We've discussed that from the start between ourselves. Regardless, that is for us to deal with. I'm not saying you're not part of the community. You have a right to post here. I'm indicating that to people who you don't socialise with actively, that is the impression created. The fact that you're both part of the community doesn't mean you know each other. She's not blaming you for stopping her. She acknowledges that she should have apologised.
No, what you're saying is that because I don't "know" andalusian, I should keep it buttoned when she's being rude. Well, no. I'm not prepared to do that. Also, she said "If the response had limited itself to pointing that out, I would have happily apologised and explained that I had an absolutely awful day." In other words, because of what was said, she just buggered off and didn't apologise. Not even in her last post. Which is weak.
We both felt it was important to get this posted: "I'm sorry Mal. What I posted was overly harsh and devoid of anything useful. I was having a completely crappy day, though that doesn't excuse it in the least. I felt fairly quilty after I posted it - I know the time and effort that you put into this (as someone who has done web design themselves). I was going to retract the post and apologise when I woke up that morning, but by then it felt like a flame-war had started."
Ok, a few things. I did not respond to what Adele said for ANY OTHER REASON than the fact that I thought her post was out of line. Even after all this, after all the long explanations and exploration of feelings, I still do. I wanted to say that (to use a much needed disclaimer when Adele is involved), in my opinion, her post was rude. Her points could have been portrayed in a much more productive and considerate way. I honestly can't think of a reason why she didn't think a bit more before she posted it. If you are going to say "Why should I compromise the way I express my opinions?" you have to acknowledge the fact that if the things you say are rude, people are going to object. It's pretty obvious that it's not going to endear you to people. It was precisely Adele's tone that irritated me, Coppe. That's why I responded to it. Saying that Doors, Chris and I pick on Adele is ridiculous. Obviously the conclusion that myself and Doors only ever, ever, ever in the history of the universe have posted personal attacks against Adele is based on... one previous thread. A thread about music, for discussion. As has been pointed out, it has eerie parallels with this thread. Me and Doors disagreed with Adele. She got annoyed and left. I think Adele disliked both of us for that thread. So, should we have held our tongues, months and months later, on an issue that I would definitely have posted about had it been somebody else saying it? This is a message board, where other people *will* join in with their opinions. Should we limit them to maybe two opinions per person per week? To make sure nobody feels vicitimised? No saving them up for malicious en masse attacks now, people! And never disagree with anyone else more than once. This whole thing is ridiculous. I stand by what I said. Edit: Oh, I just saw up there that Adele did apologise. I just wanted to acknowledge it after this post, because I didn't see the apology before I posted it. I would have been less annoyed had I seen it. It's just what was needed right at the start of this mess.
Then you should take responsibility for the impression you create. She left because she felt it had escalated beyond that. She didn't want to go through the music thread ordeal again. Can we keep the tone civil?
I never said you intended to do anything else. Again, impressions. Again, is this necessary? All acknowledged. Again, I never said you were picking on Adele. Yes, I think so. I think criticism should come from people who have an interest in seeing that person's behaviour change. Otherwise it's one-sided interaction and you create this impression. There is a lot of ridicule here that I don't think is necessary. I'd like to discuss this in a civil way. Please?
Hang on, i should take responsibility for what impression I make. Honestly, the mind boggles. This entire argument comes from andalusian not taking responsibilty for her actions, and you're telling ME i should take for mine? ... I should really laugh about it. Look, I'm not the one that's bailed out after posting something that someones taking umbridge with. I'd have my own parachute if I did that. The ordeal!? Coppe, come on. It was hardly an ordeal. An ordeal is "any extremely severe or trying test, experience, or trial." This was some people disagreeing over a song. Hardly the tasks of hercules. And lastly, I said it was weak. I wouldn't say that's the worst word I have in my lexicon.
Yes, I'm telling you that you should take responsibility. Perhaps it's not an ordeal for you, but you've severely hurt someone a couple of times. You can acknowledge that and apologise or you can recognise that by not doing that you're dismissing someone.
and yes, it's great she's finally got someone to post an apology on her behalf, It's just a few pages too late really.
There was never any intent to leave the apology out. It just happened that way. We have acknowledged that it should have been posted then.
Coppe, I'll apologise if I really think it warrants an apology. I have apologised several times in the past, to various people. I've apologised twice today even, which is possibly some sort of record. What I won't apologise for, is calling someone rude when they were. When everyone knows they were, including the person themselves. I don't even think what I said was exactly harsh, unfair or rude. Indeed, I can't imagine many people would be horrendously crushed by it.
I'm not arguing that you don't apologise to people. You did it in a way, that I think, was unwarranted. You did it in a way that created the impression that you had a strong dislike for someone and that made them feel persecuted. You hurt someone. It doesn't matter what you think about it. You can acknowledge that and apologise or you can dismiss it.
