Etiquette Hell

Forum Administration => Forum Announcements => Topic started by: Erich L-ster on September 10, 2011, 04:09:42 AM

Title: Schenanigans?
Post by: Erich L-ster on September 10, 2011, 04:09:42 AM
Sometimes it is glaringly apparent that a post or story is a creative writing exercise rather than a true happening. I understand that calling it out is frowned upon and I will not do that but I'm curious: are fake stories that are represented as true no big deal or is that something that is unwanted too?

Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Adios on September 10, 2011, 04:16:04 AM
In conjunction with a body of "creative writing" posts I think it adds up to a troll.  As per E-hell dames post the other day, the only thing we can do is ignore or ask pertinent questions.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Erich L-ster on September 10, 2011, 04:21:59 AM
Ah ok. I thought asking pertinent questions would be seen as being mean. There was another thread about not bringing  in stuff from other threads but when there are inconsistencies and contradictions it would be nice to be allowed to ask for clarification.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Miss Vertigo on September 10, 2011, 04:23:44 AM
I'm a big fan of the 'give 'em enough rope' approach, personally.

So yes, pertinent questions.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Gabrielle on September 10, 2011, 05:11:21 AM
I'm a big fan of the 'give 'em enough rope' approach, personally.

So yes, pertinent questions.

I've recently noticed  :)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Perfect Circle on September 10, 2011, 05:13:37 AM
I think the bringing up other stuff refers more to dredging up old arguments or bringing up someone's opinion from three years ago than asking for clarification on inconsistencies.

For example, if someone tells the board they live in a small shed in Alaska one week and next week they occupy a seven bedroom house in India, I am sure you are more than allowed to ask how this happened.

I do not think anyone should use this board for creative writing exercise. People come here with real problems looking for help and support and I personally feel it's rather mean to make up stories, especially ones that tap into people's emotions.

Enough rope is a good approach. If you are sure someone is telling porky pies, report to moderators.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Solanna Dryden on September 10, 2011, 07:51:06 AM
Quote
porky pies

I usually hate twee terms, but this is the best term for a lie I have ever heard!  ;D It's just so cute!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: The Legend of Daisy on September 10, 2011, 10:22:11 AM
Quote
porky pies

I usually hate twee terms, but this is the best term for a lie I have ever heard!  ;D It's just so cute!


It's cockney rhyming slang

http://www.cockneyrhymingslang.co.uk/slang/pork_pies (http://www.cockneyrhymingslang.co.uk/slang/pork_pies)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Ligeia on September 10, 2011, 12:55:22 PM
I'm a big fan of the 'give 'em enough rope' approach, personally.

So yes, pertinent questions.

I like this approach, too.  In fact, I prefer it to the big showdown with someone calling shenanigans, and then the thread getting locked or deleted.  If there's no hard proof, just a hunch, it's much more entertaining to ask questions and see how they're answered, particularly if everyone else seems in on it.  And, of course, it's more fair--if there's no hard proof, there's not much anyone, including the moderators, can do about it, and it allows a tiny benefit of the doubt.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Kiara on September 10, 2011, 12:55:54 PM
http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=100997.0 (http://www.etiquettehell.com/smf/index.php?topic=100997.0)

The new rules on suspecting someone.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Ehelldame on September 10, 2011, 03:55:43 PM
Sometimes it is glaringly apparent that a post or story is a creative writing exercise rather than a true happening. I understand that calling it out is frowned upon and I will not do that but I'm curious: are fake stories that are represented as true no big deal or is that something that is unwanted too?

How do you know a story is "glaringly apparent" that it is fiction?  I've published some extraordinarily outrageous stories in prior books that would leave the reader questioning the storytellers' credibility but I have signed documents verifying the authenticity of the events.  Absolutely nothing surprises me anymore.  The thread you are obliquely referring to in this thread doesn't come close to fantastically unbelievable when compared to real life stories that are far more bizarre.

And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

A handful of members were placed on 14 day gag for their behavior in that thread and several others *just* barely missed moderation.   Several of the newly gagged already had a record of prior gags for similar behavior which means that following someone else's lead in a thread can be a very bad idea as they may be a troublemaker with a history on this forum or a troll trying to get as many people in trouble as possible (they know they are going bye-bye and they'll try to take as many with them as they can). 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: strangetimes on September 10, 2011, 04:06:55 PM
Sometimes it is glaringly apparent that a post or story is a creative writing exercise rather than a true happening. I understand that calling it out is frowned upon and I will not do that but I'm curious: are fake stories that are represented as true no big deal or is that something that is unwanted too?

How do you know a story is "glaringly apparent" that it is fiction?  I've published some extraordinarily outrageous stories in prior books that would leave the reader questioning the storytellers' credibility but I have signed documents verifying the authenticity of the events.  Absolutely nothing surprises me anymore.  The thread you are obliquely referring to in this thread doesn't come close to fantastically unbelievable when compared to real life stories that are far more bizarre.

And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

A handful of members were placed on 14 day gag for their behavior in that thread and several others *just* barely missed moderation.   Several of the newly gagged already had a record of prior gags for similar behavior which means that following someone else's lead in a thread can be a very bad idea as they may be a troublemaker with a history on this forum or a troll trying to get as many people in trouble as possible (they know they are going bye-bye and they'll try to take as many with them as they can).

Is there a way for us to hear about that? Like maybe a moderator stepping into a thread and giving a warning?

I was going through that thread and feeling like it was sounding a little "mean girls" to me, but had you not said this, I wouldn't have known that people were being moderated and even put on hiatus for that.

I've often considered asking posters about situations from my own life, but I hesitate to do that, because I'm afraid of precisely these types of reactions. (I lurked here for a long time before registering, so this isn't just a recent thought)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Two Ravens on September 10, 2011, 04:19:12 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: aventurine on September 10, 2011, 04:31:02 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

I don't mind fictional tales as long as they are marked as such.  "Let's say that X crazy thing happened.  What would you have done?" I'll happily play in that thread.  I just don't like when hypothetical stories are told as truth - there's a different element of buy-in.  Maybe that's why posters sometimes pretend their stories are real, for fear that no one will respond if it's been made clear that the post didn't really happen, or that we're not capable of answering the etiquette question if we know the situation is hypothetical.  Which is ridiculous, of course.

What I don't appreciate is folk using this board as their creative writing outlet.  I can understand the temptation - I write, and I'd love to bounce ideas off an audience to see if my plots ring true - but I'd never, ever do that.  It's contrary to the spirit and mission of this board, and it's manipulative besides.  I respect y'all too much to do that.  Others' mileage evidently varies. 

(And I have no patience at all with trolls who use eHell as their own emotional playground.  That's just heinous.)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Two Ravens on September 10, 2011, 04:41:28 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

I don't mind fictional tales as long as they are marked as such.  "Let's say that X crazy thing happened.  What would you have done?" I'll happily play in that thread.  I just don't like when hypothetical stories are told as truth - there's a different element of buy-in.  Maybe that's why posters sometimes pretend their stories are real, for fear that no one will respond if it's been made clear that the post didn't really happen, or that we're not capable of answering the etiquette question if we know the situation is hypothetical.  Which is ridiculous, of course.

What I don't appreciate is folk using this board as their creative writing outlet.  I can understand the temptation - I write, and I'd love to bounce ideas off an audience to see if my plots ring true - but I'd never, ever do that.  It's contrary to the spirit and mission of this board, and it's manipulative besides.  I respect y'all too much to do that.  Others' mileage evidently varies. 

