Can we make MN less hostile?

[Robert]

This thread is developing a lot of irony.

Bootstrap, who champions me or others against you when you become passive aggressive or so locked in on what you have decided we mean?

Who steps in when Josh becomes so authoritative that he tells others what they think and are saying, or minimizes another so they feel shut down?

And Max can be so fixated that he is right that he sees no need to discuss because he just knows he is right.

All three of you are very strong willed and controlling in your own way. Each thinks they know how others should act, yet it is the actions of the three of you that sets a strong tone here. You three are frequent posters and help set the tone and standard others follow. So if you want it, be it. Quit telling everyone else how to be and do it yourselves.

So is that direct and confrontational enough? You want the mods to control things more. If I did, I would have to remove 50% of what many post. So then MN would just be my way instead of a community coming together and growing together. Each person has an equal right to have a voice and share their perspective, even if they are wrong. How else do we learn from each other unless we listen and share, even our wacky ideas? Yes, we can hold each other accountable, but there is a caring way to do it and a way that minimizes another by bombarding them with "facts" or talk down to them just to prove how smart and righteous the elitist is.

Lastly, if someone is being picked on, treated harshly, then flag the post itself. That lets us evaluate it. If action needs to be taken, we can and will. We have before. We will again. This is not to be used if you just disagree with the posters opinions. This is to be used if there is mistreatment. This is the way to deal with someone picking on someone or treating them too harshly.

I would personally rather the person being attacked would do the reporting of the post. We often will misjudge what is upsetting or harsh to someone else. If you suspect, then ask the poster. Do not dictate, but ask an open question. If they respond, great, if not, let it go. If the person being harassed is upset, tell them to report the post. This is really the best way.

[temporal1]

This thread is developing a lot of irony.

Bootstrap, who champions me or others against you when you become passive aggressive or so locked in on what you have decided we mean?

Who steps in when Josh becomes so authoritative that he tells others what they think and are saying, or minimizes another so they feel shut down?

And Max can be so fixated that he is right that he sees no need to discuss because he just knows he is right.

All three of you are very strong willed and controlling in your own way. Each thinks they know how others should act, yet it is the actions of the three of you that sets a strong tone here. You three are frequent posters and help set the tone and standard others follow. So if you want it, be it. Quit telling everyone else how to be and do it yourselves.

So is that direct and confrontational enough? You want the mods to control things more. If I did, I would have to remove 50% of what many post. So then MN would just be my way instead of a community coming together and growing together. Each person has an equal right to have a voice and share their perspective, even if they are wrong. How else do we learn from each other unless we listen and share, even our wacky ideas? Yes, we can hold each other accountable, but there is a caring way to do it and a way that minimizes another by bombarding them with "facts" or talk down to them just to prove how smart and righteous the elitist is.

Lastly, if someone is being picked on, treated harshly, then flag the post itself. That lets us evaluate it. If action needs to be taken, we can and will. We have before. We will again. This is not to be used if you just disagree with the posters opinions. This is to be used if there is mistreatment. This is the way to deal with someone picking on someone or treating them too harshly.

I would personally rather the person being attacked would do the reporting of the post.
We often will misjudge what is upsetting or harsh to someone else. If you suspect, then ask the poster. Do not dictate, but ask an open question. If they respond, great, if not, let it go. If the person being harassed is upset, tell them to report the post.
This is really the best way.

i felt really badly after i posted above to boot. i thought of deleting the post, but was out of editing time.
holding in thoughts, then, blurting out, is not a good way.
possibly, i should have taken my “irritants” to the Briar Patch, in the moment.
i’m not good at expressing negative feelngs, so, i do get tripped up when i attempt it. then, i withdraw, in attempt to do the better thing - -

on the bright side, there are many good+wise folks on this forum who are so well able to articulate their thoughts, defend their views, etc., without getting tripped up! i so admire this.

