If reading and/or posting in a particular thread, set of threads, or forum is not a net positive experience for you, then don't do so. I was reminded of this just yesterday when I spent ten or fifteen minutes drafting hypothetical replies to something that took me to a mental place I really wasn't interested in going. Thankfully, someone I trust set me straight before I posted anything. I can continue to read that thread, but I won't be posting in it. There are some threads that I just won't read at all, because I know it wouldn't be productive.
Of course, I have violated this premise on numerous occasions... but I've regretted it later every single time.
There was a case a few years ago when an argument between two people got so heated that one of them went on a hiatus and ultimately left the forum permanently. The person who stayed felt awful. I'm seeing a lot of angry people and hurt feelings today, so I'd just like to remind everyone that participation here is optional and that if you're upset it's probably best to take a breather -- if not stop entirely. Posting angry is a bad idea.
I actually want to extend this concept to apply to my life in general, as well. If something I'm doing does not have a net positive impact on my life (whether it's as simple as eating some chocolate or as complex as family relationships), I want to try to start re-evaluating how I pursue it or if it is even worthy of pursuit. We'll see how that goes; it's been something of a challenge applying it even to this small aspect of my life. It's worth it, though, because the forum interactions that I do have are much more positive as a result. If I hadn't made those changes to my reading and posting habits, I doubt I'd still be here.
Of course, hereabouts, when all else fails there's always the Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Post-apocalyptic gathering around the mutating radiation-laden burning oildrum?
[ January 09, 2006, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: ClaudiaTherese ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Gee, I wonder which thread that was.
On a serious note, definitely wise advice.
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Absolutely. We're on the same journey, twink. *smile
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
!
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Post-apocolyptic gathering around the mutating radiation-laden burning oildrum?
Can't think of any other reason one of them is blue and another green.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Great post, twink. Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
Note the mismatched gloves as they hug themselves for warmth. There's been some serious pickpocketry in that group.
Watch for the hands.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
You're so suspicious, CT. I just figured they were all groping each other. Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
The best part is that since I get to define "positive," I can rule that eating chocolate is always a net positive. Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
The evil mind of CT at work. Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
quote: I just figured they were all groping each other.
See, I was thinking that if anyone actually knew what thread this was about, the description of what they were doing would have been very different. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
And why don't they have any legs?!?!
Posted by Black Mage (Member # 5800) on :
Once more, I shall show my horror and surprise at this conversation with grossly misproportioned eyes:
o_O
Posted by ClaudiaTherese (Member # 923) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: And why don't they have any legs?!?!
They ate them.
It's a cruel, cruel, post-apocalyptic world.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Wise words, Twink. indeed.
I always enjoy my Hatrack time. If it wasn't a feelgood thing for me, I wouldn't spend as much time as I do. I, too, avoid some threads where I know that what I have to say would cause people to be unhappy. And in the contentious debates, I always try to not offend my fellow Hatrackers.
This is why everyone loves me best of all!
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Isn't twinky sensitive?
twinky: Just in it for the girls.
Posted by Black Mage (Member # 5800) on :
They don't have torsos or arms, either. You might like to look into that.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
See what bugs me about thread like this is that, while I think the "It's not worth always being worked up about." idea is important, I really hate Hatrack's inability to handle conflict or to distinguish between people blowing things out of proportion and a conflict that should genuinely be addressed. I don't exactly relish my role as the person who has to say the "mean" but true things that other people are thinking. I don't appreciate being alone when I support standards because doing so engenders conflict.
I also don't like the popularity angle.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
CAUTION: NOT REAL QUOTES! PARAPHRASES BELOW!
quote: Originally by twinky: We should all get along and play nice and love one another
quote: Originally by Tante Shvester: I agree! Love me!
quote: Originally by MrSquicky: I disagree. And I don't love Tante best of all.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I love Twinky. I think Squicky is a poohead.
