quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: Lobo, I edited that out immediately after I posted it because I decided it was in very poor taste and bad manners. I hoped I was able to catch it before anyone read it. Please do me the favor of deleting it from your post as well.
posted
And I see you also edited the remark I commented on, Rabbit, making my remark seem random. It was not.
Posts: 5771 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ela: To be honest, Rabbit, I think the rudeness has gone both ways.
It makes me very uncomfortable, both to observe it happening and to remark on it.
I believe I've already admitted and said I'm not proud of it so feel free to remark on it all you want. I agree.
At least I no longer expect her to listen to my constructive criticism. She clearly doesn't respect me or my opinion. When I insult her now, its solely because she's pissed me off and I can't control the urge respond. I'm not deluded enough to claim I'm doing it for her benefit.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: Lobo, I edited that out immediately after I posted it because I decided it was in very poor taste and bad manners. I hoped I was able to catch it before anyone read it. Please do me the favor of deleting it from your post as well.
sure thing
Thanks. i appreciated it.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sam (and hawkin/foundling), the howling of jackals is not interesting to me.
If you want my attention, you'll have to wait until you say something I want to converse with you about.
---------
Rabbit,
It is too bad there is this thing. For one thing, it can't be pleasant for you. I know that I would prefer to, for example, be able to post about fake plants without you dropping poison into the thread. What about a do-over? We can start fresh. I won't read your posts with the assumption that the mistakes are there because you don't care about the people you are talking to and respond according to that assumption, and I won't ask for an apology for the times you have admitted to where you goaded and insulted me for fun.
In return, you will cease insulting me and will only comment in the fun threads I start if the comment truly is something you would say at a dinner party with socially-adept colleagues.
posted
This is really not a "nice" way of starting a truce katharina. In both the give and take, it is Rabbit who is wrong according to you...
Posts: 571 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: This may current new item may explain a great deal
quote: Since cats were removed from Macquarie Island, rabbit numbers have soared, and the animals are now devastating plants. Cats previously kept a check on rabbits but were eradicated because they were also eating seabirds, scientists relate in the Journal of Applied Ecology.
I haven't been around long enough to have developed any opinion on your posting style. I will, however, say that our pet rabbits in the past did quite a thorough number on many corners of books, decks of cards, power cords and even some molding.
And instead of a cat taking out rabbit number 3, it was our dog.
Posts: 691 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm...you're right, lobo. I will rewrite the give.
I will adopt an assumption of good motives and intentions when I read your posts and respond according to the best interpretation I can come up. I will come up with that interpretation as if the post was written by..., say, Kama.
How's that? That's pretty big. Especially the Kama thing.
Hmmm...possibly too big - Kama's a real life friend and I'm probably not capable of living up to it. I'm not sure who else to put in there - perhaps a generic poster-with-whom-I-have-a-positive-posting-history-but-no-personal-relationship.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
It is too bad there is this thing. For one thing, it can't be pleasant for you. I know that I would prefer to, for example, be able to post about fake plants without you dropping poison into the thread. What about a do-over? We can start fresh. I won't read your posts with the assumption that the mistakes are there because you don't care about the people you are talking to and respond according to that assumption, and I won't ask for an apology for the times you have admitted to where you goaded and insulted me for fun.
In return, you will cease insulting me and will only comment in the fun threads I start if the comment truly is something you would say at a dinner party with socially-adept colleagues.
What do you think?
Translation: I'm sorry you're so bad at this. That must suck! Let's do this: I will pretend that you are not stupid, and I will pretend that I have an ounce of respect for you.
In return, you can be really nice to me and ignore all of the things I say that you don't like, and I will go on just as before, except without having to answer to you on anything.
quote:Originally posted by Trent Destian: This feels like my family dinners.
I so sorry.
Were you going for a Chinese stereotype... because that's how I read it, and I have to admit the absurdity really made me smile. Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
When you have that chocolatey pillowfight, please wear white panties.
Judging by your low member numbers, you two probably have too much history for anything else to work.
I'm no expert on forum etiquette, but isn't this thread an uncommonly bold way to call someone you don't like out?
Posts: 158 | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of not being an expert on forum etiquette, Jesse, stop the pillowfight bullshit. It's not appropriate here.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not that I'm a seasoned veteran, but this looks like one of the more mature online squabbles that I've seen...