Acknowledged. To be honest I'm quite surprised that you, Andalusian, don't feel part of the group as much as some of the others. I've thought of you as one of the core members for a long time now, and assumed most other people do too. In fact it's obvious that they do otherwise there wouldn't be such a big hooha over you leaving, and this lengthy debate. I don't think it would have gone on this long if everyone thought you were a nobody.
Yes, ok, keep attacking me. It's easy to do I suppose. I'm trying my best to keep my posts vaguely humorous in places, but you don't seem to be picking up on it, or you're choosing not to. I am at a loss as to when this thread suddenly became about hurt feelings of poor, blameless andalusian though. A basic principal of society is that actions have consequences. She was rude, she got pulled up on it. Is it my fault she chooses to completely overblow it? Where does it end, exactly? In my mind, she gave Mals personal feelings no consideration at all, so it's a bit rich to then get all upset when you THINK someone does the exact same to you. It is, and excuse my french, a big pile of bollocks. That is hypocracy, at it's finest.
This, and the "I never said you were picking on Adele" comment; I got this impression from her comment (through you) that she believed myself and Doors only ever posted personal attacks at her, which is rubbish. No, the disclaimer comment wasn't necessary. I said it because Adele became needlessly upset about a difference in opinion, confusing it for a personal attack. Well, I suppose it always boils down to that, doesn't it? If nobody cared, why would anybody have posted? The one sided interaction only occurred because one party made a hasty exit straight away. And the ridicule was to illustrate what I found an absurd concept.
I think you should apologise and I'm explaining why. That is it. "Poor, blameless" Andalusian? Is that really necessary? Honestly, it hurts me every time I read this sort of stuff. Why do you have to ridicule her feelings? Also, she took the blame. You are free to dismiss her feelings and acknowledge that you don't care what the ramifications of your actions were. Also, the first part is unrelated to the second one. She was rude, she got pulled up on it and she apologised (admittedly not very quickly, but that's a different debate). You made her feel persecuted. That is a different matter. That's not hypocrisy. You're saying that if you do something wrong, someone else can do that to you. That's 'eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' or a "tu quoque" fallacy, whichever way you want to see it.
It's a stark characterisation, but it is broadly the impression that has been created. I think both of you contributed to that, to making it feel like a personal attack. The one-sided interaction referred to the interaction before Adele leaving and wouldn't have changed had she not. What I'm arguing is that criticism should not come from someone you don't know within a community. That creates one-sided interaction. I think you should have realised that.
Well, maybe I'll get Ella to post an apology for me in a couple of days then. Coppe, let me ask you. Would you apologise to a murderer for locking him up? If someone came up to you in the street, and said your friend was a bit useless, would you smile and nod? If you would, then I'm a tad concerned. Actions have consequences. Why, WHY, should I apologise for upsetting someone that has just been very rude to my friend? It's sad that she feels that it's a persecution against her, but that's hardly my fault. If she was aware that she'd posted a rather nasty little post at mal, surely she can't be overly shocked that people pulled her up on it? Or was it just cause it was me, and ella. The 2 evil ringleaders that were so horrible to her previously? I think that seems more likely, given her thoughts on the subject since. I did NOT intend to go out of my way to pick on her. Make her feel bad, yes, to an extent, because she should have felt bad for being such an arse. But that is all.
I completely disagree with this point. It doesn't matter where criticism comes from within a community, it only matters weather or not the criticism is valid and justified. For example, if no-one criticsized Plaid when she was new here, she never would of realized she was pissing people off and therefore would continue to do so and never would have been accepted by the group. Nor, do I think should have a quiet word with someone who knows someone and tell them to sort out the problem. It reeks of dishonesty to me. Valid Criticism (stupid word!) and espeically how one *deals* with criticism does not in my opinion create one-sided interaction. If you deal with criticism in a mature and intelligent way. People who criticed you are forced to realised that you are mature and intelligent and therefore re-just there perception of you. ps: Sorry plaid for using you was an example I know you dislike it. And sorry the music thread misunderstanding. edit: I'd just like to add that this is a general comment about dealing with critism on the board, not directly about adele.
