Non-confrontational, non-personal discussion of how to sustain the good community.

[Roxanne Appleby]

I haven’t thought deeply about about this, but it’s what I’ve always believed. If I’m mistaken in premise or logic I would be glad to have it pointed out and explained.

I think that one element of a healthy community is that individuals don’t display "too much honesty" in sharing their views of others' faults. I think this western notion of "get it all out in public" is not correct. Instead, a certain amount of keeping it in - and perhaps even accepting a certain amount of hypocrisy - is a good thing for a community. It’s a necessary social lubricant. I think the Japanese model has something to teach in this regard.

If I think Fred is a bad person, with bad habits and bad character, explaining this in public doesn’t benefit Fred or me. Worse, it harms the community we both belong to. It irrevocably builds a wall between not just me and Fred, but between me and others with whom I did not want a wall, because they may think that Fred is good. It doesn't matter that I think they are misguided in that. What matters is that I have cut myself off from them, when I really didn't want to. The entire community is divided and fractured in ways that I couldn't predict and never intended, and it can't be undone.

In contrast, if I send Kim a PM saying, "Fred is a bad person," no one is harmed. Perhaps it’s good that I let off some steam. For that reason I think the notion that it's OK to say things in public but not in private is exactly backwards.

That doesn’t mean I can never disagree with Fred in public, but it should be something specific and not related to his personality as a whole. I can say, “Fred, I think that was impolite to call Nancy a crack-whore,” and we can discuss it. If instead I say, “Fred, you are bad,” or even, “Fred, you are an impolite person,” there’s nothing he can say back, except, “Fuck you, Roxanne.” Obviously there are lots of gray areas, but given the monumental potential for misunderstandings, perhaps once again the Japanese model has something to teach, which is to err on the side of caution in such matters. Or even the old western maxim, “If you can’t say something nice, blah blah blah.” But there’s something to it, isn't there?

 

[Just-Legal]

The problem with this, Roxanne, is that it emphasises the backdoor cliques, in that, you have person x pm-ing person y about what person z said, even if in the vein of letting off steam. You'd still end up with the same problem there is now, that some people have no idea who's bitching about who behind whomever's back.

Its a nice idea in principle but I think it would fail in reality.

((sorry if I'm a little short or unclear, making headway into a nice chardonnay!))

 

[Dar~]

http://a250.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/43/l_406ccc82470db380181f07c8e1fc4629.jpg

 

[Guest]

Non-confrontational, non-personal discussion of how to sustain the good community?

Sex.

 

[cloudy]

The problem with this, Roxanne, is that it emphasises the backdoor cliques, in that, you have person x pm-ing person y about what person z said, even if in the vein of letting off steam. You'd still end up with the same problem there is now, that some people have no idea who's bitching about who behind whomever's back.

Its a nice idea in principle but I think it would fail in reality.

((sorry if I'm a little short or unclear, making headway into a nice chardonnay!))

I agree. It goes on now, anyway.

 

[oggbashan]

Non-confrontational, non-personal discussion of how to sustain the good community?

Sex.

That would never work.

Sex causes nearly as many arguments as money.

Og

 

[Guest]

That would never work.

Sex causes nearly as many arguments as money.

Og

Wise Og.

That's a shame, isn't it?

 

[poppy1963]

What I've encountered is people already know these things...those who don't use them don't because they simply don't want to! They get a release from the spewing of the hate/hostility and will be the first ones to tell you that. Those that just get caught up in some of it sometimes will demonstrate their efforts to be fair. Those who choose "victims" will demonstrate the ability to be more civil with others.

The internet is a funny place like this...a most unusual environment in many ways...for such emotiveness. And so often those who are screaming, cussing, name-calling are the same ones criticizing "emotiveness" in nice ways in others.

What do you think, Roxanne? Was that too honest? I've tried til I was blue in the face with some and red in the face as well in rage as much as embarrassment for looking like Stuart Smalley in my efforts...

Some people just use this kind of environment to troll and flame...period...and the more you try to reason with them the more unreasonably they respond.

 

[LadyCibelle]

Non-confrontational, non-personal discussion of how to sustain the good community?

May I suggest no-one talking to anyone? I mean, that's pretty much the only way there won't be any confrontation anywhere, no?

 

[S-Des]

What I've encountered is people already know these things...those who don't use them don't because they simply don't want to! They get a release from the spewing of the hate/hostility and will be the first ones to tell you that. Those that just get caught up in some of it sometimes will demonstrate their efforts to be fair. Those who choose "victims" will demonstrate the ability to be more civil with others.

The internet is a funny place like this...a most unusual environment in many ways...for such emotiveness. And so often those who are screaming, cussing, name-calling are the same ones criticing "emotiveness" in nice ways in others.

