Ask an OTTer

[Umbran]

It still doesn't mean egos need to be brought here will all the drama that comes with it.

Depending on what you mean by "egos", I'm sorry, but yes, they do need to be brought here. A person's ego is their sense of self - it is not separable from the individual, except in badly written Star Trek Episodes.

What we can ask is that people bring a modicum of self-control - bring the super-ego with the ego, please.

Mind you, that cuts both ways. It isn't fair to say, "I'll do what I want, but you have to keep yourself under control." It is helpful if readers keep themselves in check, and edit themselves before responding badly. But, original authors should stop and ask the question, "Is this really appropriate to post?" If *both* sides keep their self control, and use a little common sense in their posts, we can move along swimmingly. But it does require both sides to keep their brains engaged.



Here's a frequently useful technique - if you see a poster react poorly, rather than try to match them and get them to back down, apologize! For many people around here, a sincere, "Whoops! I didn't expect you to take it that way. I'm sorry if I cheesed you off," can do wonders.

 

[Umbran]

unfortunately, there seems to be a disconnect between what you say and what others do. That seems to be the problem It makes it harder for others to acclimate to the environment if they are presented with a set of rules that aren't the ones being followed by everyone, you know what I mean?

He gives some great advice. But do remember - nobody here is a machine. We all - including the moderators - make a mistake now and again, or are a bit inconsistent. That's human life, and give some allowance for it. In the long run, it all comes out in the wash.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Nor did you keep your mouth shut and observe to see how things work around here and then attempt to post like the locals. As most new people do as lurkers and then first time posters when a topic strikes their interest or they have a question they feel the community can answer.

And we were having such nice discussion. There really is no need for that type of reaction. I think I brought up a good point. You guys have had a long time to get to know each other and we haven't had that opportunity. You guys also haven't had the time to get to know us. I would have thought that you would have at least acknowledge it. I mean, you did post this:

In an oppositional argument, try to acknowledge a valid point the other side makes. EN World is not debate team. There's no score. There's more honor in saying "while I still favor my position, you do raise a valid point in XYZ." Nobody's ideas or values are perfect. We all have our little hypocrisies like hating messy sandwiches but liking sloppy joes. To recognize the other side's point as significant shows that you are listening and considering new information, which on EN World is the better goal of having discussions about tricky topics.

Instead, it seems as if you came on here as if this was "the internet" and did your own thing. EN's on the internet. But it is NOT the internet. I observe each forum I am interested in before I post, and I try to post to their standard or better if I can (doesn't mean I'm good at it).

Bear in mind, my thoughts on the matter aren't official, fair or well put.

Not at all. We came here. We participated. Maybe we weren't perfect, or fit nicely into the little niche you guys would like everyone to fit into automatically, but it happens. There is a learning curve. Different sites different social norms. With as many members as ENworld has, I would expect that at least one other group has hit a couple of bumps along the way of getting used to the site.

Would you really challenge the findings of 3 professionals (apparently 3 pros reviewed her from the article I didn't read in that thread)? Is Mental Health in such condition that quality standards among such people varies? I really have no idea.

Why not? It happens in all fields. Hell, it append in the legal system all the time. You get judges that overturn the rulings of other judges all the time. Tae you car to two different mechanics. You might get one that tells you your car has one thing wrong, and the other guy will tell you it's something completely different. Same thing happens with doctors. That's why it's usually good to get a second, and sometimes third opinion. Let's not forget, even professionals make mistakes.
I've said I'm a menial health professional. Do you believe me? Did it change your opinion about my post in the other thread?

In a parallel case, I have advised Morrus on his current IT project when I raised some questions he didn't understand, that his developer better be able to answer them (to him), else he has a bad developer problem brewing.

It's possible such a behavior is rude, but I did couch it in qualifying terms, instead of saying a guy I didn't meet who has information I haven't seen given to him is bad.

I've said I'm a menial health professional. Do you believe me? Did it change your opinion about my post in the other thread?



Do you want to join the secret order of secret stuff or not? Membership is neither worth it nor not worth it. It simply is a matter of being on the inside or outside of a house on a row of houses. There are plenty to choose from, and you can be happy in this one, or you can choose another. It's OK.

I've described some tricks I've learned to assimilate or blend in. Human behavior isn't always fair, especially with regards to existing groups and newcomers. I'm not a sociologist, but the behavior jives with what I've read.

I got no other advice. I appreciate that Zombie recognized I was suggesting to move off the point of the woman who killed her bad husband that nobody agrees was bad or not. And that somebody else re-newed the conversation a post later so it spun on again. I don't think anybody was being bad, but a dead horse was continuing to suffer.

Each one of us can't control the other. I can't make anybody follow the rules I suggested. I'm advising that if you retain the clarity, when you spot the situation, that's when YOU can change what your doing. On EN world, such situations aren't usually baiting or trolling. It's more like a behavioral quirk kicks in and we get stuck debating something that we should really just gracefully back out of. I think it is one of the keys that makes any of us argue too long or too hard, instead of listen or discuss.