*steals a safety pin from CT's sadly unused thigh high leather boots*
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
What bugs me about this thread is that it makes it not okay for someone to be angry - it makes an entire category of emotions unacceptable. I think I feel about it the same way I feel about someone saying "Calm down."
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Is there a more counterproductive statement in the english language then "Calm down."?
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Squick, I don't imagine that lightning rods like their job all that much either.
The problem with choosing not to post in certain threads is that no one notices that you're sitting there mum, bursting with things to say but keeping your yap shut because your brain is screaming "It's not worth it!", and for once, it's winning. More than once I've been very tempted to post in some threads, "Not sayin' nuthin'. And you can't make me." Others express their frustration by bringing in popcorn, which for some, is like having a partner who eats crackers in bed.
All of which is to reiterate Ic's high road quote.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
Taking the high road means missing that low road shortcut to Scotland and the bonnie bonnie banks of Loch Lomand.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
How are we going to take any road without any legs?
Are we just expected to roll? Using our disconnected hands as some sort of paddles?
Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
quote: Is there a more counterproductive statement in the english language then "Calm down."?
Get over it?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
You get over it!
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
jeni, The point I'm trying to make is that sometimes, things do actually need to be said. I don't post conflict arousing things because I'm angry. I don't know that I get angry from Hatrack. I also don't set out to try to hurt people's feelings.
I post them because I think that because I think that they need to be said and my experience here has shown that if I don't say them, it's unlikely that anyone else will. I don't particularly like that role and my status as pretty much outside the Hatack clique makes me less effective, but I prefer that to a community where no one says these things.
Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
Interestingly enough, there is a phenomenon that some real psychologists study related to the origin of this thread. Humans are used to taking clues from face-to-face interaction, and when you feel the urge to say something particularly nasty or rude, an inhibitory mechanism kicks in, triggered by possibly several different things relating to empathy, a desire not to get your butt kicked etc.
On the internet there is no face-to-face interaction, and hence no inhibitory mechanism kicks in and so people say outlandish things they would never utter in real life.
Keep that in mind, and perhaps you can develop your own conscious inhibitory mechanism.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hmm...I actually think there is very little that needs to be said when someone doesn't care about who they are talking to. In those cases, it seems like someone needs to say them.
I think that's why I don't like it - I feel like you are using me to satisfy your own need to pontificate, and I resent it.
Posted by james01 (Member # 8863) on :
Ah such a nice thread turned sour.
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: How are we going to take any road without any legs?
kat, regarding comments made about your behavior, I think you're making a fundamentally flawed assumption as to the primary intended audience. But I still hold out hope for you, for without hope, what does man really have?
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Where can I read that research, Jacare?
I've been saying that for years, and I'd love to know the big words that mean the same thing.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
james, have I offended you?
Squicky, I know I'm not the intended audience, and that's what I don't like. You are talking past me to the balconies, and I don't like being used like that.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
MrSquicky,
Thanks for saying the things that need to be said. it is important. I think that sometimes you might be alone out there because you do it well and gracefully. I know that (in many discussion) I often think that if I leapt in I would just muddy the argument that someone else is making so well. Rather like jumping in with a short, thick, stick when someone else is using a rapier. I'm sorry that it makes you feel unsupported.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Actually, James, I think the conversation may have just turned productive, not sour.
Welcome to Hatrack, by the way. I see you've been here for a couple of months, but I don't believe we've crossed threads before. Nice to meet you. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Maybe I don't agree because I don't think there are balconies? I think the angels are doing fine recording the events without help, and I don't believe anyone else is watching. Rather, I don't believe that the audience is paying enough attention to make disrespecting the person you are using as a prop worth it.
Posted by james01 (Member # 8863) on :
to ElJay
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
To be specific, I do not appreciate being used a prop. There's no way to make doing that okay.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
kat, If it makes it any better, my primary intent is try to get people who you will actually listen to to take you aside or something and say "Look, you're wrong here." Kind of what they would do in public to someone who wasn't popular.
