Kevin wrote:
>I disagree with that. Why should I NOT say something because it MIGHT
>offend someone? Yeah I agree with the listequitte that personnal attacks
>are bad and wrong, that the replies should stick with the ideas. That
>hasn't stopped people from 'perceiving ' attacks on their character or
>religion or whatever.
I guess there are several people here who missed the guidelines discussions
the first time around, so I'll reiterate. It was/is my feeling that
subjects are not to be avoided, but hot language is. I think we'd all like
for everyone to avoid purposeful baiting and abuse of others. At one time
I had Gord flame me (boy did he do a good job) on the list so I could
demonstrate how to not take the bait and make a resonable reply ... that's
the kind of thing the guidelines encourage ... communication over
confrontation. I think you can say just about anything to anyone if it's
phrased properly ... it's not so much what you say as how you say it. We
could all improve in that area.
Kevin again:
>So all I really want to say is get some tougher skin, and watch the
>subjects you don't like and use that trash button.
Well, I agree with the the trash button, but I disagree with the tougher
skin. Another concept that goes along with being a member of a
civilization is to pursuade others to your point of view (diplomacy), not
clobber them and drag them to it. Sometimes people have to agree to
disagree, and drop the subject. We haven't been too good about dropping
the subject here lately, IMO.
... and dear Marvin of the Silver Tongue said:
>So here's a suggestion: when someone says something that ticks us off,
>let's stop trying to be moralists about what is basically a matter of
>conversational etiquette. We're not here to be thought police or grammar
>police. Well, maybe sometimes on the grammer....but let's be a
>sociologists instead. Remember that some people in the world are going
>to rub you the wrong way no matter what, and let's not take such things
>personally. Instead of thinking "Why, that dirty so and so...!" think,
>"Gee, I WONDER why that dirty so and so," said whatever he said. Maybe
>it'll give us enough pause to make sure that whatever we say in response
>actually does some good.
(Loud clapping heard from somewhere in the north end of the Willamette
Valley). The only thing I'd add is "lets try to redevelop our collective
sense of humour, for goodness sake".
Has everyone read _Brightness Reef_ at least? The community of the six (or
seven or eight or nine or ten, depending on how far into the trilogy we're
talking about) was enchanting for me to read about. The idea of all those
species getting along in a functioning society brought me to this list (I
was looking for information on when the next book was to be published) more
than five years ago. I think that's the 'vision' alot of us held for this
place, and it worked well for most of that time. When we had our blow up,
and members left, I think things changed in the way we communicate. I'm
not sure that it didn't start before then, though. Maybe this is just the
natural evolution and aging process that goes on in an e-community.
Anyway, community values have changed, and I'd like to know if they've
changed in a way that the community wants them to change.
Amities,
Jo Anne
Old Crone in the Willamette.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
