thirdly is a word but you know what I mean, peer pressure also reinforces these things.

As long as we aren't telling them how they're breaking the rules, right?

 

[Chaplain David]

As long as we aren't telling them how they're breaking the rules, right?

Exactly. Leaving judgement parts off of posts really improves them and doesn't feed a fire so to speak.

 

[Conservativation]

Ed has mentioned that short term bans and other measure will also be used. Plus education in MSC. I don't think that is wrapping things in ribbons.

Yes it is wrapping the real problem in ribbons.

Short term bans etc are being talked about for not posting nicely, not for whats really going on. Focusing on nice, at the expense of integrity is wrapping in ribbons, its like fake smiles in the church lobby.

 

[Chaplain David]

Yes it is wrapping the real problem in ribbons.

Short term bans etc are being talked about for not posting nicely, not for whats really going on. Focusing on nice, at the expense of integrity is wrapping in ribbons, its like fake smiles in the church lobby.

I do not like to focus on the punitive although I am very good at it. I retired as a First Sergeant and can take punitive to many different lengths. It was sometimes necessary to maintain discipline, cohesiveness, morale, etc.

But, short term bans can lead to long term bans and that is also not being wrapped in ribbons.

What about you Cons, do you think there are things about your posting style that you could improve?

 

[Chaplain David]

Yes it is wrapping the real problem in ribbons.

Short term bans etc are being talked about for not posting nicely, not for whats really going on. Focusing on nice, at the expense of integrity is wrapping in ribbons, its like fake smiles in the church lobby.

Fake smilies would gross me out but I wouldn't mind a cappucino machine.

 

[Conservativation]

I do not like to focus on the punitive although I am very good at it. I retired as a First Sergeant and can take punitive to many different lengths. It was sometimes necessary to maintain discipline, cohesiveness, morale, etc.

But, short term bans can lead to long term bans and that is also not being wrapped in ribbons.

What about you Cons, do you think there are things about your posting style that you could improve?

Im not taking the bait. I am sorry to be a broken record but you are not understanding whats being said. My point has nothing to do with how big the punishment is, Im not calling temp bans wrapping in ribbons because they are gentile punishments, but because the actual problem is not being addressed AT ALL.

Asking me about my posting style is a distraction. That comment will be taken, and used as proof of the fact that its all about posting style.

 

[Chaplain David]

Im not taking the bait. I am sorry to be a broken record but you are not understanding whats being said. My point has nothing to do with how big the punishment is, Im not calling temp bans wrapping in ribbons because they are gentile punishments, but because the actual problem is not being addressed AT ALL.

Asking me about my posting style is a distraction. That comment will be taken, and used as proof of the fact that its all about posting style.

Posting style is the topic cons. It is not bait.

Anybody want to talk about how to improve your posting style - yours not someone else's. You can take examples of what you've posted, bring them in here and I can give some pointers. The point is to be able to say what you want to say, but in ways that are

• addressing the post and not the poster,

• not overreacting to perceived threats or flames,

• posting in kindness & helpfulness,

• and naturally posting within our guidelines and rules.

 

[ex-pat]

This again misses the point. They aren't asking questions. Countless simple examples have been given. Here is another:

Poster A (man): How do you and your spouse communicate about money

Poster B (woman): Men use money to control women, and abuse them and keep them down and its not right that women have to answer to men about money, I recommend women to take an account and get half the money in it every month because the minute he starts to want to talk about it he will start controlling you.

Poster B didnt say any words that are not nice, in fact, the statement in and of itself can even be shown to be 100% true in cases, so its not even incorrect, technically. A few minutes later poster C jumps in

C: yes my husband did that and I cant stand it, we went down that path for years and Id warn any woman to watch for this

then a D and an E jump in to offer their "support" and d some hugs to those who say they were hurt this way and suddenly the innocent guy either has to say "hey I dont advocate that"...which makes him suddenly look even more guilty based on the sheer volume of assertions

or

he can leave, and leave them to swirl and machinate and he will by association look like a cad.

How does posting nice or pretending its someone else fix that?

Someone please show me step by step how that works

It doesn't. That's when you ask for thread mediation, or closure, and the hapless member of staff who really SHOULD take out stock in Excedrin gets to explain to each of these people B-Z or whatever that they've derailed a thread, and can they self-edit to at least relate to the OP.

Posting nice is not jumping on them during this and making the matter worse by personal attacks on B-Z. Pretending it's someone you care about helps with that because if you KNEW say, the person you loved most in the world would freak out at the mere mention of dogs no matter what because they had to go through reconstructive surgery to reconnect their face after being savaged by a Chihuahua that resented being forced to wear a tutu, you'd be more gentle in how you tried to convince them that not all dogs are bad, and that perhaps the Chihuahua had an actual grievance re; the tutu. You'd overlook a lot of inflammatory remarks knowing that the person had issues. When you corrected, you'd do it gently, understanding their pain, and not forcing the issues.

I'm just saying to respond, or NOT respond, in love, knowing that someone has something very painful behind them that prompts the overreaction (and I know what you mean, I've seen it, and it's tedious). Know that you don't know who they are, nor what happened to make them that way. Only God knows that, and He doesn't feel we need to know. We DO need to love our neighbour, and there's no "unless he/she is being provoking" clause to get out of that.

 

[Chaplain David]

It doesn't. That's when you ask for thread mediation, or closure, and the hapless member of staff who really SHOULD take out stock in Excedrin gets to explain to each of these people B-Z or whatever that they've derailed a thread, and can they self-edit to at least relate to the OP.

Posting nice is not jumping on them during this and making the matter worse by personal attacks on B-Z. Pretending it's someone you care about helps with that because if you KNEW say, the person you loved most in the world would freak out at the mere mention of dogs no matter what because they had to go through reconstructive surgery to reconnect their face after being savaged by a Chihuahua that resented being forced to wear a tutu, you'd be more gentle in how you tried to convince them that not all dogs are bad, and that perhaps the Chihuahua had an actual grievance re; the tutu. You'd overlook a lot of inflammatory remarks knowing that the person had issues. When you corrected, you'd do it gently, understanding their pain, and not forcing the issues.

I'm just saying to respond, or NOT respond, in love, knowing that someone has something very painful behind them that prompts the overreaction (and I know what you mean, I've seen it, and it's tedious). Know that you don't know who they are, nor what happened to make them that way. Only God knows that, and He doesn't feel we need to know. We DO need to love our neighbour, and there's no "unless he/she is being provoking" clause to get out of that.

and I also appreciate everyone's participation today, even if they do not agree with me.

 

[ex-pat]

I'd like to add one thing more before I go and commune with nature (ie: start winterizing our garden).

We tend to forget that we are being read not just by the participants in the thread, but by people who may not be even registered at CF. We forget that those people may not have the slightest hint of former animosities, or know that "some people ALWAYS make any thread about _______________" . We could be doing incredible harm to someone we've never even seen before, because words are so powerful.

All ~I~ ask is that there be enough respect shown to all posters, that at the Judgment Seat we aren't told that our words caused someone to stumble, or worse.

Off to winterize the garden!