I don't know about that. I mean people continued to participate in the conversation for a reason. My guess is they enjoyed the conversation. It was interesting. I didn't see anything where people were going for each other, insulting each other, or being disrespectful in any way. What's wrong with them continuing the conversation as long as it stays civil, as it has?

So to heck with fair. Just do the best you can to be polite, understanding and diplomatic, and let the other guy then stand out as the problem. If he goes overboard, that'll be on him. If he just missteps a little, well hopefully you both can avoid that trigger next time for his own sake.

While your advice is good, people still need to be treated fairly. It makes it easier for everyone involved.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Depending on what you mean by "egos", I'm sorry, but yes, they do need to be brought here. A person's ego is their sense of self - it is not separable from the individual, except in badly written Star Trek Episodes.

What we can ask is that people bring a modicum of self-control - bring the super-ego with the ego, please.

I'm not going to lecture you on this topic because Im' sure any post I make will be dismissed like last time, but seriously, you're killing me here, dude. killing me.

 

[Kramodlog]

Depending on what you mean by "egos", I'm sorry, but yes, they do need to be brought here. A person's ego is their sense of self - it is not separable from the individual, except in badly written Star Trek Episodes.

Not what I ment. I ment self-importance.

Here's a frequently useful technique - if you see a poster react poorly, rather than try to match them and get them to back down, apologize! For many people around here, a sincere, "Whoops! I didn't expect you to take it that way. I'm sorry if I cheesed you off," can do wonders.

Interesting. What about apologizing for insinuating we were mentally challenged? It certainly would be appreciated.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

He gives some great advice. But do remember - nobody here is a machine. We all - including the moderators - make a mistake now and again, or are a bit inconsistent. That's human life, and give some allowance for it. In the long run, it all comes out in the wash.

Right, and I think you guys should take that same consideration with us, or any new members.

 

[Janx]

And we were having such nice discussion. There really is no need for that type of reaction. I think I brought up a good point. You guys have had a long time to get to know each other and we haven't had that opportunity. You guys also haven't had the time to get to know us. I would have thought that you would have at least acknowledge it. I mean, you did post this:

I apologize for the poor choice of words. I am not EN's diplomat, and we all vary in the quality of our diplomacy, even in the best of us.

Not at all. We came here. We participated. Maybe we weren't perfect, or fit nicely into the little niche you guys would like everyone to fit into automatically, but it happens. There is a learning curve. Different sites different social norms. With as many members as ENworld has, I would expect that at least one other group has hit a couple of bumps along the way of getting used to the site.

We don't usually get a whole batch at once, especially ones with a specific culture and expectation to resume their old practices on the new home.

Culture shock on both sides.

Why not? It happens in all fields. Hell, it append in the legal system all the time. You get judges that overturn the rulings of other judges all the time. Tae you car to two different mechanics. You might get one that tells you your car has one thing wrong, and the other guy will tell you it's something completely different. Same thing happens with doctors. That's why it's usually good to get a second, and sometimes third opinion. Let's not forget, even professionals make mistakes.
I've said I'm a menial health professional. Do you believe me? Did it change your opinion about my post in the other thread?

I've said I'm a menial health professional. Do you believe me? Did it change your opinion about my post in the other thread?

Sure. You've explained here a reasonable expectation for a professional to second guess another professional's work.

You've now mentioned that you do have professional expertise in the matter, so that explains your comments as not being uninformed armchair quarterbacking (something we are ALL prone to do with every topic).

Until something comes along to contradict it, I TRUST that you are indeed some kind of mental health professional.

I don't need to see your qualifications. It is possible that you're lying, but I'm not worried about it. I would expect evidence to the contrary would be if you say mental health stuff that doesn't jive with industry terms or other experts on the forum. Kind of like how in my industry, I can tell bad Project Managers because they don't keep lists and track progress against those lists (in any variety of PM methodologies, that is the root of their art).

You word is good enough for government work.

I don't know about that. I mean people continued to participate in the conversation for a reason. My guess is they enjoyed the conversation. It was interesting. I didn't see anything where people were going for each other, insulting each other, or being disrespectful in any way. What's wrong with them continuing the conversation as long as it stays civil, as it has?

While your advice is good, people still need to be treated fairly. It makes it easier for everyone involved.

In that thread, nobody's being bad (and it was an ENner who resumed it after Z and I both tried to tamp it down. But the conversation is looping. When it loops, as an outside observer, we can tell that nobody's changing their own opinion, so it becomes a matter of repeating oneself. The bad threads usually incorporate this pattern, and its hard for the people inside to realize they are entering it.

An additional problem to when we hit that situation, is it devolves the conversation. I disproved Danny's initial proposal of that story right after he posted it. Some dialogue about it still is OK, but now, most of the thread is about that one legal case and no longer about the original topic. On EN, that's threadjacking (and don't forget, even I kept posting about it).

There are lots of times, a little bit of side-tracking is OK. And thread-jacking isn't a crime unto itself. It's more like an accident. It really means a new forked topic needs to start.

A lot of these things are more like accidents. It's more like people don't realize they're beating a dead horse, sidetracking a conversation (and thus making it harder for folks seeking to continue the OT), or getting ruder in their responses (like I messed up last post).