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ela: And I see you also edited the remark I commented on, Rabbit, making my remark seem random. It was not.
Sorry Ela, I wasn't trying to make you look bad. I was just posting while teetering on the edge of control. I'd teeter a bit too much one way and post something nasty, and then teeter back the other way a little and delete it.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: I'm afraid that's a bit of the Trini dialect showing through, not chinese.
That's interesting, Rabbit. To what degree do you find yourself adopting the local dialect? What about accent?
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Ela: And I see you also edited the remark I commented on, Rabbit, making my remark seem random. It was not.
Sorry Ela, I wasn't trying to make you look bad. I was just posting while teetering on the edge of control. I'd teeter a bit too much one way and post something nasty, and then teeter back the other way a little and delete it.
quote:Originally posted by katharina: How's that? That's pretty big...
With this much venom, why even pretend? Just post "I HATE YOU!!!!!!111?1!?11!!" in every thread and then go have a cupcake.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Genuine: Judging by your low member numbers, you two probably have too much history for anything else to work.
Actually, I don't remember ever getting into a tiff with kat before this thread about 6 months ago. Since then I don't seem to be able to post in a thread shes in without pissing her off.
quote:I'm no expert on forum etiquette, but isn't this thread an uncommonly bold way to call someone you don't like out?
That wasn't my intent. I should have just ignored kat from the beginning. I'm normally even tempered but condescension is the one thing that tends to push all my buttons. I have a very hard time letting it roll off without a response. I need to work on that as it doesn't do me any favors.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, they wouldn't exactly call it condescension if it wasn't perceptible, and therefore probably unjust. It's exceedingly ironic that someone who complains about elitism and perceived exclusion through other people's use of language and attitude would stoop to intentionally provoking people by creating the sense of a status distance in which that person is assumed (in their language) to be possessing of knowledge or status above that of the other. That is the basis of condescension of course, that the speaker implies a social (or academic or other) distance between themselves and the one they are speaking to, and most often this is done with the intention of provocation, or at least the establishment (in both people's minds) of superiority.
On the flip side, the same person, so overly concerned with perceived status and social distance will also read the language of others as an attempt at or indication of the same thing. They will react by either playing to the "elevated" language by topping the original speaker n some way (such as demanding copious sourcing, or questioning the speaker's authority). The other common move is to simply flip the perception of social distance against the person "putting on airs" or being "elitist," and implying that this person is, in reality, of a lower social status (lower than the status that *matters*), and is pretending to a position of greater power.
I think, for one, that a person who can't relate to an "elitist" is as guilty of false assumptions as the elitist may be- at least in that person's estimation. Most of the time, social distance makes itself apparent in ways other than speech, but of course, and again, that doesn't happen as much here.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: Sam (and hawkin/foundling), the howling of jackals is not interesting to me.
If you want my attention, you'll have to wait until you say something I want to converse with you about.
That's an unintelligent statement. I know you'll read my posts, such as I have easily had 'your attention' towards my last post; whether or not you have the wherewithal or capacity to defend it — as opposed to puerile dismissal of it as the 'howling of jackals' — is your concern alone.
You're still not ignoring it, and I'm still right Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Absolutely! I really hope nothing here serves to alienate Dr. Rabbit from Hatrack, because in my opinion she's one of our best and brightest of all time. Or for the amount of time I've been around, anyway.
Lesser lights have come and gone, but Dr. Rabbit has been a steady beacon of smarts and sense for all seasons. (OK, no more alliteration, I promise.)
What ever happened to the "Ask Dr. Rabbit" thread. That was one of my very favorites. Anyone still have a copy?
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: I'm afraid that's a bit of the Trini dialect showing through, not chinese.
That's interesting, Rabbit. To what degree do you find yourself adopting the local dialect? What about accent?
I have relatively recently recognized that I naturally pick up a little bit of anyones accent when I'm talking with them. Its not enough to pass as a local, but its enough to obscure my own native dialect. As a result, people can never figure out where I'm from. People are always asking me where I'm from and telling me I don't sound like I'm from the states.