(And I have no patience at all with trolls who use eHell as their own emotional playground.  That's just heinous.)

I wouldn't mind hypotheticals either.  But it seems to me that the way the majority of these thread go, the OP posts an outlandishlish story in which Rude Bob is very rude indeed, and the majority of the responses consist of "What a jerk!" and "Poor you, OP."  They hardly prompt a debate about the etiquette of the situation (because there usually isn't one - just a person acting outlandishly), or teach any kind of lesson that I can see.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Nurvingiel on September 10, 2011, 04:42:36 PM
That was well said Aventurine.

I don't like people passing off a fake story as true because that is lying. I don't think it's polite to lie to people, so shouldn't that sort of behaviour be unacceptable here?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lynn2000 on September 10, 2011, 04:46:28 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

You know, if it's a "good" thread which leads to meaty discussion of etiquette points and doesn't turn nasty, I don't think I'd be upset to later learn that it didn't actually happen to that exact poster. I'd probably think, "Huh, that's weird, why the coy disguise?" but I wouldn't be outraged or upset or anything.

I think the problem comes when, as Two Ravens just posted, the purpose of the fake story is just to elicit sympathy and/or stir up trouble, especially if a sensitive subject is involved. To be honest I don't find stories where the OP is clearly in the right and Rude Bob is clearly rude to be very interesting and I don't usually post in them or follow them--not because I think they might be fake, but just because I'd rather read/contribute to a thread with some actual discussion.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: aventurine on September 10, 2011, 04:56:56 PM
I think the problem comes when, as Two Ravens just posted, the purpose of the fake story is just to elicit sympathy and/or stir up trouble, especially if a sensitive subject is involved. To be honest I don't find stories where the OP is clearly in the right and Rude Bob is clearly rude to be very interesting and I don't usually post in them or follow them--not because I think they might be fake, but just because I'd rather read/contribute to a thread with some actual discussion.

ITA with you and Two Ravens.  I've noticed that I don't usually post in these kinds of threads, and you've helped me realize why - when there's no actual etiquette question, just a black hat/white hat situation, I typically just read the OP and then forget about it until it blows up to multiple pages and/or get locked.  Must be why I've never developed any kind of trolldar   ;D

I don't like people passing off a fake story as true because that is lying. I don't think it's polite to lie to people, so shouldn't that sort of behaviour be unacceptable here?

That's an excellent point.  What's more rude than the intent to deceive?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: MaggieB on September 10, 2011, 05:07:41 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

I don't think that they're "OK" or that they should be encouraged, but honestly, I think it's the price of being on the internet.  Some people like to make up stories and post them online.  We can't go all vigilante on each other and try to vet every story.  It's not productive, and it's not polite.

We've all been in situations too crazy to be true.  I don't know whether the story in the other thread is true, and it really doesn't matter to me.  It could still lead to useful discussion about what to do when you're in one of those situations that is just so out there that you're caught completely off guard.

I do think it's different when the made-up stories are so emotionally charged that they're painful to others.  Making up stories like that should, in my opinion, be corrected and closed.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Ehelldame on September 10, 2011, 05:13:40 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

Unless you have proof a story is fictional or you have somehow acquired psychic talents that I lack, you are not in any position to be publicly calling out someone just because you have a "feeling".  Public speculation as to someone's veracity without supporting evidence is rude.   Read everything at face value, eat the meat and spit out the bones and move on if you think something is hinky. 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Erich L-ster on September 10, 2011, 05:22:54 PM
Is it ok to ask a non-accusatory question as to how pieces X and Y fit together? I don't want it to come off as mean spirited but if something doesn't fit with something else can one ask? If indeed everything's on the level there may be a good explanation. I probably wont ask it now that it's become an issue I just want to know if it's allright to ask.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: aventurine on September 10, 2011, 05:36:51 PM
In the past, that's the method that has been encouraged, Erich L-ster.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Eisa on September 10, 2011, 05:43:28 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

Unless you have proof a story is fictional or you have somehow acquired psychic talents that I lack, you are not in any position to be publicly calling out someone just because you have a "feeling".  Public speculation as to someone's veracity without supporting evidence is rude.   Read everything at face value, eat the meat and spit out the bones and move on if you think something is hinky. 

POD. :) I have to agree that if you don't have proof, saying it publicly isn't a good idea. If you really think something is crazy-hinky, wouldn't it be a better idea to either wait or report it to the mods rather than call the poster out?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Two Ravens on September 10, 2011, 05:51:02 PM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

Unless you have proof a story is fictional or you have somehow acquired psychic talents that I lack, you are not in any position to be publicly calling out someone just because you have a "feeling".  Public speculation as to someone's veracity without supporting evidence is rude.   Read everything at face value, eat the meat and spit out the bones and move on if you think something is hinky. 

POD. :) I have to agree that if you don't have proof, saying it publicly isn't a good idea. If you really think something is crazy-hinky, wouldn't it be a better idea to either wait or report it to the mods rather than call the poster out?

Just to clarify, I never advocated "calling someone out."  I was responding to the notion of "It doesn't matter if it is made up - it can still teach a lesson." 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: kingsrings on September 10, 2011, 06:01:37 PM
I just stay away from threads/posters that I don't believe are true. I just go with my gut instinct and keep aware of patterns. That's really the only way to go about it, because there's usually no way to prove, and calling someone out just causes problems.

And now after EHell Dame's post about "A handful of members were placed on 14 day gag for their behavior in that thread", I pictured in my head a small jail cell holding a handful of members with gags over their mouths and their hands tied, heh.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: sugar pie on September 10, 2011, 06:56:15 PM
Sometimes it is glaringly apparent that a post or story is a creative writing exercise rather than a true happening. I understand that calling it out is frowned upon and I will not do that but I'm curious: are fake stories that are represented as true no big deal or is that something that is unwanted too?

How do you know a story is "glaringly apparent" that it is fiction?  I've published some extraordinarily outrageous stories in prior books that would leave the reader questioning the storytellers' credibility but I have signed documents verifying the authenticity of the events.  Absolutely nothing surprises me anymore.  The thread you are obliquely referring to in this thread doesn't come close to fantastically unbelievable when compared to real life stories that are far more bizarre.

And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

A handful of members were placed on 14 day gag for their behavior in that thread and several others *just* barely missed moderation.   Several of the newly gagged already had a record of prior gags for similar behavior which means that following someone else's lead in a thread can be a very bad idea as they may be a troublemaker with a history on this forum or a troll trying to get as many people in trouble as possible (they know they are going bye-bye and they'll try to take as many with them as they can).

Is there a way for us to hear about that? Like maybe a moderator stepping into a thread and giving a warning?

I was going through that thread and feeling like it was sounding a little "mean girls" to me, but had you not said this, I wouldn't have known that people were being moderated and even put on hiatus for that.

I've often considered asking posters about situations from my own life, but I hesitate to do that, because I'm afraid of precisely these types of reactions. (I lurked here for a long time before registering, so this isn't just a recent thought)

I feel like I've seen the mods address this before, but I can't remember where. I know there are arguments against it (it lends more attention to the malefactors, it has an air of public stoning to it...) but while I don't need to know that someone has been gagged, I do feel a note saying, "blah blah blah is not acceptable forum behavior" would be useful so users will know that it's been addressed and can learn from the experience. YMMV.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: penelope2017 on September 10, 2011, 07:02:49 PM
I do think it would be appreciated if a mod stepped in and warned posters when people start to head into gag-worthy behavior, as someone mentioned above.