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
quote:I think that's why I don't like it - I feel like you are using me to satisfy your own need to pontificate
Welcome to forum life Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Would it make you feel better if you knew that I usually e-mail Banna after these discussions to see if I went too far? You know Banna - you know she tells me.
I really don't like being used as a prop, Squicky - I really don't. It makes me feel like I'm being treated like I don't matter.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
kat, I don't use you as a prop. I give you good advice I'm pretty sure you're not going to listen to and publically stand up for being respectful and not being nasty to people here as things this community holds as important.
I did this with Baldar, I did it with Leto, I'm doing it with you. I do it with other people when I feel they cross the line.
If you talk it over with Banna and continue to act the way you do, then I guess, no, I don't trust her judgement.
You can be a very nice person, I've no doubt, but you can also be very nasty and a lot of people don't want to acknowledge that about you, especially since you are good at playing the passive-aggressive victim role.
Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
*pat pat*
See, instead of a post-apocalyptic whatever, it could be a pity party.
(BTW, isn't AJ the one who's read the symptoms of Asperger's and thinks that if tested, she'd have it? If so, I'm not sure that her reading of social situations would be all that enlightening to you. I mean, one of the major problems with kids with Asperger's is their total lack ability to read/respond appropriately to social cues.)
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I really don't like being used as a prop,
How about a lean-to, crutch or, perhaps, fulcrum?
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Tante,
Just realized I have been an idiot. Forgive me?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Squick, you pretend to be talking to me and instead are speaking to the balconies. That's using me as a prop. I think you think you're being brave and speaking truth to stubbornnes, but you're just being nasty. You know it makes me uncomfortable, and not in a "Oh no, I've been discovered." More like a "Why is he commenting on me all the time?" kind of way.
If it was intended for me, you'd send an e-mail. In fact, I promise that if you say it to me in an e-mail so I know you aren't using me, then I will listen.
Oh, I never said I followed what she says. I do ask, though.
I know I'm not always nice. If you think about it, though, I never strike first.
Posted by Jacare Sorridente (Member # 1906) on :
quote:Where can I read that research, Jacare?
The first I read about it was something by Daniel Goleman. ( link)
Of course, I am skeptical of anything said by a psychologist, but this particular idea seems like it may actually be true, regardless of the source Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Tante,
Just realized I have been an idiot. Forgive me?
Whatever in the world for? I am completely and blissfully unaware of any idiocy or transgressions that beg my forgiveness.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
Phew.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
quote: What bugs me about this thread is that it makes it not okay for someone to be angry - it makes an entire category of emotions unacceptable
I don't see this thread as saying that at all. It's saying that you have every right to be angry--twinky admitted being mad. But he's suggesting that we should exercise a little bit of self-restraint and refrain from posting while mad. That's what is counterproductive IMHO.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hmm....that still says "Calm down" to me.
Posted by Kayla (Member # 2403) on :
quote:Hmm....that still says "Calm down" to me.
But that still beats "bite me" doesn't it?
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Are those the only choices?
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
How about "go suck an egg?"
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
Actually, I see it as more of saying "shut up" rather than "calm down." Neither statement is going to make you less mad, but the advice to shut up is, if heeded, the best course of action.
It doesn't mean you shouldn't say what's on your mind. It means you should refrain from saying it until the strong anger emotion behind it has passed. I try to go by the half-hour rule. If someone posts something on Hatrack that ticks me off, I wait a half hour before posting a reply. Usually by then other people have replied to the offensive post in a manner better than I could accomplish while spitting mad, so I don't have to reply at all.
Posted by Brian J. Hill (Member # 5346) on :
By the way, lest I come off sounding holier-than-thou, I will in the interest of full disclosure say that I have a really bad temper which is easily provoked, and have occasionally posted in anger on the 'rack. It's only recently that I've had some success in implementing the half-hour rule, and I admit I'm still a work in progress.
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
quote:The point I'm trying to make is that sometimes, things do actually need to be said.
