Ask an OTTer

[Janx]

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

Just covering my own bases.

Personally, I'd rather realize I goofed up and issue my own apology.

Once requests for apologies start coming out, it seems to trigger new problems for the apologizer.

feeling forced to do so, denying that it is /was offensive to the other party, etc.

If I was you guys, I would rather Umbran simply chose his words better next time, than press for an apology this time. Otherwise, it can re-open the wound as people seek to prove/disprove he did or didn't say something. ( I really don't know one way or the other and do NOT want to drag it back up).

But that's just me. I can accept a dude back into the pack without making him do the walk of shame. Paula Dean can go back to making food I don't eat. As long as she stops catering dinners with black slaves, I can live with that.

I suspect this is related to the concept of "saving face". Help each other save face. I think we all know to be a lot more careful.

Worst case, if it happens again, try this phraseology (or make a better one, I ain't great at this either):
that statement seems like it implies I am mentally challenged. That's offensive to me. Please find another way of expressing your point.

I think some people call that "killing them with kindness". By being so sincere and squeaky butt clean, the other party is now on the hook for improving their speech or being the jerk. the additional side effect is that we not only haven't called them a jerk, we've left them an out to correct themselves.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

Paula Dean can go back to making food I don't eat. As long as she stops catering dinners with black slaves,

Wow!
Care to post any proof she catered dinners with "black slaves"? Really dude, that was inflammatory as well as a lie.

 

[Janx]

Wow!
Care to post any proof she catered dinners with "black slaves"? Really dude, that was inflammatory as well as a lie.

It wasn't intended to be inflammatory.

I apparently erroneously assumed everybody knew her recent issues over charges of racism included catering dinners where she hired black staff and dressed them as classic black butler wait staff.

Per this article http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/paula-deen-s-racist-wedding-fantasy-was-once-reality.html

Calling them black slaves may have been exagerative, and the exact incident was that she had allegedly planned, but not executed a wedding (didn't know that, learned something new).

I apologize for the mis-information.


Now for your part, was it necessary to escalate it to "that was inflammatory as well as a lie"

I believe it would have been sufficient to say, "that's not quite accurate. That part of her recent drama was over her allegedly fantasizing about planning something like that as a wedding, but it never actually happened."

The point of correcting my information could have been delivered without such heated words or assumption of my intent (which should have been clear that I was saying Paula Deen can get back to work and the facts of her actual case were irrelevant). I don't care if she did or did not plan a slave wedding so long as she doesn't do so now.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

It wasn't intended to be inflammatory.

I apparently erroneously assumed everybody knew her recent issues over charges of racism included catering dinners where she hired black staff and dressed them as classic black butler wait staff.

Per this article http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/paula-deen-s-racist-wedding-fantasy-was-once-reality.html

Calling them black slaves may have been exagerative, and the exact incident was that she had allegedly planned, but not executed a wedding (didn't know that, learned something new).

I apologize for the mis-information.


Now for your part, was it necessary to escalate it to "that was inflammatory as well as a lie"

I believe it would have been sufficient to say, "that's not quite accurate. That part of her recent drama was over her allegedly fantasizing about planning something like that as a wedding, but it never actually happened."

The point of correcting my information could have been delivered without such heated words or assumption of my intent (which should have been clear that I was saying Paula Deen can get back to work and the facts of her actual case were irrelevant). I don't care if she did or did not plan a slave wedding so long as she doesn't do so now.

Exaggerated is an understatement, but apology accepted. It seems (to me) your use of "black slaves" was intended to elicit a negative response from others, as it is clearly a lie and gross exaggeration of the issue. My "heated" response and "escalation" was a direct result of your exaggeration and gross misrepresentation of the issue. Sorry if you didn't like my response.
The truth... it hurts.

 

[Remus Lupin]

I can't help noticing that it's often pretty easy to identify OTTers in this and other threads simply by the tone of their responses. It's ... markedly different ... from what I've come to expect at ENWorld. And I have to say it doesn't seem to be having the most salubrious effect on the discourse.

 

[Robin Hoodlum]

What's wrong with my "tone"?

Janx lied and overly-exaggerated the issue by using inflammatory words.

So tell me again how I am the one what's wrong in this situation?

 

[Janx]

What's wrong with my "tone"?

Janx lied and overly-exaggerated the issue by using inflammatory words.

So tell me again how I am the one what's wrong in this situation?

No, I stated information that was incorrect because I did not know the correct information.

I was misinformed and spoke inaccurately. As my point was about moving beyond Paula Deen's mistake, the details of her mistake and thus my misinformation were irrelevant anyway.

So you missed my point, and called me a liar instead of correcting my error in information.

That's insulting.

As I can't seem to get past two posts without offending somebody, we're done here.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

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

Agreed. I know it would make me feel a whole lot better about the position he holds here if he would acknowledge that in this one case he was well out of bounds. It's not ok - to me - to have someone with the ability to censor others make comments like that towards people who he can censor.

 

[Zombie_Babies]

I can't help noticing that it's often pretty easy to identify OTTers in this and other threads simply by the tone of their responses. It's ... markedly different ... from what I've come to expect at ENWorld. And I have to say it doesn't seem to be having the most salubrious effect on the discourse.

Well, it's a two way street. Some people here expected us to know exactly how things work here immediately and, when we showed we didn't, they treated us poorly. Some of you, though, have been helpful, kind and willing to engage - I do not mean to imply this is a community wide deal. Anyhoo, when people are treated poorly for reasons they do not understand it's not surprising to most to see those people react negatively. From that moment on it doesn't take much to cause them to react negatively as many innocent things can be seen as an attack.

I'm sure that not everything you've noticed stems from this but I do believe it explains some. I'm not trying to say this is all your fault or anything like that, I simply think we both had some unreasonable expectations. I've admitted to mine.

 

[Homicidal_Squirrel]

Well, it's a two way street. Some people here expected us to know exactly how things work here immediately and, when we showed we didn't, they treated us poorly. Some of you, though, have been helpful, kind and willing to engage - I do not mean to imply this is a community wide deal. Anyhoo, when people are treated poorly for reasons they do not understand it's not surprising to most to see those people react negatively. From that moment on it doesn't take much to cause them to react negatively as many innocent things can be seen as an attack.

I'm sure that not everything you've noticed stems from this but I do believe it explains some. I'm not trying to say this is all your fault or anything like that, I simply think we both had some unreasonable expectations. I've admitted to mine.

I'm going to go with BOS (Battered OTTer Syndrome), and I've hired Dannyalcatraz as our lawyer. Any questions or comments should be directed at him.