Display:
one of the cardinal rules - what is understood by a communication is not what the communicator thinks he or she meant. It is what is understood by the person who is being communicated to.

Now, in this case, I felt I was being called a liar. And, giving the benefit of the doubt to the person so calling me, I asked him (politely, not ascerbically) to correct that. And in this case, the person not only refused, but continued on in the same vein. So, in this case, it is quite clear to me what happened.

The rest of the bullying came in subsequent threads, one in another fareasterner thread where he melted down against yet another poster here, and again, that some of you don't think there is bullying and are quite defensive about it is pretty telling to me, and in fact this sort of treatment of arguments does not really lend itself to the advertised goal of the site which I see all over this thread.

I would further note that I never used the word conspiracy, nor do I think my read on what happened is unreasonable or part of some persecution complex Actually, I question why you would employ that line of reasoning, which commonly is used to discredit the other as simply some unreasonable crank. I also note that others have complained on this thread about the same sort of treatment I am complaining about, so it's not like this is some crazy ravings of someone who got pissed off and still is pissed off.

I for one have greatly decreased my participation here because of all of that, and quite frankly, question a lot more the good faith of more than one regular here because of it.

Fai de bèn a Bertrand, te lou rendra en cagant

by redstar on Tue May 13th, 2008 at 10:25:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The problem with cyberspace is that we have none of the communication, mediation and reconciliation tools that we can have in the real world during and following an argument - the friendly look, the handshake, the smile, the warning look, the - I'm in no mood to piss about look - etc. and which people use, often unconsciously, to modulate their responses.

There is also the car driver effect - people who are mild and diffident in ordinary interaction become kamikazes at the wheel when their car gives them some degree of anonymity and they feel they can let their frustrations out.

Thus when things get personal on-line my instinctive response is to withdraw -you can't win when feelings are hurt online - not in a way where everyone feels their honour is preserved - it is so much more difficult to create a win-win rather than a win-lose scenario.  Everything you say starts to be misconstrued in ways you can't control.

Much as I would prefer it to be otherwise - it's best not to let things get too personal - for one thing - the world could be watching, and there is no way a face saving compromise can be engineered as in real world interaction.  The trick is not to have too high hopes of what can be achieved on line in the first place.

"It's a mystery to me - the game commences, For the usual fee - plus expenses, Confidential information - it's in my diary..."

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Tue May 13th, 2008 at 12:00:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series