Squick, I understood you. I was trying to empathize with your statement. Lightning rods do something that needs doing. It doesn't make it fun, though. And I agree with you that sometimes, a statement just needs to be made. Or a confrontation or whatever. Been there, done that, got the battle scars and find that my threshold for 'moral imperative' has gotten a lot more cynical.
That's all I meant. Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
BJH's first post on this page hit the nail on the head. "Don't post in anger" is not "calm down."
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I think it is okay to be angry. I am sort of sorry for being rude to Karl, although I don't think I was deliberately except for the bite me (Kayla and Squicky were mean enough that I still think they are fair game), but I think saying one is angry is okay. It's okay to be angry when disrespected or hurt. I know I don't like being told not to feel the way that I do, and being told to go away feels like saying that that emotion is unacceptable.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
"Don't post in anger" is also not "it is not okay to be angry," though. That's a really big distinction. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Hhm...is it on a forum? Posting is all the communication there is. If someone isn't allowed to express anger or post while angry, that's the equivelent to not allowing them to be angry.
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
I disagree. I don't think emotions have to be expressed to be experienced. For instance, I was livid with someone on a forum a while ago. I didn't post. I was still angry, but now I'm very glad that I didn't post about it. If I'd felt very strongly about it after the fact, I would have taken it to e-mail.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
It's how that anger is expressed that changes. A powerful message delivered with a carefully calculated fury can be far more effective than lashing out without thinking.
When a post makes me really angry -- doesn't happen often and has never happened here, but it's happened -- I made a point of typing out my reply and then going back to it ten minutes later. I was still angry, but I was able to choose my words carefully, delete the words that were chosen in haste specifically to hurt, and get my ideas across with a much greater impact. I had time to understand where the anger came from and how the other person was playing on it so I could try to defuse the situation and speak with the voice of sweet reason.
At least, that was the theory... Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
Yes, I use the "preview post" button quite extensively, and I try to make a special effort to use it when I'm concerned about being offensive or when I'm irritated. That helps.
Posted by Theaca (Member # 8325) on :
I am in this book club, and we just finished a little book called Big Girls Don't Whine. It wasn't very deep and I wouldn't have picked it, but it wasn't that bad, and her ideas were simple and common sense. Lately if I want to write a post and I feel emotional I write it in Notepad and I think to myself, is this a Big Girl post, or is this an immature, nasty, or selfish Little Girl post? If I'm not sure, I don't post it for a couple hours. Actually helps a lot. Silly, I know.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Not silly at all, Theca.
I have a file I use to type up posts I know I shouldn't post. Sometimes they get edited and posted later; sometimes they never do.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
*Comes late to the party* Was out of town for the weekend. Nice seeing ya'll too.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Btw, although I may be somewhat socially inept in my own social interactions, in person, I am *darn* good at analyzing other people's interactions, extracting their motivations, and spinning it in the direction the person I'm talking to is most likely to be receptive to hearing.
I don't do it like I used to because it feels cheap. I felt guilty after I did it this weekend with one of Steve's brothers. Even if it was for a good purpose,(people within the family getting along) and Steve was ok it.
AJ
Posted by JennaDean (Member # 8816) on :
So maybe not "Calm down," and maybe not "Don't post when angry," but "Don't post without thinking. And if you're angry, do it twice."
When we're angry we say things intended just to hurt people, and we often regret them. When we take the time to think, we can make our point without hurting and without regret.
It's part of growing up: learning to censor our own words so we can make our point without hurting people. Often takes a whole lifetime or more. We're lucky on the forum we can stop and think, and preview, and edit ... not so lucky in real life.
Posted by Shan (Member # 4550) on :
*chuckles wryly*
I generally "read" so calm, polite, even-handed on the 'rack.
It's a rare day I can achieve that when trying to say what's on my mind at home or work.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
I find this an interesting discussion in the abstract, and not as it applies to any particular thread. I have found people differ enormously in how they take the same phrasing. I've been astonished many times that someone might find offense in something I meant as positive approbation, and occasionally I'm greatly relieved that something I feared was not phrased as felicitously as I had hoped, was nevertheless taken in good spirit, sometimes better than it deserved, which made me quite happy.