*Hijacks back* Mal on the homepage it asks me to login and I keep doing that, in frustration I went to Boardania to have a read if not post, and it says 'Hi spiky!'... Is there anyway to get the homepage to say 'Hi spiky' so I don't get confused and continue to try to login when I'm already logged in? *relinquishes thread*
This is the new thread that won't sleep, I see! I had hoped we would avoid getting mired into this kind of argument, but since we haven't, I feel compelled to comment, as a member of this community and a friend of all the people involved. I have a habit of being long-winded in these affairs, so apologies in advance for that. KK, I would also like to comment on your remarks, but I'll do so in a different post. I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, especially since several have been so hurt already, on both sides of this argument, whether it has been stated or not. I don't want to unjustifiedly accuse anyone of anything (or, indeed, be accusatory at all). But there are some long-standing tenets of this community that I see being called into question here: the acceptability of criticising perceived bad behaviour; personal responsibility and the extent to which we should be prepared to accommodate others' needs; acceptability of swearing; and whether or not we should offer our opinion when a similar opinion has already been offered. Those last two are, for me, the easiest to address. First; each person is an individual and has a right to express their opinion. In this community, if you think it, you can say it. Crucially, though, we believe in taking responsibility for what you have said. If CJ, Ella, Doors, Marcia, Rinso, KK, Coppe and anyone else want to chime in on this issue, they will and may do so. That is one of the defining principles of this board. The corollary is that each person must be prepared to accept the consequences of their statments. In relation to this, I am happy that Adele has finally offered an apology, which actively takes responsibility for her earlier words. Thank you, Adele. Second; swearing happens on this board. We've had many discussion about this in the past. If you want to ask people not to swear, fair enough. But, for my part, I will not refrain from swearing if that word is the tool I wish to use. Swear words carry whatever power we choose to give them. If, to you, they are relatively meaningless, then they will not hurt. If, to you, they are strong and painful, they will hurt you. Remember that other people may invest them with more or less power than you do. Choose your words carefully and with intention, and be prepared to accept the consequences of your choice. And remember that other people's words are theirs to choose, and they are doing you a favour if they agree to bend to your values on this matter. Coppe, what you perceive as uncivil or hostile is not necessarily intended that way. Doors, what you intend as humorous or merely emphatic may not be taken that way. I think you both know that and must be prepared to take it into account. Now let's look at the other stuff, which is more complicated. This jumped out at me. Here's a quote from one of my favourite women, Eleanor Roosevelt: "No one can make you feel small without your consent." In relationship counselling, we are taught to take responsibility and to promote peacemaking by recognising that no one else can make us feel a certain way. We can spend our lives letting other people control our feelings, or we can choose to own our feelings and not give responsibility for them away to others. Perhaps, as a result of Doors and Ella's comments in the past, Adele felt persecuted. But Doors and Ella did not make Adele feel that way. If anything, I think Adele is far more likely than most people to feel persecuted because of her family background; and that is no more Doors and Ella's fault than it is hers. That said, we have responsibility for the words we choose, and therefore a partial responsibility for their effect, whether or not it was intentional. That has to go both ways. If Adele's choice of words upset other people, and she cares about those other people (and didn't intend to upset them), she should apologise, as she finally has. If Doors's choice of words has upset other people (and Coppe says it has), and he cares about those other people and didn't intend to upset them, he should apologise. You might think the other person is wrong for taking offense, but if they have taken offense and you care about them, there are still those hurt feelings to deal with. Choosing to say nothing is a choice too, with its own consequences. So is choosing to say, "No, you are reacting inappropriately. Please try to see it my way." But remember it might be a lot harder for someone to see it your way without an apology first. Coppe, bear that in mind for the first half of this argument. Doors, bear it in mind for the second. Ownership of feelings is important, and so is ownership of words. If someone says something that offended you, you were offended. They have responsibility for their words causing offense; and you have have responsibility for your feelings of offense. You can say, "When you say that, I feel offended." And they can say, "I'm sorry my words offended you." Or, of course, they can say, "I don't care, I'm going now, bye." Or, "I don't care, I'm pissed off. Maybe I'll apologise later, but I'm not making any promises, so there!" Then you can choose how to deal with your feelings of offense. (And, as many of us know, receiving an apology doesn't always make your feelings go away!) Now, let's look at the music thread. First of all, even if Adele still felt like a newbie, she wasn't. She was (is?) an accepted and known member of the community in good standing. I felt like a newbie for two years after joining the boards (having lurked for a long time before that), even though I knew I wasn't. I was still very emotionally swung by events such as being snapped at by Samantha Vimes, being thanked by people I helped, being acknowledged by Garner, being put down by Lorenzo and so on. I recognised that these feelings were mine and chose to deal with them accordingly. Now, I am not saying that it is wrong or silly to be heavily affected by such events if you feel (or really are) new. And those people could certainly have been more thoughtful in the way they spoke to me, but it was still mostly my issue with being new that was behind the emotional impact of their words. It's quite important to be able to notice when, actually, yeah, it is coming from you. I think this is an important thing to remember, and I definitely agree with it. Established members too easily forget the power newbies invest in them and their words. However, if you're the "newbie" (or semi-lurker or whatever), it's important to remember that other people don't necessarily know you feel that way. They're probably speaking to you the same way they would to anyone else on the board. Your feelings are your own and often derive from your position, not from the other person. I read over the argument in the music thread. In my reading, Adele gave a contentious opinion, stated in a humorous but very blunt