What do you think, Roxanne? Was that too honest? I've tried til I was blue in the face with some and red in the face as well in rage as much as embarrassment for looking like Stuart Smalley in my efforts...

Some people just use this kind of environment to troll and flame...period...and the more you try to reason with them the more unreasonably they respond.

Well said.

 

[neonlyte]

Where I live we have a whole mixed bunch of people. The local family grocer is a cousin of the the husband and wife who rent the restaurant in my building. He's a really nice guy, his wife is not too well, she works the cash register most of the time. His cousin - the guy who rents the restaurant takes advantage of the local rent laws requiring both parties to agree on a fair rent. He's getting near retirement, dosen't want to pay a cent more than he has too, so he hasn't agreed a rent increase for fifteen years (he pays about $80 per month). The grocer puts his prices up according to the wholesale markets; he's considerably more expensive than the supermarkets, but hey, he's a nice guy. Welcomes everyone with a smile, gives the kiddies biscuits, so that is where I shop. I hardly talk with the the one who rents the restaurant.

In the park opposite, we have a whole bunch of druggies and alcoholics. They pretty much keep to themselves, they run the parking after market finishes and collect a few cents. They also look out for my car when I'm not here, I give them the change in my pocket. You wouldn't call them friends, but they are friendly most of the time. It's easy to tell when they've 'had too much' though they tend to argue between themselves.

The rest of the folk around here drift through, across the market square, into the restaurant, to work. We smile as we pass, might sometimes exchange a word we have no major impact one on the other.

Of course, if you want trouble, it's easy to find. Most of it is just bad parking, but just occassionally we get something more serious, like when the gypsies fall out. We all know you don't interfere. Let them sort their own squabbles, and apart from the infrequent stabbing, life carries on, the gypsies are back flogging their clothing on the market fringe, the drunks and druggies sing songs and help park cars, the grocer continues to dispense his free biscuits and I don't talk to the bastard downstairs who wont pay a reasonable rent.

 

[oggbashan]

Machiavellian advice

Whenever a community is feuding internally, or a ruler is unpopular, the remedy is an external threat, real or imaginary.

The constant threat to Literotica is those who would suppress free speech because they don't agree with what is said. There are those, particularly in some religious groups in the US, but also in the UK, who would regard us in Literotica as irredeemibly perverted and sinful. If they could, they would destroy the internet rather than allow free speech.

Freedom of speech means that we have to accept freedom of speech for others even if we dislike or even hate what they say.

Unfortunately the governments of the US and UK seem to regard freedom of speech as only suitable to be allowed with tight restrictions about what is said. I could be prosecuted for blasphemy, for racist or sexist writing or speech even though I hear far worse in the streets of my town.

Og

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

The problem with this, Roxanne, is that it emphasises the backdoor cliques, in that, you have person x pm-ing person y about what person z said, even if in the vein of letting off steam. You'd still end up with the same problem there is now, that some people have no idea who's bitching about who behind whomever's back.

Its a nice idea in principle but I think it would fail in reality.

((sorry if I'm a little short or unclear, making headway into a nice chardonnay!))

Glad to see you have your priorities straight.

"some people have no idea who's bitching about who behind whomever's back"

Granted, at a certain point it can become toxic in itself, so maybe I need to explore that a bit more. If I PM Kim and say, "Fred is bad," and Kim PMs back and says, "Yeah!" no one is harmed. But if I now PM Tim and say not "I think Fred is bad, but "Kim and I think Fred is bad," that is creates a toxic dynamic in itself. That would break down what I hoped to accomplish.

Does that make sense?

 

[Belegon]

Whenever a community is feuding internally, or a ruler is unpopular, the remedy is an external threat, real or imaginary.

The constant threat to Literotica is those who would suppress free speech because they don't agree with what is said. There are those, particularly in some religious groups in the US, but also in the UK, who would regard us in Literotica as irredeemibly perverted and sinful. If they could, they would destroy the internet rather than allow free speech.

Freedom of speech means that we have to accept freedom of speech for others even if we dislike or even hate what they say.

Unfortunately the governments of the US and UK seem to regard freedom of speech as only suitable to be allowed with tight restrictions about what is said. I could be prosecuted for blasphemy, for racist or sexist writing or speech even though I hear far worse in the streets of my town.

Og

Ogg, are you saying that the recent removal of irritant Falwell created a void in which we felt less threatened by outside sources and thus reverted to bickering with each other?

 

[Dar~]

Whenever a community is feuding internally, or a ruler is unpopular, the remedy is an external threat, real or imaginary.

The constant threat to Literotica is those who would suppress free speech because they don't agree with what is said. There are those, particularly in some religious groups in the US, but also in the UK, who would regard us in Literotica as irredeemably perverted and sinful. If they could, they would destroy the internet rather than allow free speech.