In fact, in the PinkWildRose thread, I think someone even said because EhellDame had posted in that thread, surely she would have admonished posters if they were out of line. That line can often be nebulous when it comes to this board in terms of gag-able behavior. Perhaps if a warning is laid down first, people will learn for the future. While I can see how some of the posts in that thread maybe have been a little wise-guy, it would not have occurred to me they were gag-worthy.

It's easy to fall into a pattern of going along with the joke in the thread. Human nature, even. I admit I read that thread immediately feeling it was false, or exaggerated, from the first read, before anyone else made a comment. I realize that outlandish things happen to people, but it starts to feel a little out of the realm of reality when it seems like repeatedly outlandish things happen to the same person due to far-reaching coincidences.

A repeated saga like Marina's neighbor made sense. She lived next door. Of course run ins would happen more than once.  As someone also said, fictional stories that aren't designed to evoke sympathy or commiseration are one thing. Ones that have a clear villain don't seem productive to me other than to boost someone's ego or earn them attention. Hypothetically, if the Ty story was false, was there going to be any discussion of who was right or wrong? Clearly this was a blatant horrendous act.

Even as a truth, when an OP has that much of a clear imbalance in the right/wrong department, I sort of see it as a rant rather than a legitimate discussion starter. I also notice the 'rant' type post:

"I went to the store, someone cut me, but I stood up for myself. He cursed me under his breath but moved to the back of the line.

Glad I got the last brownie we were both eyeing. (insert winky/devilish emoticon here)"

are becoming more, and more frequent. Both fictional or otherwise, I don't really get the benefit in posting a story you already know you were entirely right. Where's the discussion?

Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: jimithing on September 10, 2011, 10:59:51 PM
I do think it would be appreciated if a mod stepped in and warned posters when people start to head into gag-worthy behavior, as someone mentioned above.

In fact, in the PinkWildRose thread, I think someone even said because EhellDame had posted in that thread, surely she would have admonished posters if they were out of line. That line can often be nebulous when it comes to this board in terms of gag-able behavior. Perhaps if a warning is laid down first, people will learn for the future. While I can see how some of the posts in that thread maybe have been a little wise-guy, it would not have occurred to me they were gag-worthy.

It's easy to fall into a pattern of going along with the joke in the thread. Human nature, even. I admit I read that thread immediately feeling it was false, or exaggerated, from the first read, before anyone else made a comment. I realize that outlandish things happen to people, but it starts to feel a little out of the realm of reality when it seems like repeatedly outlandish things happen to the same person due to far-reaching coincidences.

A repeated saga like Marina's neighbor made sense. She lived next door. Of course run ins would happen more than once.  As someone also said, fictional stories that aren't designed to evoke sympathy or commiseration are one thing. Ones that have a clear villain don't seem productive to me other than to boost someone's ego or earn them attention. Hypothetically, if the Ty story was false, was there going to be any discussion of who was right or wrong? Clearly this was a blatant horrendous act.

Even as a truth, when an OP has that much of a clear imbalance in the right/wrong department, I sort of see it as a rant rather than a legitimate discussion starter. I also notice the 'rant' type post:

"I went to the store, someone cut me, but I stood up for myself. He cursed me under his breath but moved to the back of the line.

Glad I got the last brownie we were both eyeing. (insert winky/devilish emoticon here)"

are becoming more, and more frequent. Both fictional or otherwise, I don't really get the benefit in posting a story you already know you were entirely right. Where's the discussion?

Totally agree. I generally have the worst trolldar. But when I realize that some of the most outrageous, rude stories, are all happening to the same person, in all aspects of their life, that definitely raises lots of red flags.

People do have crazy, outlandish things happen to them. Truth is stranger than fiction, as they say. But when it's with every single person in their life, and details start to bleed together and don't back each other up, that's when my troll ears perk up.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: DuBois on September 11, 2011, 03:41:12 AM
And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

Really?  Fictional stories/tales of outlandish behavior are okay as long as they teach a lesson?

I don't think that they're "OK" or that they should be encouraged, but honestly, I think it's the price of being on the internet.  Some people like to make up stories and post them online.  We can't go all vigilante on each other and try to vet every story.  It's not productive, and it's not polite.

We've all been in situations too crazy to be true.  I don't know whether the story in the other thread is true, and it really doesn't matter to me.  It could still lead to useful discussion about what to do when you're in one of those situations that is just so out there that you're caught completely off guard.

I do think it's different when the made-up stories are so emotionally charged that they're painful to others.  Making up stories like that should, in my opinion, be corrected and closed.

This, exactly. I also think the 'calling out' posters in the thread in question were pretty rude. But even if that story had been fake(which I don't think it was) it does no harm to anyone, unlike the ones about miscarriages and stuff.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: General Jinjur on September 11, 2011, 04:04:09 AM
I wouldn't mind hypotheticals either.  But it seems to me that the way the majority of these thread go, the OP posts an outlandishlish story in which Rude Bob is very rude indeed, and the majority of the responses consist of "What a jerk!" and "Poor you, OP."  They hardly prompt a debate about the etiquette of the situation (because there usually isn't one - just a person acting outlandishly), or teach any kind of lesson that I can see.

Eh, Rude Bob is totally real. My Rude Bob, anyway. Drinking, you know.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: strangetimes on September 11, 2011, 04:14:27 AM
Sometimes it is glaringly apparent that a post or story is a creative writing exercise rather than a true happening. I understand that calling it out is frowned upon and I will not do that but I'm curious: are fake stories that are represented as true no big deal or is that something that is unwanted too?

How do you know a story is "glaringly apparent" that it is fiction?  I've published some extraordinarily outrageous stories in prior books that would leave the reader questioning the storytellers' credibility but I have signed documents verifying the authenticity of the events.  Absolutely nothing surprises me anymore.  The thread you are obliquely referring to in this thread doesn't come close to fantastically unbelievable when compared to real life stories that are far more bizarre.

And what if it was fiction?  Can you not extract the etiquette (or lack thereof)  of the tale as  a learning experience?

A handful of members were placed on 14 day gag for their behavior in that thread and several others *just* barely missed moderation.   Several of the newly gagged already had a record of prior gags for similar behavior which means that following someone else's lead in a thread can be a very bad idea as they may be a troublemaker with a history on this forum or a troll trying to get as many people in trouble as possible (they know they are going bye-bye and they'll try to take as many with them as they can).

Is there a way for us to hear about that? Like maybe a moderator stepping into a thread and giving a warning?

I was going through that thread and feeling like it was sounding a little "mean girls" to me, but had you not said this, I wouldn't have known that people were being moderated and even put on hiatus for that.

I've often considered asking posters about situations from my own life, but I hesitate to do that, because I'm afraid of precisely these types of reactions. (I lurked here for a long time before registering, so this isn't just a recent thought)

I feel like I've seen the mods address this before, but I can't remember where. I know there are arguments against it (it lends more attention to the malefactors, it has an air of public stoning to it...) but while I don't need to know that someone has been gagged, I do feel a note saying, "blah blah blah is not acceptable forum behavior" would be useful so users will know that it's been addressed and can learn from the experience. YMMV.