way, that would inspire anyone disagreeing with it to speak up. (And wasn't that her intention, to garner a response?) I read Doors's response as an intentionally humorous, playful disagreement. I was really gobsmacked by how hard Adele took his 'Incorrect!' remark, which I read as most clearly tongue-in-cheek and an absolute match in tone for Adele's comments. I did think Ella's comments were slightly defensive, but I also thought Adele's comments had been slightly aggressive, so no surprises. I also thought the tone remained civil and humorous throughout. Coppe's entry into the thread really surprised me, because I genuinely saw nothing to get upset at. I'm very sorry that an exchange took place that was so upsetting to two board members, especially since I totally missed it at the time and therefore couldn't attempt to ease things a little. But I really think that this was a case of both Adele and Coppe being incredibly oversensitive, and perhaps of a failure to clarify intended tone adequately and early enough to make a difference (on Doors's part). At this point I want to pause to say that I am worried about coming across as one-sided. Coppe, in the middle of such emotional upheaval, I'm worried that you will perceive what I've said so far as further hostility, dismissal or lack of empathy. It is not intended that way. I hope that giving my honest opinions and the reasons for them will help everyone to resolve this. Moving on. I see a similar pattern in this thread as that of the music thread. Adele spoke in a way that offended. We've talked about 'blunt' and 'rude' already, so let's just say that we don't always come across how we intended to, and we're all still learning. I called her out on this in what I hope was a gentle enough way to get her to think about it without getting upset. I don't think the additional comments from Doors and Ella were helpful at that time, but it was their prerogative to make them, as discussed above. What surprised me is, as Marcia pointed out, Adele felt so upset about other people being blunt, when she sees no problem with speaking that way herself. To put it another way, she can dish it out, but she can't take it. Coppe, sometimes in this thread, you seem to have felt that Adele should be allowed to dish it out but shouldn't have to take it. (Of course, you are aware of the vulnerability beneath the bolshy exterior, but not everyone has that privilege!) Now, I think from later comments you've made, you refute that position. And since Adele has apologised for how she spoke before, we can assume she acknowledges that it's not OK to dish it out. But people will naturally take exception if that is what they think you're saying. I think the points that have been raised - particularly by Rinso and CJ - have often been very valid. If you expect people to be careful about the way they talk to you, it follows that you have to be careful about the way you talk to them. Coppe, would your feelings in this be different if you thought that Adele had been treated in exactly the same way she treated others? Or if she had been treated better than she treated others? You know, in the past I've seen Garner say things that have caused far more hurt than Adele caused, to people I care about as much as I care about Mal (and Marcia, because I also thought of how she would feel about it, since Mal is her husband - and I remember remarks she's made before about how strongly she feels when the people she cares about are insulted). Those times have been really difficult for me, especially since my policy of openly stating when I think my friends are in the wrong (a policy this whole community abides by, in fact) has often upset Garner, because he has felt undermined and ashamed. I've also felt furious and incredibly defensive when I've seen the hurt other people have caused him, even when I believe him to have been in the wrong. The trouble is, Garner's a very oversensitive person, for various reasons, and what he perceives as persecution, hostility or disagreement just because it's him is usually something far more innocent. If you're an oversensitive person, it's quite important to learn to recognise it. And don't go dishing it out if you can't take it. Garner learned that one the hard way. He's also been very willing to apologise for his mistakes, but there's always fallout, and the apology only ever deflects some of it. Anyway, if Garner says something I think is wrong, I'll say so. And if anyone else here says something I think is wrong, I'll say so. Whether they're a newbie or someone like Ba or Rinso. Saying that you shouldn't criticise someone unless you know them well is something I definitely disagree with, I'm afraid, Coppe. If I behave badly, it doesn't matter if you know my reasons or not. Yes, criticism implies a wish to change someone's behaviour. Can't you wish to change the behaviour of someone you don't know who's doing something you don't like? I fail to see how this point can be supported. This community took a lot of damage recently from a group of people who would not acknowledge problems until they were large and festering enough that they nearly broke us. Those of us who did try to address problems didn't do so nearly early enough. Problem behaviour gets addressed, regardless of whether you know the person or not. It goes all ways. Whatever is posted here is open to the whole community to comment on, whoever posted it. So, in case you weren't able to draw a point from all that, I'll summarise. Coppe, you're a great guy, a good friend and an important member of the board. I'm sorry you've been upset, but I do think you're overreacting to perceived - rather than genuine - hostility. I make a point of saying when I disagree with my friends (especially since that way it means something when I do agree with them), and this is me doing it. I'm very sorry Adele felt so put upon that leaving was the best option, but I believe those feelings arise primarily from within her rather than without. I do not think that Doors and Ella have persecuted Adele - in fact, I find that a worryingly strong accusation. It's not always other people's fault if you feel bad. I think it was entirely appropriate for people to comment both on what Adele said and on the tone she used. I also think it's appropriate for everyone to continue to comment on this matter if they have something to say (I hope, though, that it will soon be resolved). That said, there is one more point I wish to discuss that relates to this, which I've already touched on earlier. There has been a lot of talk in this thread about perceptions, impressions and whose fault it is if someone takes offence. The following are quotes from some things I said to SWReader a little while ago. I think they apply to everyone involved in this. Now, obviously SWReader and Garner's particular case is no longer what we're concerned about - but if the points were true for that situation, they must still be true now. Your words are your responsibility, and your response to other people's words are your responsibility. Does this post make sense? If there's anything that seems unfair, wrong or illogical, please pick me up on it.