I've also started noticing some Trini dialect slipping into my speech. It was particularly evident while I was in the states over Christmas. The funny thing is that I can't mimic either the accent or the dialect if I try, but it still slips in to conversations when I'm not trying.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I would prefer an active truce, if leaving each other alone means I can post fluff threads without being barfed on, then I'll take it. Done.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let's talk about me more. I'm much more enthralling than anyone else here, because I'm so aloof.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Well, they wouldn't exactly call it condescension if it wasn't perceptible, and therefore probably unjust. It's exceedingly ironic that someone who complains about elitism and perceived exclusion through other people's use of language and attitude would stoop to intentionally provoking people by creating the sense of a status distance in which that person is assumed (in their language) to be possessing of knowledge or status above that of the other. That is the basis of condescension of course, that the speaker implies a social (or academic or other) distance between themselves and the one they are speaking to, and most often this is done with the intention of provocation, or at least the establishment (in both people's minds) of superiority.
On the flip side, the same person, so overly concerned with perceived status and social distance will also read the language of others as an attempt at or indication of the same thing. They will react by either playing to the "elevated" language by topping the original speaker n some way (such as demanding copious sourcing, or questioning the speaker's authority). The other common move is to simply flip the perception of social distance against the person "putting on airs" or being "elitist," and implying that this person is, in reality, of a lower social status (lower than the status that *matters*), and is pretending to a position of greater power.
I think, for one, that a person who can't relate to an "elitist" is as guilty of false assumptions as the elitist may be- at least in that person's estimation. Most of the time, social distance makes itself apparent in ways other than speech, but of course, and again, that doesn't happen as much here.
I'm still not sure if I've correctly parsed everything you've said here. It seems at points that you may be trying to circumlocute insulting anyone, which given the context of the thread is admirable but doesn't exactly lead toward clean communication. Please forgive me if I'm reading things into what you have said that were not intended.
You seem to be referring to the thread link I posted above. I admit that I was definitely involved in an arrogance war with kat in that thread and appreciate the irony of my complaining about her being condescending in that circumstance. It really wasn't necessary or productive of me to keep needling her the way I did. Its just so tempting. My part in that whole battle is likely a bit of academic culture that I really should try to curb here.
As for elitism, I think we may define it differently. I don't consider the recognition that some people are smarter, or faster, or more logical, or better musicians or richer than others to be elitists. What I consider elitist is the idea that that being better in some particular area entitles one to special treatment in areas that have no logical relation.
So for example, I would not consider it elitist to reserve certain lanes in a swimming pool for people who can swim fast. That is a privilege that is logically related to the fact that they can swim fast. But it would be elitist to reserve lanes in the swimming pool for people who had a long enough publication list or to reserve a special section of the library for people who can swim fast. Its elitist to give respect to someone's opinion on climate change science because they are a great actor or a fast runner, those aren't skills that have any relationship to the issue.
It is however not elitist to give more respect to someone's opinion on climate change because they have spent years studying and gaining expertise in the issue.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: While I would prefer an active truce, if leaving each other alone means I can post fluff threads without being barfed on, then I'll take it. Done.
I'm afraid that an active truce really isn't possible until you can recognize what you are doing that I (and many others I might add) find so difficult to deal with. You seem to have no interest in that kind of personal introspection. That's your choice but do not expect others to accommodate you in it.
And by the way, remarking that I think a certain behavior might be unhealthy might have been tactless, but it was not intended an ad hominem attack and it certainly wasn't "barfing" on you.
A big part of the problem is that you tend to interpret any disagreement as a personal attack. I have no idea what's going to set you off. I'm sure that's my fault and is because I'm an insensitive human being, but that doesn't change the fact that I really honestly can't tell what will set you off. I still have absolutely no clue what I did in the Sarah Palin thread that you thought was an ad hominem. The only way I can think of to avoid offending you, is to avoid speaking to you. In fact, even that doesn't seem to be enough. I need to avoid speaking when you might possibly assume that I was speaking to or about you.
That's why I think the only solution is to stop interacting. I will agree to avoid posting anything directly referring or responding to you and you will either simply avoid reading my posts or agree to assume that nothing I say is referring to or responding to you.
[ January 14, 2009, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: The Rabbit ]
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will agree to avoid posting anything directly referring or responding to you and you will either simply avoid reading my posts or agree to assume that nothing I say is referring to or responding to you.
Agreed. It will be nice to be able to post fluffy threads in peace.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