Your suggestion sounds better than mine- I think it would give posters a heads up that the  behaviour is unacceptable, so they don't get caught up in it themselves and it would also keep the forum feeling a little more civi
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 11, 2011, 04:39:07 AM
Can I ask a question please, without seeming out of line? I have noticed that some of the posts I have made have been picked apart and scrutinized. Possibly, it was the way I worded things, but in the past (not so much recently), but I felt that I was "under suspicion" for something. I don't want to appear rude, but surely there is a difference between asking pertinent questions and constantly questioning a post just because of a phrase used that may be misinterpreted? Is it fair for a new poster to be quoted time and time again, with one line in bold, questioning "what that means" and being made to feel like a SS through a difference of opinion or difference of culture (if what happened took place in another country)?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Spoder on September 11, 2011, 05:03:32 AM
Well, it doesn't sound fair to me, but then again I'm getting confused by this whole thread! Would it be possible to be more specific about what you said that has been  picked apart, Hollanda?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 11, 2011, 05:13:05 AM
Well, it doesn't sound fair to me, but then again I'm getting confused by this whole thread! Would it be possible to be more specific about what you said that has been  picked apart, Hollanda?

Sure! :) Ok, there was one yesterday which is a pretty good example. Discussing pregnancy (which was an issue in the post) and I stated I don't like being unnecessarily barged into or barged past.  Maybe my wording on that was not great, but after trying to explain what I meant three or four times, I became a little frustrated until a long-time poster came to my rescue and suggested to others what I may actually mean (which was correct BTW!). There were also other posts previously in which my wording was questioned several times. I appreciate I am from the UK and maybe we do things differently over here, and I appreciate my wording sometimes is not altogether clear. I am  willing to explain myself further when the need arises, but I did feel a little "criticized".

Maybe I am just being a little sensitive at the moment!!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Joeschmo on September 11, 2011, 06:23:44 AM
Hollanda I saw the post you're referencing and thought the questioning of you was a little extreme. I love reading the board but rarely post because unless it's in the off topic boards I usually end up feeling like a jerk.
 I've read on here the sentiment just because one's feelings are hurt doesn't mean anyone was rude but I think it also holds true that just because someone is within the boundaries of etiquette doesn't mean they are nice.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 11, 2011, 06:33:29 AM
Well...keeping things in perspective, maybe I was a little oversensitive, and maybe it was genuine misunderstanding. I just felt and still do, that when questioning fellow posters, a little bit of leeway should be used.  I have read something once and thought one thing, and then read it back later and thought "Hey, that could mean something totally different!!" Then I feel like a jerk :( So maybe that's what happened, it was all just misunderstanding!?!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: POF on September 11, 2011, 07:58:29 AM
Well...keeping things in perspective, maybe I was a little oversensitive, and maybe it was genuine misunderstanding. I just felt and still do, that when questioning fellow posters, a little bit of leeway should be used.  I have read something once and thought one thing, and then read it back later and thought "Hey, that could mean something totally different!!" Then I feel like a jerk :( So maybe that's what happened, it was all just misunderstanding!?!

Hollanda - there is also a very bad habit here of dogpiling ... so when one person chimes in A LOT more will echo that thought. I had a situation where upon getting feedback on a post- I realized that I was the person worhty of E- Hell. My actions  were definitely rude - although I had the best of intentions.  After a few people posted - I responded that  YES - I see it and I have apologized to the person I was posting about. I had probably 20 more posts after that where people where saying how awful, rude, and just a thoughtless human being I was. Regardless of how many times - I said YES .. I agree it was bad ... I've apologized can we move on..... more people chimed in. I felt like I was getting a public flogging. 

I found it very frustrating. So - it happens to all of us.  In the past - I've used etiquette hell as a mirror at times to look at my actions and to get objective feedback and suggestions on how to improve.  I'm much more hesitant to start topics because of some of the dogliling / snarkiness that crops up and then takes off.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Redsoil on September 11, 2011, 08:19:41 AM
Maybe Scritzy's Coke Rule could be employed at times like these? 

I do think that stories which are later shown to be fake can drag people down emotionally, which is extremely nasty, in my opinion.  Someone who may just be posting for reactions (and getting them) can be a direct cause of emotional harm to others, who sincerely believe the lies the poster is spinning.  Especially if those posters (who are often offering support and/or prayers etc) have faced similar crises themselves - it's particularly egregious.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Miss March on September 11, 2011, 08:44:27 AM
Quote
I found it very frustrating. So - it happens to all of us.  In the past - I've used etiquette hell as a mirror at times to look at my actions and to get objective feedback and suggestions on how to improve.  I'm much more hesitant to start topics because of some of the dogpiling / snarkiness that crops up and then takes off.

I have been seeing a lot of this in recent threads too. That, or someone seems to take a fairly straightforward statement made by another poster, and then they twist the words into something else. Or there are certain posters who often seem to end up at odds with each other. I had thought things would improve when we moved to the new forum and got the much discussed "ignore" button, but I guess that hasn't panned out. I hope the mods are still looking for a way to add that feature. I think a lot of us on Ehell do more lurking and less posting of topics for precisely the reasons you state above, POF.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: LadyL on September 11, 2011, 10:36:40 AM
Well...keeping things in perspective, maybe I was a little oversensitive, and maybe it was genuine misunderstanding. I just felt and still do, that when questioning fellow posters, a little bit of leeway should be used.  I have read something once and thought one thing, and then read it back later and thought "Hey, that could mean something totally different!!" Then I feel like a jerk :( So maybe that's what happened, it was all just misunderstanding!?!

Hollanda - there is also a very bad habit here of dogpiling ... so when one person chimes in A LOT more will echo that thought.

Yes, this. Sometimes someone chimes in with an opinion that is (IMO) on the extreme end, but then a bunch of people echo that sentiment, and it seems like it's the majority opinion. Often it's not - when this has happened in threads I've posted, I will often get a PM or two (or three sometimes) from people who strongly disagree with the dog pile but didn't want to get into it on the thread because they felt it had gotten one sided and a bit hostile. Sometimes, an equally strong opposite opinion will get posted, and the dogpile swings back in a different direction (this is usually around page 3 of the post).

IMO it's a combination of people feeling emboldened to support a poster who took a strong position, and the "opposition" to that opinion staying silent (until someone posts a strongly worded post about that view, and then the pendulum often swings back).

So it often looks like this:

OP: I was passing by the lost and found at my work on my way home, and saw what looked like my coworker's sweater sitting there. I wasn't sure if it was hers so I didn't claim it, and by the time I told her about it the next day the lost and found was closed for a few days. Was I rude?

Posts  1-3: Not rude
Post 4: Wow, I would feel really awful if I couldn't get my sweater back all week because a coworker couldn't take five minutes to bring me it or at least tell me they saw it. Whatever happened to looking out for each other? OP, I think you were very rude.
Posts 4-15: POD
Post 16: Hey wait a minute, the OP said she wasn't even sure if it was this person's sweater - so if she claimed it it could be stealing from the actual owner. And she was on her way home, we don't even know if her coworker was still around in the office. I don't think she was rude at all.
Posts 17-?? POD

Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Giggity on September 11, 2011, 10:59:31 AM
Sure! :) Ok, there was one yesterday which is a pretty good example. Discussing pregnancy (which was an issue in the post) and I stated I don't like being unnecessarily barged into or barged past.