Yeesh, I go away for one day and there's three pages of going round in circles? I'm going to try and sum up my opinions on this... Adele, like others, I do think your first post in this thread was rude, in particular the last sentence. I can't say I'm 100% happy with all the changes (I've mentioned a few), but there are improvements, the work is ongoing and I know Mal is doing this to help the board, not for strange meglomaniac reasons (although I bet he's secretly stroking a white cat at his keyboard). It's fine to say that things aren't looking right to you, but to seemingly disregard Mal's work is rude. I say 'seemingly', because that obviously wasn't the intention. I think Doors' reply to your post was fair enough, pretty even-handed. Ella's post was a little blunter, but amounted to the same as Doors'. I guess it does look a bit like they are ganging up, especially as we all know they're a couple, but it's just something they both felt strongly enough about to post. Your second post was unhelpful. It would have been better to post the apology that has now been posted by Coppe. It would have left your position clear and dissipated any opportunity for the misunderstandings and discussions/arguments that occured afterwards. If after the apology, you still felt the need to leave the board for whatever reason, then that is obviously your perogative, but not something I would like to happen. With regards to the music thread disagreement, I was as equally (if not more) involved in that as Chris, Doors and Ella. I think I showed in Holland that I don't dislike you for it - I did enjoy your company (was particularly grateful for it when the Garners were poring over the RPGs in the shop!*) and you are a nice person. I'm pretty sure that if the others had met you, they would agree. Yes, you're opinionated, as are a lot of my friends, on and off-board, but that's not a bad thing. Occasionally, just occasionally, you do cross a line to rudeness, although I'm sure that's not intentional. I think it's learning how to express yourself clearly, something that probably comes as you get older. I think that sounds a little patronising - I don't intend it to be and expressing myself clearly is something I'm trying to improve too - with varying degrees of success. I'd touch on the rest of the thread now, but that seems to be a slightly different matter, this post has taken me a while and it's getting late. Damn work in the morning! *before Grace mentions it, I know I'm also a geek and have played RPGs with you - but I'm a lesser, not-so-obsessive geek!
OK, now responding to KK's comments about this thread. At the time, I didn't see the question of the shade of the new post indicators as a big deal. Hence my low level of input on the subject. Since, as Doors pointed out, there were arrows pointing to the new threads, it seemed to me that the matter was more a minor question of aesthetic/design preference of concern to those who'd posted about it. What I did see as a potential issue was Doors telling people off for whining. I posted about it, although evidently not in a way that was sufficient to balance his and Ella's posts. I didn't think people were whining, but I thought Doors's remarks were more funny than severe, as I indicated the time. As I've said above, it's easy for established members to forget what an impact these things can have on newer people. At the time, I didn't realise that you were that affected by the matter, KK. Perhaps the lengthy post with apologies, reasoning and clarifications could have given me a clue, but... you know, I missed the big signpost. Sorry! I thought my comment, "I don't think there's a problem with the suggestions that were made" was sufficient to indicate that I disagreed with Doors and thought your remarks were OK. KK, you took to heart what seemed to me to be a small matter. I still don't think it was as big a deal as you felt it was, but I'm sorry that your post went without much acknowledgement. We were still getting to know you at the time and I, at least, found some of your reactions hard to gauge. It seemed to me then more that you wanted to clarify your position than that you were upset about the matter. Doors and Ella are both people who can come across as rude where they intended to be humorous - and I sometimes wonder if this is more of an issue where there is cross-cultural dialogue. I think non-Brits more often find Doors's posts upsetting than Brits do. Sarcasm can be perceived as rudeness, humour or both, and I think it goes across better with people who have the same cultural norms as you do. Doors and Ella both tend to be sarcastic, sardonic, ironic and combinations of the aforementioned. You can speak someone else's language perfectly and still completely get hold of the wrong end of the stick due to cultural differences - see the confusion over the 'Incorrect!' comment in the music thread. The trouble is that if you know someone, you're used to the way they talk - so, for older members, they're less likely to notice Doors being harsh, because that's just Doors. That doesn't make it right, of course. Now, I'm sorry that I didn't do more to step in and be diplomatic. It didn't seem to be that there was much to be diplomatic over or that any more really needed to be said. But perhaps, when you say that 'everyone can improve on their diplomacy skills', that comment is really - diplomatically - aimed at Doors and Ella? If so, I agree. Improve your diplomacy skills, Doors and Ella! Buy some ranks when you level up, and stop making me laugh when you're naughty, because it doesn't help. Anyway, I know arguments can be scary and upsetting when you don't feel established in a group. Remember that disagreeing with you is not the same as disliking you, and that people don't always come across the way they mean to. As discussed in my previous post, that isn't your fault! But it can help to bear it in mind. Does this help? Is there anything further you'd like to address?
