>  Hey squad: 
> 
> Richard Budd felt the need to scold me for
>  having the nerve to correct something he'd posted. I'd attempted to
>  clarify the difference between two words that look alot alike, but
> have
>  completely different meanings; mediate and meditate. It seemed he'd
> read
>  one as the other and been confused by it. His response to my efforts
> was
>  a little scornful.  He wrote,  "Great job exposing that typing error.
>  You're quite insightful and should be very proud of yourself".  That
> was
>  it. He addressed none of the issues.
>  
>  Rick: I don't think there was anything about my criticism that could
> be
>  viewed as a personal attack. It certainly wasn't intended that way.
> Why
>  the sensitivity? Why the lashing out? Are you trying to SHAME me into
>  submission? Are you just trying to hurt my feelings? Please let this
>  serve as an apology, if you've really been injured.
>  I say we can disagree vigorously on the issues, but please refrain
> from
>  snotty insults. Personal insults are almost impossible to take
> seriously anyway, since we don't "personally" know each other. You
> don't know me
>  well enough to deliver any genuine and valid insults. I just ends up
>  revealing too much about the attacker.
>  
>  This is a forum where we all put our ideas on the table for everyone
> to
>  examine. Criticism and disagreement are the methods we use to
> discover
>  the truth. Our disagreements are more productive and fun than any
>  small-talk tea party ever was. Each of us has a reason to think these
> are important ideas. We all care about this stuff or wouldn't spend
> the
>  time. Sure, there's gonna be passion and some heat, but I think we
> all
>  owe it to each other to be very clear about what we mean. We should
> be frank and pointed in our objections.  We should even try to use
> proper
>  spelling and grammar, include descriptions and definitions of the
> words
>  we employ, and otherwise respect the time of those who will read what
> is
>  written. Each of us should be able to engage the debate fully without
>  fear of retaliation. We shoudn't have to walk on egg shells. That is
>  simply too dishonest and distracting.
>  
>  I realize I may come off as a know-it-all here, but I really do have
>  alot of experience with discussion groups. (Been doing it for over
> ten
>  years including five years as a talk show producer and a little time
> as
>  a talk radio host. It sure is nice to have someone else taking care
> of
>  things for a change.) People will occasionally get their feelings
> hurt
>  when a pet idea is rejected or ignored. Even when a flaw in logic or
>  factual error is discovered it can sting a little.  We just have to
> be
>  adult about it and resist the temptation to hurt the messenger rather
>  than address the criticism. If all you want in life is an un-bruised
>  ego, this is not your kind of hobby.
>  
>  I hate to point fingers after having said all that, but ask yourself
>  these questions. Do you imagine that threats and insults are
> productive in any way? Do you imagine that behaviour has earned
>  any respect? Do think anyone was impressed reading abusive posts?
>  The answers are no, no and no. 
> 
> 
>  David


MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/

Reply via email to