Freedom of speech means that we have to accept freedom of speech for others even if we dislike or even hate what they say.

Unfortunately the governments of the US and UK seem to regard freedom of speech as only suitable to be allowed with tight restrictions about what is said. I could be prosecuted for blasphemy, for racist or sexist writing or speech even though I hear far worse in the streets of my town.

Og

So astutely and brilliantly put. I adore you *kneels*

 

[Guest]

Non-confrontational, non-personal discussion of how to sustain the good community?

Sex.

AMEN!!! and halleluja!!

 

[Belegon]

AMEN!!! and halleluja!!

*taps foot*

Still patiently waiting for the convergence of Fem being in a straight-curious mode and visiting Southern California....

Sex and drinks... I'll pour. (and ignore those who say I'm not allowed to bartend...)

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Whenever a community is feuding internally, or a ruler is unpopular, the remedy is an external threat, real or imaginary.

The constant threat to Literotica is those who would suppress free speech because they don't agree with what is said.

Yeah! I say, let's string the bastards up! Who's with me? C'mon, AH, united we stand! Over? Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? C'mon, let's do it!

<cue marching music. marches out, high-stepping, pumping baton up and down>

 

[poppy1963]

Well said.

Thanks...and one of the most important elements of this opinion is: those who do this will TELL you and others publicly that they are doing it! They say it straight out and people stare blankly at them and just motor on. Hee hee!

Of course, later, when you call them on it, they pretend it isn't so...no matter how many links to their states are provided.

Mostly people just stare blankly and motor on...

Perhaps that IS the best thing to do for the "community". It's just very difficult for ME to do!

 

[Vermilion]

I haven’t thought deeply about about this, but it’s what I’ve always believed. If I’m mistaken in premise or logic I would be glad to have it pointed out and explained.

I think that one element of a healthy community is that individuals don’t display "too much honesty" in sharing their views of others' faults. I think this western notion of "get it all out in public" is not correct. Instead, a certain amount of keeping it in - and perhaps even accepting a certain amount of hypocrisy - is a good thing for a community. It’s a necessary social lubricant. I think the Japanese model has something to teach in this regard.

If I think Fred is a bad person, with bad habits and bad character, explaining this in public doesn’t benefit Fred or me. Worse, it harms the community we both belong to. It irrevocably builds a wall between not just me and Fred, but between me and others with whom I did not want a wall, because they may think that Fred is good. It doesn't matter that I think they are misguided in that. What matters is that I have cut myself off from them, when I really didn't want to. The entire community is divided and fractured in ways that I couldn't predict and never intended, and it can't be undone.

In contrast, if I send Kim a PM saying, "Fred is a bad person," no one is harmed. Perhaps it’s good that I let off some steam. For that reason I think the notion that it's OK to say things in public but not in private is exactly backwards.

That doesn’t mean I can never disagree with Fred in public, but it should be something specific and not related to his personality as a whole. I can say, “Fred, I think that was impolite to call Nancy a crack-whore,” and we can discuss it. If instead I say, “Fred, you are bad,” or even, “Fred, you are an impolite person,” there’s nothing he can say back, except, “Fuck you, Roxanne.” Obviously there are lots of gray areas, but given the monumental potential for misunderstandings, perhaps once again the Japanese model has something to teach, which is to err on the side of caution in such matters. Or even the old western maxim, “If you can’t say something nice, blah blah blah.” But there’s something to it, isn't there?

Oh my God - who told you my name was Fred? I can't believe you thought I was a bad person all this time <sobs loudly>

Sorry Roxanne. 12 hours till my exam and I'm more than a little hysterical. I suggest everyone ignores my posts until I seem a little mor enormal...
x
V

 

[Guest]

Oh my God - who told you my name was Fred? I can't believe you thought I was a bad person all this time <sobs loudly>

Sorry Roxanne. 12 hours till my exam and I'm more than a little hysterical. I suggest everyone ignores my posts until I seem a little mor enormal...
x
V

hell fred but youve got a cute av

 

[impressive]

The spin-off thread. *yawn*

 

[Vermilion]

hell fred but youve got a cute av

Dat belong to ma Ho, Biyatch.
She be mine so youse keep yo filthy lezbean hands offa her

x
V

(plz don;t take offence. Like I said, am more than a little hysterical here)

 

[Liar]

I think we just solved it with candy over in the other thread.

 

[Guest]

Dat belong to ma Ho, Biyatch.
She be mine so youse keep yo filthy lezbean hands offa her

x
V

(plz don;t take offence. Like I said, am more than a little hysterical here)

how dare you!!!!


now come here so i can lick you