Since I was the one who "picked the post apart," I will state my position here again: there's a difference with being "barged into" - i.e., pushed and shoved - and "barged past." Your post seemed to deal with the latter, which I didn't get, since I didn't understand how I'm supposed to go through life never walking faster than those around me. For me, the the adjective is the key.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Larrabee on September 11, 2011, 11:06:49 AM
Sure! :) Ok, there was one yesterday which is a pretty good example. Discussing pregnancy (which was an issue in the post) and I stated I don't like being unnecessarily barged into or barged past.

Since I was the one who "picked the post apart," I will state my position here again: there's a difference with being "barged into" - i.e., pushed and shoved - and "barged past." Your post seemed to deal with the latter, which I didn't get, since I didn't understand how I'm supposed to go through life never walking faster than those around me. For me, the the adjective is the key.

I think you've misunderstood the word 'barge', it does imply physical contact.  Here is a perfect example of someone barging 'past' someone, as a Brit would understand te term:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lyu1KKwC74
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on September 11, 2011, 11:08:30 AM
Sure! :) Ok, there was one yesterday which is a pretty good example. Discussing pregnancy (which was an issue in the post) and I stated I don't like being unnecessarily barged into or barged past.

Since I was the one who "picked the post apart," I will state my position here again: there's a difference with being "barged into" - i.e., pushed and shoved - and "barged past." Your post seemed to deal with the latter, which I didn't get, since I didn't understand how I'm supposed to go through life never walking faster than those around me. For me, the the adjective is the key.

I think you've misunderstood the word 'barge', it does imply physical contact.  Here is a perfect example of someone barging 'past' someone, as a Brit would understand te term:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lyu1KKwC74

Agreed.  Hollanda's original post was very clear to me in that she meant physical contact.  I felt you were a bit rude in that thread Juana, you appeared to be having a go at Hollanda in a sarcastic way rather than just asking her to explain if she was referring to physical contact or not.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Bexx27 on September 11, 2011, 11:11:41 AM
Sure! :) Ok, there was one yesterday which is a pretty good example. Discussing pregnancy (which was an issue in the post) and I stated I don't like being unnecessarily barged into or barged past.

Since I was the one who "picked the post apart," I will state my position here again: there's a difference with being "barged into" - i.e., pushed and shoved - and "barged past." Your post seemed to deal with the latter, which I didn't get, since I didn't understand how I'm supposed to go through life never walking faster than those around me. For me, the the adjective is the key.

That was the source of the confusion for me, too. Also mentioning being pregnant as if that made it worse. Later it was clarified that you just meant people should pay more attention to their surroundings because they might push down someone with any type of physical limitation. With the clarifications, I don't have a problem with your post.

It's hard to read tone and posters often get asked to clarify what they intended to say. Sometimes posts can be interpreted to mean something entirely different - and possibly more offensive - than the poster actually meant. It's certainly happened to me and I know I often fail to express myself well. I think misunderstanding what a poster is saying and seeking clarification of their point is quite different from doubting that their story is true.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Giggity on September 11, 2011, 11:16:05 AM
Which is why, in that post, I asked for clarification a few times. Shoving someone is always rude. Walking past them, possibly even brushing them, is not. I am still not sure what being pregnant has to do with the issue, unless it's that one should pay special attention to one's surroundings in case a neighboring human happens to be expecting.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: RingTailedLemur on September 11, 2011, 11:30:41 AM
Which is why, in that post, I asked for clarification a few times. Shoving someone is always rude. Walking past them, possibly even brushing them, is not. I am still not sure what being pregnant has to do with the issue, unless it's that one should pay special attention to one's surroundings in case a neighboring human happens to be expecting.

Hollanda was definitely talking about physical contact.

You (general) should be careful of heavily pregnant woman for the reason I explained, they are balanced differently and it is easier for them to fall.  In the same way, you (general) should also keep an eye out for frail people (likely to fall and get badly hurt) and children (don't always look where they are going and fall over easily).
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Giggity on September 11, 2011, 11:31:50 AM
It might be a US/UK thing. I didn't get that "barging past" = "shoving." (I still don't, but I am willing to admit when literalism causes a problem and retire on those grounds.)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Larrabee on September 11, 2011, 11:35:34 AM
It might be a US/UK thing. I didn't get that "barging past" = "shoving." (I still don't, but I am willing to admit when literalism causes a problem and retire on those grounds.)

What do you think it means then?  I don't understand why you aren't willing to accept the clarification you asked for.  What you're talking about is called 'walking past'.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lisbeth on September 11, 2011, 11:50:40 AM
We seem to be going around in circles.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Giggity on September 11, 2011, 11:54:35 AM
Once it was explained to me, I got it fine. That's why I asked so many times.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: sugar pie on September 11, 2011, 11:56:04 AM
We seem to be going around in circles.

It feels more like a mobius strip.  ;D

*crickets chirping*
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: bobsyouruncle on September 11, 2011, 11:56:53 AM
It might be a US/UK thing. I didn't get that "barging past" = "shoving." (I still don't, but I am willing to admit when literalism causes a problem and retire on those grounds.)

What do you think it means then?  I don't understand why you aren't willing to accept the clarification you asked for.  What you're talking about is called 'walking past'.

I'd never heard the term barging past before - without the clarification I'd have assumed it meant walking past *quickly* and *purposefully* but not with any physical contact.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lisbeth on September 11, 2011, 11:57:36 AM
We seem to be going around in circles.

It feels more like a mobius strip.  ;D

*crickets chirping*

Welcome, my friends, to the show that never ends!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Larrabee on September 11, 2011, 11:58:52 AM
It might be a US/UK thing. I didn't get that "barging past" = "shoving." (I still don't, but I am willing to admit when literalism causes a problem and retire on those grounds.)

What do you think it means then?  I don't understand why you aren't willing to accept the clarification you asked for.  What you're talking about is called 'walking past'.

I'd never heard the term barging past before - without the clarification I'd have assumed it meant walking past *quickly* and *purposefully* but not with any physical contact.

I understand that, I just didn't get why even after the clarification Juana said she still didn't 'get that barging past = shoving'. 

Other posters are right though, this could get really dull so I'll just leave it there!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Nurvingiel on September 11, 2011, 12:02:12 PM
I had a big post written out on the pregnancy issue, but I think we're really sidetracking Erich's thread. I'll start a spin-off. :)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Giggity on September 11, 2011, 12:02:17 PM
Once it was explicitly stated, I got it. (That's why I asked so many times. I was looking for explicitness.)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lisbeth on September 11, 2011, 12:06:24 PM
Getting back to shenanigans-I have to admit that while it bothers me that there are emotional bloodsuckers who would post false stories for sympathy in this forum, I'm not wild about posters calling shenanigans on someone.  Asking questions is one thing, but I'd rather let the moderators be the ones to identify trolls.

When forum posters do it, it can get really nasty and there can be a lot of back-and-forth defensiveness.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lynn2000 on September 11, 2011, 12:51:15 PM
So it often looks like this:

OP: I was passing by the lost and found at my work on my way home, and saw what looked like my coworker's sweater sitting there. I wasn't sure if it was hers so I didn't claim it, and by the time I told her about it the next day the lost and found was closed for a few days. Was I rude?

