General > Rants and Stuff

TOO MUCH NEGATIVE FEEDBACK!

<< < (3/4) > >>

Jason R. Peters:

--- Quote from: mycoltbug on June 28, 2011, 09:16:59 PM --- "Fardawg101 CM
@spencerpanger I have a problem in letting things go when there is a complete misunderstanding. That is why I started the thread.
--- End quote ---

Often, in my younger days, I had a problem letting things go when I had decided THE WHOLE WORLD IS WRONG AND JASON IS RIGHT. I've grown up since then (I'd like to think), but back then I would conclude that

1. I couldn't possibly be wrong
2. Since I couldn't possibly be wrong, anyone who disagreed with me must be wrong
3. If they continued to be wrong after I explained why they were wrong, they must be "misunderstanding" me

Only a consistent effort to correct these "misunderstandings" would result in everyone agreeing with me and seeing the error of their ways.

Fardawg's Tolkien thread had all of these elements. He repeatedly refused olive branches of "we mostly agree, but we're using different terminology", or "in your context, you're right, but what we're saying isn't untrue", etc.

It just doesn't seem like he possesses the maturity and discipline to respectfully disagree with people in a forum like this. His comment to Peter ("How many bestsellers have YOU written?") among others was blatantly uncalled for. He even insulted Peter for pointing to elements of his text which indicated anger/passion and lack of calm. Fardawg seemed to believe that angry and insulting words would lose sting ("just joking") if you interspersed lots of smiley faces.

All that said, people can sometimes mature given the opportunity. I say give Fardawg the opportunity to treat this as a life lesson, that you can't walk all over people's opinions and insult their viewpoints -- particularly not a forum dedicated to a respectful exchange of ideas. An apology to all concerned is a great idea, not because I feel Fardawg did anything wrong to me, but because sincere contrition would be a necessary first step to have any meaningful interaction with this forum.

But no more missteps tolerated. (And if the stated penalty for sock-puppets is immediate permanent ban, I say make it so. I don't know whether the policy states levels of tolerance or not...I suspect from Peter's response it is moderator's option.)

I have a great deal of respect for Peter for even asking our opinions, and admitting his desire to banhammer while offering Fardawg an out through the voices of other forum-goers.

To be perfectly honest, I don't want Fardawg back...he did not seem to be positively contributing (the opposite), but I have faith in second chances. Or to be more accurate, I want to have faith in second chances.

Peter Ahlstrom:
I read through what fardawg said in his private messages to me (he sent me four which ticked me off, but it turns out three of them were the same due to a forum error, so it was really just two). And I read his Twitter conversation with mycoltbug. He did not admit any misunderstanding was on his side, and he does not think any of his behavior was jerkish or condescending. I could go through his posts sentence by sentence and explain things to him but I don't want to waste my time. Maybe if I'm bored someday I can have time for that. But I may let the ban expire on schedule if he realizes those two points (that some misunderstanding could have been on his side, and that even if he didn't mean to be a jerk or condescending it still came off that way and he should change how he acts at least for this forum).

I really like your post on the topic, Jason.

However, Tagg Veylan's philosophy above on how to treat people who disagree with him indicates a person I simply do not want on this forum.

Juan Dolor:

--- Quote from: Tagg Veylan on June 27, 2011, 07:10:54 PM ---I defuse the situation by killing them with kindness and logic. No matter how inane their comments are, I simply say that I understand their point of view and appreciate their comments, and then I apply logic to destroy the framework of their presuppositions from beneath them. If they continue, they simply show themselves to be illogical to all who see them and are simply another example of the uselessness of their kind.

--- End quote ---

Man, this comment is weird.  He starts by talking about 'defusing the situation' and 'killing with kindness,' which I actually think are good ways to deal with a nasty argument.  (Better, in fact, than my own sarcastic post above.)  But then he starts in about how he destroys people with logic, and how people who disagree with him are useless.  Yikes!

Am I the only one who sees a real disconnect there?

dhalagirl:
Nope.  You're not the only one.  The worst part is that it's exactly how he deals with arguments.  It's really irritating.

fardawg:
I apologize for coming off as a jerk in the Tolkien thread. It was not my intent but I clearly did. By trying to not look like one I just made it worse. I was afraid from the start that people would take me the wrong way so I overcompensated. It is much easier in real life to get across your attitude.  I'm someone who likes people to understand every little point I make and I like discussions to be wrapped up in a little bow. I don't need everyone to agree with me. I'm not that kind of person. I just want people on both sides to understand where the other is coming from before it ends. I'm anal that way. That is why I sent Peter the PM. I felt his last post deserved a response and I wanted to clarify some things. It did tick me off when I saw he was posting about me on twitter.
Once again, I am sorry. 




PS. (sorry this is long) Tagg (yes, he is my brother. I left timewasters up when I left and it got him to finally sign up.) was talking about spammers, trolls, hatters, etc. He was not referring to anyone on this forum, esp. not Peter. He had no idea who Peter was and it is unfortunate that the OP referred to him. He hadn't even read the other thread because he doesn't like Tolkien except for the movies. It doesn't make sense when applied to the Tolkien post since no one was trolling or hating in it. Everyone was very civil and I still appreciate the conversation. Peter ended the topic so he doesn't fit as someone who would continue to spam.
He was actually thinking about certain types of atheists and others who post comments on youtube with hateful attitudes who cuss in all caps. Instead  of yelling back he (and I) just address whatever ridiculous accusation they make (ala "Xtians are f#$%%$#@ stupid and cause war teh should all die!!!!!) as if they have a point and then point out where they are wrong. If they continue to be hateful and cuss without discussing like a normal human being, they just continue to look bad. Most of the time they begin to act civil. I myself have had wonderful conversations where the person thanked me at the end. Tagg was going for a cold Sun Tzu feel which is why it came off like it did (he was role playing for the school of war track thingy). Looking like jerks apparently runs in the veins. That said, you don't have to bother unbanning him since he doesn't want to post again. I'll just delete his account if I can. 

PPS. If I was back in college this would make for a great paper on miscommunication.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page