While I am entering this thread on a late point, I feel I need to address this point. Both Andalusian and Doors have been in this community for quite some time. This is enough to create familiarity. Perhaps it is not enough to create friendship, or close familiarity, but then close familiarity is not something that is achieved on message boards on that regular a basis. The main point here is point of view. From what you say, Andalusian requires close familiarity and friendship are for full interaction. I disagree with this view, and personally take this as a too guarded approach to interaction. But this is merely my personal view on this matter. Having written this, I've no read Rinso's comment later in the thread, which already replied in length on this. This makes my comment fairly redundant, and next time I'll read the topic to its end before replying. But as I put time and effort into this post, I still prefer to post it.
I haven't commented on this because, so far, I am still stuck in the "WTF"-state. I can second and support Buzzfloyd's posts though. I think they really bring a perspective into it.
Right, I understand that. It wasn't that big a deal, really. I think I never did understand what you meant with that post. I think perhaps I have come across as taking this matter more serious than I did. I did try to clarify my position, and tried to offer constructive critisism in my second post. I must work on expressing myself more clearly, in matters that matters. Sarcasm is easily misunderstood when written. And it could be a cultural/language issue, I don't know. Not really, no. I mean everyone can improve their diplomatic skills. What I think I was trying to say is that nobody is perfect, nobody is always right and that remembering that this applies to you as well can make a lot of difference. This was not aimed at Doors or Ella in particular. I'll buy some ranks in the sarcasm decrypting skills. Wise words. Yes, it helped. No, nothing further. Thank you for taking your time to comment on this matter. Also, a big thank you to Doors for being a big man and apologising to me earlier, even though he never meant any harm and was really only expressing his opinion.
Sorry about that Spiky, that's what is meant to happen. I installed a little program last night that interfered somehow with this, got rid of it now and it works again.
I think you're right there. I'm a fairly competent English speaker, but some cultural references go way over my head, as I don't watch the same TV channels/read the same papers. I guess that even goes for very competent English speakers like CY (Who is a Dutch guy studying English) and Andalusian, who is Australian. I tend to ask for clarification before reacting as I have found that writing is a horrible way of relaying sarcasm and irony. So, if I suspect only a little that someone's comment might be taken in a joking matter, I might even research the phrase on Google or WikiPedia. Also, and this may be a bit naive, I tend to assume people aren't out to get me, but like Buzzfloyd said, that might have to do with my personal background. PS: any of the mods want to try and split the thread? Might be a nice thread to try it on.
As am I. Further, as someone who returned from their own tanty (also at mal none-the-less, is this a running theme here sorry again mal) this needs to be said: Adele take some time off the boards, you may find yourself drawn back here you may not either way don't burn your bridges.
I'm up for trying this, though there are interspersed posts about technical stuff. Edit: However, it appears that, while we can merge threads, we can't split them. Or am I reading something wrong, Mal?
The easiest way I think is to tick all the boxes next to posts you want to move in this thread and move them to a new thread, that you name yourself after selecting "move posts".
Yeeh, there might be some posts that are half a reaction to the upset, and half technical questions/praise and whatnot. I'm trusting you to see which post goes where..
OK, thanks. Also, Mal, I'm slightly unclear on something. I get a login request on the front page. I ignore it and come to the boards, where I am logged in. Is that what's supposed to happen?
This is going to be a real headache, but I think is worth doing. If it's OK with everyone, I'll save it for later today when I can discuss it with others.
I don't think it really matters about the login. I think if you log out from the boards to clear cookies then log back in again it should log you into both. Or you might have to delete cookies on your computer yourself. It'll only really matter if you want to put something on the main site when I get around to sorting that bit out.