Posts  1-3: Not rude
Post 4: Wow, I would feel really awful if I couldn't get my sweater back all week because a coworker couldn't take five minutes to bring me it or at least tell me they saw it. Whatever happened to looking out for each other? OP, I think you were very rude.
Posts 4-15: POD
Post 16: Hey wait a minute, the OP said she wasn't even sure if it was this person's sweater - so if she claimed it it could be stealing from the actual owner. And she was on her way home, we don't even know if her coworker was still around in the office. I don't think she was rude at all.
Posts 17-?? POD

Just wanted to say I thought this was accurate. Not always in terms of dogpiling (i.e., strong condemnation of the OP), but just the opinions on a thread in general. Personally I think it's really interesting to see how opinion sways back and forth due to someone posting a strong new opinion/observation. The "waiting in the wrong line" thread in Life... in general is a good recent example, I think.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: PeterM on September 11, 2011, 01:21:18 PM
I realize that outlandish things happen to people, but it starts to feel a little out of the realm of reality when it seems like repeatedly outlandish things happen to the same person due to far-reaching coincidences.

A repeated saga like Marina's neighbor made sense. She lived next door. Of course run ins would happen more than once.

Not picking on or implying anything about Marina specifically, but a situation like that could just be a liar who came up with a backstory that holds together well. The obscene snow-woman/racist bagel stories turned out to be fake, if I recall correctly. Those were about a crazy neighbor, too, which definitely helped make them seem more realistic than if each story had been told as a separate incident involving multiple different people.

For the record, I don't think any of the recurring characters on this board are made up. I heartily wish some of them were, but that's another matter. But the fact that a number of outrageous stories star the same person doesn't really make them more believable. Another possibility is that the troll behind them is just more prolific and better at the job than others.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 11, 2011, 02:35:19 PM
I have to say that recent responses to posts I have made - and responses to other posts - have left me very wary of starting new threads on this board.   I am making it clear now that I felt quite intimidated with the "barging past" comments made by individuals, and I believe, looking back at my posts, that I made myself clear enough when asked for clarification the first time.  If people have an issue with me, fine, PM me if you need more information and I will happily clarify on the board. Constantly and publicly questioning anyone on the same issue is not helpful. 

I think we have clarified the issue of shenanigans on this board, things seem to be going round in circles now.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: EMuir on September 11, 2011, 02:39:56 PM
I would rather we all just assume people are telling the truth and discuss the relevant points of etiquette.  If you think someone is lying, leave the thread and it will die.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Scuba_Dog on September 11, 2011, 02:40:16 PM
I have to say that recent responses to posts I have made - and responses to other posts - have left me very wary of starting new threads on this board.   I am making it clear now that I felt quite intimidated with the "barging past" comments made by individuals, and I believe, looking back at my posts, that I made myself clear enough when asked for clarification the first time.  If people have an issue with me, fine, PM me if you need more information and I will happily clarify on the board. Constantly and publicly questioning anyone on the same issue is not helpful. 

I think we have clarified the issue of shenanigans on this board, things seem to be going round in circles now.

I read through your thread and I don't see where anyone accused you of making things up.  I see where there is a clarification issue, but a shenanigans one I'm not seeing.  Am I missing it?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 11, 2011, 02:44:20 PM
I have to say that recent responses to posts I have made - and responses to other posts - have left me very wary of starting new threads on this board.   I am making it clear now that I felt quite intimidated with the "barging past" comments made by individuals, and I believe, looking back at my posts, that I made myself clear enough when asked for clarification the first time.  If people have an issue with me, fine, PM me if you need more information and I will happily clarify on the board. Constantly and publicly questioning anyone on the same issue is not helpful. 

I think we have clarified the issue of shenanigans on this board, things seem to be going round in circles now.

I read through your thread and I don't see where anyone accused you of making things up.  I see where there is a clarification issue, but a shenanigans one I'm not seeing.  Am I missing it?

That was the only conclusion I came to after being questioned so intensely...that I could somehoew be under scrutiny.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Scuba_Dog on September 11, 2011, 02:47:50 PM
I have to say that recent responses to posts I have made - and responses to other posts - have left me very wary of starting new threads on this board.   I am making it clear now that I felt quite intimidated with the "barging past" comments made by individuals, and I believe, looking back at my posts, that I made myself clear enough when asked for clarification the first time.  If people have an issue with me, fine, PM me if you need more information and I will happily clarify on the board. Constantly and publicly questioning anyone on the same issue is not helpful. 

I think we have clarified the issue of shenanigans on this board, things seem to be going round in circles now.

I read through your thread and I don't see where anyone accused you of making things up.  I see where there is a clarification issue, but a shenanigans one I'm not seeing.  Am I missing it?

That was the only conclusion I came to after being questioned so intensely...that I could somehoew be under scrutiny.

Hm, I didn't get that at all from the exchange.  It really just seemed like a clarification issue.

I'm sorry it made you feel that way though. 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Ehelldame on September 11, 2011, 07:45:59 PM

That was the only conclusion I came to after being questioned so intensely...that I could somehoew be under scrutiny.

The only scrutiny you should be concerned about are the moderators', particularly mine. 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Erich L-ster on September 11, 2011, 08:58:04 PM
I had a big post written out on the pregnancy issue, but I think we're really sidetracking Erich's thread. I'll start a spin-off. :)
I think my thread is moot now anyway. If one doesn't believe a story to begin with any explanations are probably not going to be believed anyway especially when taken in context with past information that doesn't jibe. The conclusion for me is I should probably just bite my (typing fingers?) tongue.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Miss Understood on September 11, 2011, 10:09:40 PM
Well...keeping things in perspective, maybe I was a little oversensitive, and maybe it was genuine misunderstanding. I just felt and still do, that when questioning fellow posters, a little bit of leeway should be used.  I have read something once and thought one thing, and then read it back later and thought "Hey, that could mean something totally different!!" Then I feel like a jerk :( So maybe that's what happened, it was all just misunderstanding!?!

Hollanda - there is also a very bad habit here of dogpiling ... so when one person chimes in A LOT more will echo that thought.

Yes, this. Sometimes someone chimes in with an opinion that is (IMO) on the extreme end, but then a bunch of people echo that sentiment, and it seems like it's the majority opinion. Often it's not - when this has happened in threads I've posted, I will often get a PM or two (or three sometimes) from people who strongly disagree with the dog pile but didn't want to get into it on the thread because they felt it had gotten one sided and a bit hostile. Sometimes, an equally strong opposite opinion will get posted, and the dogpile swings back in a different direction (this is usually around page 3 of the post).

IMO it's a combination of people feeling emboldened to support a poster who took a strong position, and the "opposition" to that opinion staying silent (until someone posts a strongly worded post about that view, and then the pendulum often swings back).

So it often looks like this:

OP: I was passing by the lost and found at my work on my way home, and saw what looked like my coworker's sweater sitting there. I wasn't sure if it was hers so I didn't claim it, and by the time I told her about it the next day the lost and found was closed for a few days. Was I rude?