Robert, one thing i’d like to add to your helpful post is, that word, “tribalism.”

boot, you use this word, telling others not to do it! i agree with you on that part.
however, my impression is, you do this more than others. in your above post to me, you divide yourself, Josh, and, now new member Mennogal, against (me and Max.)

as i have protested in the past, there is no “me+Max.”
example:
i have agreed and supported appleman, and others, OVER YEARS, to a far greater extent, yet, never once has there been a reference to “me+appleman.” not one single time.

i do not see/think in tribes, and, somehow, i’m not going to let you lead me into it!
i have an online developng relationship with both Josh, and, now, new Mennogal.
if you want to form a virtual tribe, and others are willing, so be it. adult choice.
but, that’s not for me.

i just reviewed this former post from Robert.
because of his post just above, i’ll add this as a former fav post from admin.
no, i’m not in a tribe with Robert!

.. i wrote:
Robert has shared his understanding of what a discussion forum is over the years.
not long ago, he posted this, i found his description worthwhile, and, easy to understand:

from the "Russian Hacking" thread, Page 20. Jan 2017
http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php ... king#p5883

Robert wrote:
It is also okay for people to state their opinions, even if they are wrong.

We are not setting policy here, but speaking [off] the cuff on a lot of things.

We do not have to be professional or experts to speak.

It is also okay to be wrong when we do speak if we are being sincere and just sharing our opinions.

Sometimes speaking and listening to others opinions can help us grow our knowledge.

I also have no problem with someone having an opinion with little information as long as they are honest about their position.

All the research in the world also can not give a person wisdom. So often we mistake information for wisdom.

It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to have a gut feel for things.

To repeat, this forum has great admin+mods. No one is perfect, but, my goodness, who would do all that would be required to [do as good] - or, better?! Of course, “we” all imagine we’d do better!
But, that’s just SOP human delusions. imho.

[Bootstrap]

Bootstrap, who champions me or others against you when you become passive aggressive or so locked in on what you have decided we mean?

First off, if I am doing something that gets in the way of discussing a topic or letting someone say what they mean, I do appreciate it when people step in to help. I really do find it helpful when people are specific about particular posts or behaviors.

I don't think I'm passive-aggressive, though:

Passive–aggressive behavior is characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation.

I don't think I avoid direct confrontation. I don't think I am indirect. I suspect I'm about as direct and straightforward as anyone here, and maybe that's part of what some find uncomfortable about me.

I do think I probably play by different rules than you do, and we have a different sense of what is normal and natural and expected in a place like an Internet forum.

You are right that I sometimes guess what people mean and guess wrong, and that can be a problem. I don't always know when I'm doing it. But I think other people do that to me too. The best approach I have found is to simply clarify, without malice, if someone misunderstands me. And when people clarify what they mean, I think I accept that.

Who steps in when Josh becomes so authoritative that he tells others what they think and are saying, or minimizes another so they feel shut down?

I do sometimes, actually, if you notice.

All three of you are very strong willed and controlling in your own way. Each thinks they know how others should act, yet it is the actions of the three of you that sets a strong tone here. You three are frequent posters and help set the tone and standard others follow. So if you want it, be it. Quit telling everyone else how to be and do it yourselves.

I started this thread precisely because I am trying to figure out what I can do to reduce hostility. I frankly don't know how to do better than what I am doing. If you read the thread, I'm doing a lot of asking. I'm not claiming to be the person who always gets this right.

Some of what you see as controlling is simply me trying to keep discussion on the topic itself, especially in threads that I start.

So is that direct and confrontational enough?

It's pretty clear that you get frustrated with me, Josh, and Max. I think that's the main thing that's clear in what you have said so far. You say more helpful things in the rest of the post - I will respond to that in a second post.

[temporal1]

.. .. o.and. “one more thing” ..

i do not conflate the meanings of the words, “Christian brotherhood,” with, “tribalism.”
i have great respect for Christian Brotherhood, and, brothers in Christ, etc.

tribalism has a dark and divisive factor that is manipulative, and not Christian.

humans are certainly capable of running off into ditches.
if not, temporal life would be so much tidier.

misuse of the scripturally pure, “brotherhood,” can end up being tribalism.

as with all our choices, the intent of our hearts is what Jesus KNOWS, there is no escape from His knowing. “repent and obey” are the everyday ongoing struggle. (at least, in my world.)