Grace, thank you for your post. I've tried to trim it down a bit in responding, I hope you don't mind. I completely agree with your first point. I'm not someone who responds to negativity well in a debate and I have to admit I found a lot of Doors' and Ella's posts difficult to read and respond to. I realise, however, that that is to an extent my response. It is why I've asked politely for them stop rather than getting upset or affronted. I realise that people argue in different ways. It gets to a point, though, where I find it difficult to continue the discussion. It's too upsetting. "Fuck off" is singularly aggressive to me. The same goes for the repeated references to Adele as emotionally unstable. What use does this serve? Even as a way of arguing, it confuses things. When Doors characterises my opinion as 'would you apologise to a murderer for locking them up?', it serves little purpose. It bears little relation to my point and it creates the feeling in me that there is an unwillingness to see my side of things. Well-put, I agree. Very true and I do think the established member - newbie dynamic amplified what happened, but it doesn't explain all of it. Perhaps I am incredibly oversensitive, but even reading it months after it happened the other day, I got the same impression I got then. I can, reading it now and keeping in mind that their comments were intended to be humorous, see it the other way too. I sometimes get the feeling here that our interpretation is being held against us. To me, there were genuinely things in those responses that were hurtful. I don't think that's true. She hasn't said that she doesn't see a problem with speaking that way herself. I may have confused matters here with my misinterpretation. I think she was treated in the same way. She posted something that was unnecessarily blunt and I think the responses were too. I've cut this quote bit, for conciseness: I agree with that. Everyone has a right to criticise something they feel needs to be criticised. However, when you do not know someone, the impression you bring across will be different. Your words will be interpreted differently. There's an extra weight there that you need to take responsibility for. That is the point I've been trying to make. I get the feeling the word 'persecution' has been taken out of context rather. I've said that it felt that way to her at times, but I've made it clear that I no way think Doors and Ella have some sort of vendetta against her. I feel some of the responses to Adele were not appropriate. That is primarily what bothers me about this thread.
Yes, sort of... maybe. No really, either the same games will come back or some new ones... or some of the same ones with some new ones. Also I just noticed with the login, if you click "remember me" it logs you into the forums but not the front site, if you don't tick this box you will be logged into both. It's not a big deal I guess, just a bit odd. I'll look into fixing though of course.
I think what Grace said pretty much covers it. However, I'm not overly sure why people can say Ella needs to brush up on her diplomacy. Me, yes. I can be rude, and certainly I could pull out a million examples of where I've pissed someone off for some reason or another. But ella? She's not exactly over confrontational, a couple of posts on this thread and maybe 2 or 3 other posts ever doesn't seem to be track record of poor diplomacy. But, maybe it's just me. If everyone else thinks she's got the diplomacy skills of the american government, then maybe there's something in it. I just don't see it. To hark back to the music thread, I think there was only 2 people in the whole world that thought we were being horrible to andalusian. Or could ever think that. Ever. Even now, the idea of it is beyond ridiculous to me. Unlike coppe, I can't even see it another way. They both read something that patently wasn't there. It was an entirely ridiculous argument, brought about by one persons immense overeaction to a percieved slight against her. But, christ, it's an argument I'll never win. Coppe and andalusian will never ever see it that way, despite all the opinion against them on it. So, I'll just give up on it and move on. I think that the initial responses to andalusian in this thread were entirely justified. If you're going to be outlandishly rude to someone (like ben said, it was really the final sentence), then you can't expect that people are going to be pleased about it. especially on this board, where people have a long tradition of not being slow to tell people off for being annoying, and for sticking up for friends. As the thread has went on however, I think things have maybe gotten a bit heated. Certainly, I was getting a bit irate by the end of the night, and possibly got a bit snappy. I still stand by what I said though, but, I certainly didn't intend to make out that andalusian was emotionaly unstable. A bit hyper sensitive, yes, but that's all really.
Look, all the interaction you've had with Andalusian boils down to disagreeing with her posts. When the incidents are months apart and in both cases the same people quickly respond in a critical tone (and not far apart from each other), an impression of dislike is created. I don't see why that is difficult to understand, or why it is difficult to own up to your part in that.
In terms of what has happened last night, I think Grace has pretty much summed it up. One thing I'd like to add: tempers. It seems the parties concerned lost theirs and responded accordingly. I've done a quick calculation, between 17:50 and 21:43 last night, there were 30 posts made between Coppe, Doors and Ella - an average of 7 minutes between posts. There were extra posts in between by CJ, Rinso, KK and Mal, but as the thread seems to have become about the other three, I'll allow the stats to look a bit better. Now, 7 minutes to fully digest a post and formulate a coherent response is not very long. I think it would have helped all concerned to have taken time over posts, to ensure people were communicating effectively. There was a lot of stumbling over phrasings, I wonder why? Doors has already acknowledged he was getting a bit "snappy" last night, so I don't think it's unfair to say that tempers seem to have been lost. It would certainly help all concerned, if this discussion is to go on, that people simmer down and take time over their posts.