Posts  1-3: Not rude
Post 4: Wow, I would feel really awful if I couldn't get my sweater back all week because a coworker couldn't take five minutes to bring me it or at least tell me they saw it. Whatever happened to looking out for each other? OP, I think you were very rude.
Posts 4-15: POD
Post 16: Hey wait a minute, the OP said she wasn't even sure if it was this person's sweater - so if she claimed it it could be stealing from the actual owner. And she was on her way home, we don't even know if her coworker was still around in the office. I don't think she was rude at all.
Posts 17-?? POD

The only thread I remember that looked anything like the above was the one where a coworker had left her purse in the ladies' bathroom.  That's quite different from a missing sweater, and yes, some posters criticized the OP for leaving the purse alone and not notifying security (and I think she clarified that to do so would be really difficult - the fact remains that if it had been feasible, in the case of a purse, not a sweater, all reasonable steps should be taken to reunite the item with its owner).

I don't see the point of changing the details of an example to such an extent that the example has no relevance.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: LifeOnPluto on September 11, 2011, 10:10:08 PM
I just wanted to make it clear that my "This guy is unreal" comment on PWR's thread (which sparked the subsequent POD chain) was made in good faith. That is, I genuinely believed the story and thought the guy's behaviour was outrageous. I wasn't trying to coyly question the validity of PWR's story.

Anyway, this thread has been very instructive and illuminating. I do agree that notifying a mod is the best way to handle a suspected shenanigans.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 12, 2011, 01:56:47 AM

That was the only conclusion I came to after being questioned so intensely...that I could somehoew be under scrutiny.

The only scrutiny you should be concerned about are the moderators', particularly mine.

Ok. Here's what I will do. From now on, I will not take anything so personally. Simples!

(Thank you Ehelldame!) xxx
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: MariaE on September 12, 2011, 02:41:30 AM
I just wanted to make it clear that my "This guy is unreal" comment on PWR's thread (which sparked the subsequent POD chain) was made in good faith. That is, I genuinely believed the story and thought the guy's behaviour was outrageous. I wasn't trying to coyly question the validity of PWR's story.

Anyway, this thread has been very instructive and illuminating. I do agree that notifying a mod is the best way to handle a suspected shenanigans.

FWIW, I never thought you were - and I fully believe some of the other "unreal" / "unbelievable" comments were meant in the same way. Other posters just hijacked your comment.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: missmolly on September 12, 2011, 03:40:44 AM
I think that asking pertinent questions is a good way to do it, however, we should to keep in mind that some posters will intentionally change/withhold certain details about stories they've posted in order to avoid people IRL recognising the stories/posters.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Curly Wurly Doggie Breath on September 12, 2011, 03:56:51 AM
I think that asking pertinent questions is a good way to do it, however, we should to keep in mind that some posters will intentionally change/withhold certain details about stories they've posted in order to avoid people IRL recognising the stories/posters.

yep, it's a family member I am complaining about not doing the job, in a thread. So, I don't want them to find me.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Ehelldame on September 12, 2011, 06:46:13 AM
I think that asking pertinent questions is a good way to do it, however, we should to keep in mind that some posters will intentionally change/withhold certain details about stories they've posted in order to avoid people IRL recognising the stories/posters.

Changing pertinent details is encouraged to avoid exposing too much personal information.  Every once in a  while someone requests that I delete every post in a thread they created because they realized, too late, that there are real life people that can find their comments.  I don't delete entire threads or have the time to pick through their posts to remove them. 
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: LadyL on September 12, 2011, 08:45:47 AM

So it often looks like this:

OP: I was passing by the lost and found at my work on my way home, and saw what looked like my coworker's sweater sitting there. I wasn't sure if it was hers so I didn't claim it, and by the time I told her about it the next day the lost and found was closed for a few days. Was I rude?

Posts  1-3: Not rude
Post 4: Wow, I would feel really awful if I couldn't get my sweater back all week because a coworker couldn't take five minutes to bring me it or at least tell me they saw it. Whatever happened to looking out for each other? OP, I think you were very rude.
Posts 4-15: POD
Post 16: Hey wait a minute, the OP said she wasn't even sure if it was this person's sweater - so if she claimed it it could be stealing from the actual owner. And she was on her way home, we don't even know if her coworker was still around in the office. I don't think she was rude at all.
Posts 17-?? POD

The only thread I remember that looked anything like the above was the one where a coworker had left her purse in the ladies' bathroom.  That's quite different from a missing sweater, and yes, some posters criticized the OP for leaving the purse alone and not notifying security (and I think she clarified that to do so would be really difficult - the fact remains that if it had been feasible, in the case of a purse, not a sweater, all reasonable steps should be taken to reunite the item with its owner).

I don't see the point of changing the details of an example to such an extent that the example has no relevance.

Yep, that was my thread, and the inspiration for this example. The opinion in bold was not unanimous, but some posters did feel very strongly that it was an ironclad rule that I broke and that there wasn't much room for interpretation or discussion.

However I can think of a handful of other threads that followed the same pattern where I PM'd back and forth with members about how it's weird that this particular pattern is so distinct. That's not to mention the dozens of times when it happened and I didn't say anything. I find that when a seemingly innocuous topic gets contentious it tends to be because of this pattern.

Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 12, 2011, 10:33:57 AM

So it often looks like this:

OP: I was passing by the lost and found at my work on my way home, and saw what looked like my coworker's sweater sitting there. I wasn't sure if it was hers so I didn't claim it, and by the time I told her about it the next day the lost and found was closed for a few days. Was I rude?

Posts  1-3: Not rude
Post 4: Wow, I would feel really awful if I couldn't get my sweater back all week because a coworker couldn't take five minutes to bring me it or at least tell me they saw it. Whatever happened to looking out for each other? OP, I think you were very rude.
Posts 4-15: POD
Post 16: Hey wait a minute, the OP said she wasn't even sure if it was this person's sweater - so if she claimed it it could be stealing from the actual owner. And she was on her way home, we don't even know if her coworker was still around in the office. I don't think she was rude at all.
Posts 17-?? POD

The only thread I remember that looked anything like the above was the one where a coworker had left her purse in the ladies' bathroom.  That's quite different from a missing sweater, and yes, some posters criticized the OP for leaving the purse alone and not notifying security (and I think she clarified that to do so would be really difficult - the fact remains that if it had been feasible, in the case of a purse, not a sweater, all reasonable steps should be taken to reunite the item with its owner).

I don't see the point of changing the details of an example to such an extent that the example has no relevance.

Yep, that was my thread, and the inspiration for this example. The opinion in bold was not unanimous, but some posters did feel very strongly that it was an ironclad rule that I broke and that there wasn't much room for interpretation or discussion.

However I can think of a handful of other threads that followed the same pattern where I PM'd back and forth with members about how it's weird that this particular pattern is so distinct. That's not to mention the dozens of times when it happened and I didn't say anything. I find that when a seemingly innocuous topic gets contentious it tends to be because of this pattern.

ITA. Just read back a few posts and I can see where the misunderstandings lie - when one person puts forward the opposite view from the PPs, and then more climb out of the woodwork and agree. Then it goes back to the original POV and so on.  I don't think it is always intentionally malicious, but if one poster is particularly upset or annoyed about something, that's when tempers might flare! I guess Scritzy's coke rule might apply here.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: penelope2017 on September 12, 2011, 10:41:25 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Perfect Circle on September 12, 2011, 10:51:47 AM
One of the characteristics of Ehell is that people will give you their opinion and they do not sugarcoat it. That doesn't mean members are rude but they are firm and honest in how they see the situation.

If you only want people to agree with you and your position, this isn't a place to post.