[Bootstrap]

Robert, one thing i’d like to add to your helpful post is, that word, “tribalism.”

boot, you use this word, telling others not to do it! i agree with you on that part.
however, my impression is, you do this more than others. in your above post to me, you divide yourself, Josh, and, now new member Mennogal, against (me and Max.)

as i have protested in the past, there is no “me+Max.”

I really do think that tribalism is bad, and I certainly don't want to form tribes like what you describe. I don't think that's what I was doing, and I think Josh would be rather surprised to find himself placed in the same tribe as me.

Let me go back and see what I said:

I stepped in to defend Mennogal when Max kept reposting the same insulting question without responding to what people were saying in response to him. I think I'm going to start doing that for Josh too. I'm not going to try to defend myself on this kind of thing - at least, not regularly - but I will defend others against this. And I think it would be helpful if we all would be a little less tolerant of this kind of behavior, regardless of who is doing it.

That's not a declaration of war against Max, who posts good things too. But I do think this behavior is problematic.

As Robert suggests, maybe it's more appropriate to simply flag such posts for the moderators to step in.

If you or Max have a hard time relating to me or Josh or Mennogal, that's fine. But I don't think we go around announcing the people we have an especially hard time relating to. It doesn't make things friendlier. And I don't think we go around making public accusations that we are unwilling to discuss.

I might start flagging these posts too.

[temporal1]

.. I frankly don't know how to do better than what I am doing. ..

as an aside to your discussion with Robert, i believe you.
for myself, in a similar place, i chose to reduce quantity, since improving quality didn’t seem to be within my grasp.

lots of others have done similarly.
unfortunately, some have completely left the forum for lack of quality.
most members are here seeking quality, not quantity. it is present! there are lots of golden members, not necessarily amongst those (of us) with highest post-count.

quantity serves a purpose. quality balances it, with its own purpose.

[Bootstrap]

You want the mods to control things more.

I haven't said anything about that in this thread.

I do think a "respectful discourse" policy would be good - say whatever you want about topics but don't dump on people. I think that makes it a lot easier to discuss things freely without feeling like we are under personal attack. I don't know if the moderators or the community should be pushing in this direction, or perhaps both, but I think that would be helpful.

If I did, I would have to remove 50% of what many post. So then MN would just be my way instead of a community coming together and growing together. Each person has an equal right to have a voice and share their perspective, even if they are wrong. How else do we learn from each other unless we listen and share, even our wacky ideas? Yes, we can hold each other accountable, but there is a caring way to do it and a way that minimizes another by bombarding them with "facts" or talk down to them just to prove how smart and righteous the elitist is.

I agree with what you say above, but there may be some culture clashes in how we perceive things. I particularly agree that the goal of discussion should not be "to prove how smart and righteous the elitist is" - or the reverse elitist, or anyone else.

If we are discussing a matter of fact then facts tell us what the truth is. And if truth matters, facts matter. This may be a place where academic culture is very different from most everyday culture - in my world, the facts I present are challenged every day, and I have to change my mind as I learn. I am wrong pretty much every single day, and I can either learn or not learn as I go.

Exploring this kind of thing together is one of the main reasons I come here. In some threads this goes quite well - I thought the KJV thread and the depression thread were two recent examples of good threads with participation from a lot of people. Often, doing this requires a few reminders to return to the topic. We often seem to do this best in threads that are about personal experience or the Bible - and there are a lot of people here who really know their Bible.

In my world, challenging someone's facts or opinions is just the way we learn, but challenging someone else's integrity or character is normally out of bounds. Sometimes it feels to me like some people treat these all the same. They take a stand on some issue, present some facts (or "facts", as the case may be), and perhaps even proclaim that there's something wrong with anyone who disagrees with them. Sometimes they act as though they have mastered huge and complex fields of study. They then feel personally offended if you explore the facts they present to see what is true. I think this is the kind of thread where I tend to get on people's nerves. I'm not sure what to do with that. I think it is important to be able to challenge facts. I think it's helpful if we each hold to our facts lightly, letting them change as the conversation teaches us.