Even if that were true, which I doubt, what is so bad about it? Are you saying that he has been disagreeing for the sake of it, that he is only doing it because he does not like Andalusian? I do not think Doors is that childish, he would just come out and say he dislikes her if it was the case and not simply disagree with everything she posts.
I do actually think it's true. I know it seems difficult to believe, but Adele hasn't posted that much (we've both been fairly absent the last year). Because her posts are sparse, they tend to stick out in my mind. I know it's something close to that and it is definitely the impression. I'm not saying he's been disagreeing with her for the sake of it. I don't think Doors is that childish either. I have no real idea why it has happened, but I know what it feels like to be on the receiving end and there is no doubt in my mind that it's not a good thing.
Two things I'd like to comment on: And I think this comment is relevant to what I'm going to say: Correct me if I'm wrong (I could easily have missed it), but I don't remember Andalusian actually posting an apology about her possible overreaction to Doors and Ella. Neither, Coppe, have you apologised for the part you may have played in exacerbating the situation (and I don't just mean the misunderstood interpretations. I mean generally.) Both may have been partially justified, but if we're going to say that when people are hurt, apologies should be made whatever the intention, then I think it is only fair that this applies to you as well. I've already apologised for any wrong I may have done, but it's very frustrating to read that you fully expect an apology from Doors when I feel that if that is the case, one should be heard from you as well.
Just to quickly touch on that, Ella only posted twice. CJ posted more often, and some of the others posted just as much. It was mostly just me and coppe
Yeah, I think that's fair. CJ, I'm sorry you've been left alone in your apology. It was really appreciated and I don't think I made that clear. Also, reading those posts in a new way, I can see quite clearly how my comments weren't helpful. I've been meaning to say something more general about this anyway, so I'll throw the two together. (This goes for CJ too, to the extent of which he feels it applies.) Doors, I'm sorry that you feel this frustrated. I'd imagine both Ella and you feel pretty harassed, and vilified, over both incidents. I'm sorry I contributed to that in any way.
I'd like to take this moment to tell you all a quick story about my new work. As you might know, my new job is about processing peoples claims for compensation, when they've been the innocent victim of innocent crime. There are various ways that people will not be eligible for any sort of pay out from the government. If you were doing something illegal at the time, or if it was something that happened through your own stupidity for instance. There's also a part about being ineligable due to your conduct "before, during or after" the incident. Basically, if you ran from the scene, arranged a revenge attack or... brought it on yourself through your own actions. So, if you called someones girlfriend a slag, and got punched as a result, you get no money for it. Or, if you're in a pub watching a Man Utd game, with a load of Man utd fans, and decided now was a great idea to tell them how shit you thought they were, you'd get no money for the resulting injuries. Basically, the government are saying - if you bring something on yourself through your own actions, you can have no cause for complaint, and we're certainly not going to bend over backwards to compensate you for it. Take what you will from that tale.
Ah, it's ok. I'd rather just put this all behind us and move on to be honest. I was getting heated last night, and I apologise if I said things that were out of line as a result. We both could probably have handled it a bit better, to be honest.
Yeah, I know, but Ella seems to have been brought into this as much as you two, which is why I included her. If you want the stats including everyone else, it's a shade over 6 minutes per post.
Doors, you do realise that applying that example to this situation would make you the provoked Manchester United fan and not the government, right?
I'm not applying specific examples, just the general principal behind the scheme. I used the examples to illustrate the idea. Sometimes, people are the authors of their own downfalls, is basically what i'm saying.
Coppe, the most I felt was frustration that me and Doors were being lumped together as a gang, trying to upset Adele. No, that was never the case. I am sorry you both felt that the combination of the music thread and this one meant we were persecuting her. Nothing in this thread, and most definitely not a shred of the posts in the music thread, were posted with dislike behind them. I am sorry about the circumstances: Adele's rare posting and mine and Doors close posting times around two of them. However, I don't think these circumstances can be held against either of us. Me and Doors frequently talk to each other online. We are often online at the same time. In regard to this thread, I acknowledge that we both posted when just one post would have sufficed. But I wanted to acknowledge my opinion, and would have done this with anybody else, regardless of who they were, and regardless of who posted before me. My posts were not tailored by a dislike of Adele. When diplomacy is called for, I will try not to be sarcastic in future. Bauke is right when he says it is difficult to interpret correctly in writing. Thanks for your last post, Coppe. I did not intend to hurt anybody, and I'm sorry if I did.
Well, Ella seems to understand! Sarcasm is antithetical to diplomacy, and both of you are people who bring sarcasm to the debate in spades. For my part, it makes me laugh. But it's definitely not diplomatic. That's NOT the same as saying Ella is rude or confrontational, because I don't think she's either of those. I don't think there's anything else that I have been asked to add to this or should add. The argument seems to be over, I'm glad to see.