Sometimes it needs one person to come out with an opposing opinion to either encourage others to agree or to see the situation from a different point of view.

I think anyone who has been here for any length of time has had people disagreeing with them. It's the nature of this place and I personally think it's much better for it.

How boring would it be if everyone agreed with each other on every thread?
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Spoder on September 12, 2011, 11:05:08 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Hollanda on September 12, 2011, 11:09:27 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.

The written word is easier to misunderstand than the spoken word - there is no non-verbal communication involved, and it is impossible to gauge the intonation in the words.  That's where my frustration lies sometimes!
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: LadyL on September 12, 2011, 11:09:35 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?


No, more that the tone of a discussion can be easily biased by a minority viewpoint if that view is put forward forcefully enough. I think most people post expecting a range of opinions. When you are only getting feedback reflecting one view, it's either a super rare unanimous thread (snakes!) or there's a bit of a herd mentality going on, with dissenters lurking silently, hesitant to jump in the fray. It can make you question your grasp on not only etiquette but reality itself when it seems like 'everyone agrees' on a position you think is way out there - whether you're the OP or a reader. For me it's helpful to understand the underlying dynamics, because it's easier to sort through what is reasonable, balanced feedback and what is weird internet groupthink.

It reminds me of a friend who used to do product development focus groups for extra money in college - she made a game out of trying to convince the whole group to agree with the most random viewpoint possible, to see who would buy in. She said it was pretty easy to manipulate people this way.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Spoder on September 12, 2011, 11:12:56 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.

The written word is easier to misunderstand than the spoken word - there is no non-verbal communication involved, and it is impossible to gauge the intonation in the words.  That's where my frustration lies sometimes!

Well, for sure, I agree. But that's why I think that all comments should be taken to be non-personal, i.e. they should be interpreted in the best possible light. It's the nature of internet forums that you only have what's on the screen to go by.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Lynn2000 on September 12, 2011, 11:13:13 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.

POD, I have seen the same pattern many times in threads. I think it's an interesting example of group dynamics, personally, and similar to what happens in a real-life group discussion--only easier to pick up on, because you can take the time to study the written responses. I don't think there's anything wrong with it in general and it can actually lead to a lot of interesting insights. It can certainly be inflated to extreme "dogpiling" or personal comments, but it doesn't always happen that way (or even most of the time).

AKA, POD LadyL. :)
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: gollymolly2 on September 12, 2011, 11:15:37 AM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.

The written word is easier to misunderstand than the spoken word - there is no non-verbal communication involved, and it is impossible to gauge the intonation in the words.  That's where my frustration lies sometimes!

You're right, it is easier to misunderstand the written word.  So just always assume that someone who has responded to you is looking for an honest discussion, not a fight.

At its core, this is a discussion forum.  That means you should always expect to have people disagree with you and/or ask for clarifications.  It certainly happens that posters disagree rudely or are pushy in their requests for clarification, but I frequently see posters respond by getting defensive, which makes them look just as bad as the original rude/pushy poster.  If someone disagrees with you (even with a rude tone), ignore the tone and discuss their comment (if you want).  If someone is pushy in asking you to clarify something that seems obvious to you (even with a rude tone), ignore the tone and try to think of a better way to explain yourself (if you want).  But don't get caught up in the tone and act offended, it serves no purpose.

eta: Pod, Spoder.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: StressedGroom on September 12, 2011, 11:28:23 AM
Well...keeping things in perspective, maybe I was a little oversensitive, and maybe it was genuine misunderstanding. I just felt and still do, that when questioning fellow posters, a little bit of leeway should be used.  I have read something once and thought one thing, and then read it back later and thought "Hey, that could mean something totally different!!" Then I feel like a jerk :( So maybe that's what happened, it was all just misunderstanding!?!

Hollanda - there is also a very bad habit here of dogpiling ... so when one person chimes in A LOT more will echo that thought. I had a situation where upon getting feedback on a post- I realized that I was the person worhty of E- Hell. My actions  were definitely rude - although I had the best of intentions.  After a few people posted - I responded that  YES - I see it and I have apologized to the person I was posting about. I had probably 20 more posts after that where people where saying how awful, rude, and just a thoughtless human being I was. Regardless of how many times - I said YES .. I agree it was bad ... I've apologized can we move on..... more people chimed in. I felt like I was getting a public flogging. 

I found it very frustrating. So - it happens to all of us.  In the past - I've used etiquette hell as a mirror at times to look at my actions and to get objective feedback and suggestions on how to improve.  I'm much more hesitant to start topics because of some of the dogliling / snarkiness that crops up and then takes off.

What I see a lot is people responding before they read the whole thread; in some cases its obvious because they ask questions already resolved in the thread.  I'm not saying dog piling doesn't occur, but I think often times people get too emotional and post before reading the whole thread.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: pierrotlunaire0 on September 13, 2011, 02:23:35 PM
I think one of the things that has led to some of the confusion regarding suspicions is the fact that E-hell itself has evolved so much over the years.

I was bored one day, and looking at some very old posts (2006 or 2007).  Things that would immediately result in a locked thread today were allowed: Sheer vents, clearly labeled as vents in the title, for example. 

Not that I am saying that this is a bad thing.  It does show that E-hell is growing and evolving, and I happen to think that changes are positive.  It is a little surprising, however.
Title: Re: Schenanigans?
Post by: Danismom on October 12, 2011, 09:37:12 PM
I do agree that when a thread is going along with many people agreeing with one side of the argument, posters are less likely to be the one to jump in and disagree. But then one person has the nerve to do so, and then the rest who've been reading it and thinking the same thing join in.

I'm not sure what else you are implying is occuring when a thread is going one way and then turns another? That it's orchestrated for some reason?

This is what I see, too. I agree that the pattern LadyL described is pretty accurate, but I don't see it as a problem.

I think the problems usually start when comments turn personal, or posters involved in the thread *take* comments personally that weren't meant that way.

The written word is easier to misunderstand than the spoken word - there is no non-verbal communication involved, and it is impossible to gauge the intonation in the words.  That's where my frustration lies sometimes!

You're right, it is easier to misunderstand the written word.  So just always assume that someone who has responded to you is looking for an honest discussion, not a fight.

At its core, this is a discussion forum.  That means you should always expect to have people disagree with you and/or ask for clarifications.  It certainly happens that posters disagree rudely or are pushy in their requests for clarification, but I frequently see posters respond by getting defensive, which makes them look just as bad as the original rude/pushy poster.  If someone disagrees with you (even with a rude tone), ignore the tone and discuss their comment (if you want).  If someone is pushy in asking you to clarify something that seems obvious to you (even with a rude tone), ignore the tone and try to think of a better way to explain yourself (if you want).  But don't get caught up in the tone and act offended, it serves no purpose.

eta: Pod, Spoder.

I sometimes struggle to remember that some words have different meanings in different parts of the world.  Hollanda pointed out that "barging past" someone is a colloquialism that makes sense in the UK.  However, in my part of the US, we would think it meant to walk forcefully or pointedly past someone.  That could look like passing someone while stomping, muttering, or otherwise giving off body language of being frustrated/rushed/angry at the person being passed.  In different areas of the US there are different sayings as well that may not translate well.  Remembering that Ehell is international provides a reality check for me on this.  Juana and I are in the same state.  I understand the confusion she experienced.  The video was really helpful and clarifying.