I am pretty certain EN worlders didn't perfectly follow the suggestions I outlined before OTT came along. But more of us seemed to aspire to do so than not. Even those who've misstepped recently.

I know I suck at it, but I'd rather forget any of us had an argument yesterday, and simply try to post better today, and not push somebody else's hot-buttons if I know they exist.

I don't expect to succeed at it, but I expect I will be better to work with than if I don't move past yesterday's mistakes.

 

[Janx]

Not what I ment. I ment self-importance.

Interesting. What about apologizing for insinuating we were mentally challenged? It certainly would be appreciated.

I'm sorry if I ever implied or said such a thing.

Which leads to another EN forum rule of thumb that I should follow better:

A danger zone that I've hit (and got redmarked for it) is using name calling to refer to the demographic who I think is outside of the conversation. For example, "only jerkholes would think the original PA comic was condoning rape"

The danger I just hit, is initially, I think I'm just talking about non-EN worlders who misread PA's comic that was actually very Anti-Rape because I think they are being very bad and hurtful over a misrepresented cause.

However, as the conversation evolves and somebody takes up portions of the anti-PA argument (as PA had responded badly), now I am at risk of calling them jerkholes. Which is against EN policy.

It can be really tricky to avoid (at least for me in my manner of writing). Try to spot it and prevent yourself when you can, as it's just a bad habit that can get you in trouble, and certainly leads to undiplomatic speech.

Believe it or not, I would prefer that we all didn't have to carefully phrase our words and have our lawyers and editors look them over for approval before we speak. But I also accept that we do need to put more effort more often than we actually do.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

I apologize for the poor choice of words. I am not EN's diplomat, and we all vary in the quality of our diplomacy, even in the best of us.

No worries.

We don't usually get a whole batch at once, especially ones with a specific culture and expectation to resume their old practices on the new home.

Culture shock on both sides.

Right, and it's not as if we expected you guys to just convert to our ways. As I aid before, there isa learning curve. We have to get used to the way you guys worked around here, as any new member has to do. All we ask is that we get that chance instead of having people automatically dump on us.

Sure. You've explained here a reasonable expectation for a professional to second guess another professional's work.

You've now mentioned that you do have professional expertise in the matter, so that explains your comments as not being uninformed armchair quarterbacking (something we are ALL prone to do with every topic).

Until something comes along to contradict it, I TRUST that you are indeed some kind of mental health professional.

I don't need to see your qualifications. It is possible that you're lying, but I'm not worried about it. I would expect evidence to the contrary would be if you say mental health stuff that doesn't jive with industry terms or other experts on the forum. Kind of like how in my industry, I can tell bad Project Managers because they don't keep lists and track progress against those lists (in any variety of PM methodologies, that is the root of their art).

You word is good enough for government work.

You know, I could also be just some guy who has had years of mental health treatment and learned enough to fake it. Some psychiatry patients are able to do a good enough job to fool even psychiatrist.

In that thread, nobody's being bad (and it was an ENner who resumed it after Z and I both tried to tamp it down. But the conversation is looping. When it loops, as an outside observer, we can tell that nobody's changing their own opinion, so it becomes a matter of repeating oneself. The bad threads usually incorporate this pattern, and its hard for the people inside to realize they are entering it.

An additional problem to when we hit that situation, is it devolves the conversation. I disproved Danny's initial proposal of that story right after he posted it. Some dialogue about it still is OK, but now, most of the thread is about that one legal case and no longer about the original topic. On EN, that's threadjacking (and don't forget, even I kept posting about it).

There are lots of times, a little bit of side-tracking is OK. And thread-jacking isn't a crime unto itself. It's more like an accident. It really means a new forked topic needs to start.

A lot of these things are more like accidents. It's more like people don't realize they're beating a dead horse, sidetracking a conversation (and thus making it harder for folks seeking to continue the OT), or getting ruder in their responses (like I messed up last post).

I recognized the problems with thread jacking. It is disruptive. It is annoying when it happens often. No one likes it. Still, the thread in question seems to have had a gradual shift towards that topic. Sometimes threads change topics. It's not always a bad thing.

I am pretty certain EN worlders didn't perfectly follow the suggestions I outlined before OTT came along. But more of us seemed to aspire to do so than not. Even those who've misstepped recently.

I know I suck at it, but I'd rather forget any of us had an argument yesterday, and simply try to post better today, and not push somebody else's hot-buttons if I know they exist.

I don't expect to succeed at it, but I expect I will be better to work with than if I don't move past yesterday's mistakes.

We don't expect to perfectly fit in, but we do try to fit in. We have some members that have a bit more influence on other members, and they are able to corral some of our grumpy members pretty well. I suggested to Umbran that he PM those members. I'm not sure if he has, but the suggestion was given. It would be a much easier way than having people just reporting and getting angry with us. So it's not as if we aren't trying. It just requires time and a bit of a willingness from the other side to allow us to fit in.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

I'm sorry if I ever implied or said such a thing.

No, that comment is in reference to a post Umbran made.