Lastly, if someone is being picked on, treated harshly, then flag the post itself. That lets us evaluate it. If action needs to be taken, we can and will. We have before. We will again. This is not to be used if you just disagree with the posters opinions. This is to be used if there is mistreatment. This is the way to deal with someone picking on someone or treating them too harshly.

I agree, people should be free to have whatever opinions they have. The issue is really how we treat each other.

I would personally rather the person being attacked would do the reporting of the post. We often will misjudge what is upsetting or harsh to someone else. If you suspect, then ask the poster. Do not dictate, but ask an open question. If they respond, great, if not, let it go. If the person being harassed is upset, tell them to report the post. This is really the best way.

I know several people who are feeling harassed, and who are participating less because of it. That's one of the reasons I have been stepping in.

I also know that there are some people who feel harassed by me. If that's simply because I challenge facts or "facts" that they present, I generally feel that's an important part of what forums are for, sifting through what is true and what is not together. If there are things that I am doing that are toxic, I want to know what they are and stop doing them.

[Robert]

A lot of what happens, not just here but other online forums, is personality types clash.

Boot, I am going to identify you here, but just as an example, not because this is bad about you. It is actually a really good thing in its place.

You are very analytical. When you discuss with a feeler, you are actually talking a different language. Each has a very hard time understanding because both come from such a very different place.

I actually suspect if you and I were in the same church, we would get along great and most likely be close friends. We need the other parts of life to build those bridges. We need common every day issues and experiences to help connect our divergent personalities. There are times in real life that something will pop up and I think you are the fist person I would take it to. There are other things in life that I choose to not to share with you because I think you would not know how to respond in an open forum. I have the same issue with my oldest daughter. I can not be connected with her at all through social media. She knows me and understand me, but all her wacky liberal friends are totally lost and very reactionary to some of my posts. So for her to have other connections, I had to disconnect online. I live 5 miles away. Face to face works so much better. She can see the humor in my face when I tell her I used the Sputnik beep as her ringtone because she is such a commie. She is not, and she knows I know she is not, but it is just a little humor. I love to tease the people I like. In real life, thaht works great. On an online forum, not so much.

Lesterb is just the opposite. There are things I would always share openly with him, but certain areas of ideology I would not present to him. Some of that is the struggles he openly shares he has. Last thing I would want to do is bring him any pain or discomfort.

I have learned that in life people approach and deal with things much differently than I do. Because I am a feeler, I tend to think of how someone else is feeling and work from there. Because you are analytical, I think you tend to start there. Sometimes people just want to be heard. They do not always want to be corrected or showed they are wrong. They just want to speak. It helps to validate that they are actually human.

I used to let a lot more roll off. I am much more reactionary and more sensitive. I get annoyed a lot easier. I have nothing outside the house that validates me, so when someone minimizes me, I become a Lutheran again and go on the attack. Maybe not good on a Mennonite Forum, but it is what it is.

So how could you, Josh and MaxPC do better? Maybe lighten up a bit. Let someone be wrong and just hear them as a person. Share your perspective, not as proof, but as example. Feelers learn through osmosis, not by being pounded by facts.

My 15 year old had been reading survival manuals. He knew a lot of the facts. he ran away. At 2 AM I get the call he is ready to come home. He tried to use his facts and found they were lacking. We explained to him it takes wisdom and experience to take those facts and make them usable. We also explained that there are a lot of bears in the woods and the books never told him about that. Facts are great, but they do not always give you the whole picture.

[steve-in-kville]

I've belonged to a lot of forums since about 2000-ish. Various interests. I've dealt with all-out professional trolls. I've also been in honest misunderstandings. My policy has always been:

You come after me publically, I will respond likewise. You wanna play games? I'll play the game back, and I'll play the game better.

You contact me privately, most likely it'll be squashed within 10 seconds.

[temporal1]

I've belonged to a lot of forums since about 2000-ish. Various interests. I've dealt with all-out professional trolls. I've also been in honest misunderstandings. My policy has always been:

You come after me publically, I will respond likewise. You wanna play games? I'll play the game back, and I'll play the game better.

You contact me privately, most likely it'll be squashed within 10 seconds.

is it ok if i swoon, now+then? (swoon being a smile-sigh combo.)