I've tried assiduously to ameliorate my reponses to unpleasant things, deciding just not to let things bother me. I've had some success, but I wonder if it came at the expense of caring? I wonder sometimes if it's possible to care deeply about people while not letting anything they do hurt or offend you? Is that detachment that seems necessary to maintain a cheerful equanimity also a barrier to empathy or to any profounder type of love?
[ January 10, 2006, 04:36 AM: Message edited by: Tatiana ]
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
After further reading and cogitation, I wonder if we should take anger as being a sort of love? Is anyone every angry at or about someone about whom they care nothing whatsoever?
About 3 weeks before my father died, I called my mom and he answered the phone. He was not one for chatting, not being someone who actually had any small talk. So I said hi and asked to speak to mom but he asked me how I was feeling (I was sick at the time with something or other of no importance). I briefly answered what he wanted to know, and he yelled at me angrily for not taking good enough care of myself and said I needed to see the doctor or else I might die. (I'm getting emotional remembering this.) I think he had just discovered that if you neglect some things, they can become serious. That was Dad. <laughcries> He would discover something like that, decades after everyone else had been trying to suggest it to him, and suddenly it was the most important thing ever, and he was the only one who knew, and you'd better listen to what he said. Funny that remembering that trait now (3.5 years after he died) just makes me miss him terribly and wish desperately for someone with exactly that trait to be in my life again. <laughcries more> Gosh the very things that infuriate you about people you love can become transmuted into something so wonderful like that. What was I saying?
Oh yeah, because I knew how sick he was, and saw that yelling-at I got more deeply than I had ever seen it before, I realized that it was his version of tenderest love and concern. Just like that time I was sobbing uncontrollably about my friend who killed himself when I was 16 and Dad came in and yelled angrily "why the !@(>@&? did that stupid boy have to shoot himself anyway?" and it was the worst possible thing he could have said and made me sadder and also angry at him and it was all because he loved me. He was upset at my sorrow, and it made him angry at my friend who had inadvertantly caused it.
How strange, how strange, that violent anger is sometimes an expression of love? I wonder if I can remember that the next time I'm angry or someone is angry at me? It seems like if I could think of it at the exact moment it was happening, it might change something for the better somehow. Doesn't it?
Or maybe this is all sleepy ramblings.
<love to all>
Posted by ctm (Member # 6525) on :
quote:Originally posted by BannaOj: Btw, although I may be somewhat socially inept in my own social interactions, in person, I am *darn* good at analyzing other people's interactions, extracting their motivations,AJ
My son is borderline Asperger's and I find this is true of him... He's not too good at social stuff that involves him, but as an observer, he's often spot-on.
I honestly think one problem in the sort of thread we're talking about is that sometimes we humans tend to, well, belabor a point... Once in college, back in the Reagan era, my circle of friends consisted of die-hard liberals with the exception of one guy, who was a die-hard conservative. Right before the elections of '84, we were arguing and arguing, and he was countering, and one friend said to him "You don't understand my point!" and Bill the conservative said "I do understand your point, I just totally disagree!" Which shut us all up.
I think we all like to believe that if everyone understood the clear thinking and impeccable logic by which we arrive at our opinions, they would of course agree with us. Conversely, if a person doesn't realize we are right, they must not understand our point, so we keep explaining and explaining... and sometimes we take it a little too personally, and let our emotions carry us away...
I've done this myself, I've seen it here, I've seen it in real life.
As others have said, it's okay to be angry, and it's okay to have heated discussions. But it's also good to take a step back and think twice before you post. I've deleted many a post myself rather than add it...
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I can continue to read that thread, but I won't be posting in it. There are some threads that I just won't read at all, because I know it wouldn't be productive. ![[Group Hug]](graemlins/grouphug.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
to ElJay
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)