Author Topic: Thoughts on thoughts  (Read 16259 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

aventurine

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6391
  • Mean, but agreeable
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2011, 02:05:41 PM »
Ohhh yeah.  I always write this extravagant, richly detailed account, and then pare it down ruthlessly to get to the core.  I feel like I get much better insight, even on my own, by that process.

I agree, that particular thread wasn't the best example of the issue I started this thread to discuss.  I've seen in the past where responders have just thrown out a "well, you ought not to hold that opinion/feel that way in the first place" like a drive-by, without offering anything useful.  I'm not a fan.  I wish I had some examples, but then again, I wouldn't want to call anyone out either.





"A child of five could understand this.  Send someone to fetch a child of five." - Groucho Marx

Jan74

  • Guest
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2011, 03:02:51 PM »
I've seen in the past where responders have just thrown out a "well, you ought not to hold that opinion/feel that way in the first place" like a drive-by, without offering anything useful.  I'm not a fan.  I wish I had some examples, but then again, I wouldn't want to call anyone out either.


See, I think saying that is out of line. However, saying "I completely disagree with your opinion/the way you feel" is ok.

You can't tell others how to think.

aventurine

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6391
  • Mean, but agreeable
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2011, 03:22:21 PM »
I've seen in the past where responders have just thrown out a "well, you ought not to hold that opinion/feel that way in the first place" like a drive-by, without offering anything useful.  I'm not a fan.  I wish I had some examples, but then again, I wouldn't want to call anyone out either.


See, I think saying that is out of line. However, saying "I completely disagree with your opinion/the way you feel" is ok.

You can't tell others how to think.

ITA.  And when I tried to raise that point, that's when I was told that if it's posted here, then it's fair game for criticism/commentary.  Disagreement, of course, is fine, natural and expected, but we really can't, as you said, tell others how/what to think.




"A child of five could understand this.  Send someone to fetch a child of five." - Groucho Marx

Dindrane

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 15463
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2011, 03:42:30 PM »
I think that's a key distinction, though.  Everything posted here is fair game for commentary or criticism.  But it is still impolite for one adult to tell another adult what they should be doing (unless they have been asked to do so).

So if I pose a question about a scenario with my sister, but spend a lot of time talking about my brother, and then ask how people think I should respond to the situation with my sister, it's totally fair for them to give me opinions on what I should do about my sister.

It would also be fair for them to comment on what I said about my brother.  I think it would even be fair for them to suggest different ways of dealing with my brother as well as my sister.  But it would be rude to state (rather than suggest) that I should do X with regard to my brother.

It makes it more rude, in my opinion, if they tell me to do X with my brother, and ignore my question about my sister.


hyzenthlay

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8751
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2011, 04:03:05 PM »
It makes it more rude, in my opinion, if they tell me to do X with my brother, and ignore my question about my sister.

In the cases where I have seen something like that happen it's my opinion that it's because with what we are given by the poster the 'sister problem' is mild and easy to address and the 'brother problem' is a huge complicated mess that the poster doesn't seem to see.

When I first joined someone had posted about cars being rude and possibly dangerous to a motorcycles participating in a fund raising drive  . . . a fund raising drive that was miles long and completely dominating the right lane of a freeway going through the heart of a busy urban area.

Many people pointed out that the cars were being left almost no options and the OP might want to contact the organizers or otherwise not participate if the organization wasn't improved. The OP seemed grumpy that she was being given advice she didn't ask for, even though according to her own post the problem was much more about the ride then about the 2 cars she was upset about.

And I think people that ask focused questions usually get fairly focused answers. The folks who ask very open ended questions usually trigger a more widely ranged discussion


aventurine

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6391
  • Mean, but agreeable
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2011, 04:05:04 PM »
I think that's a key distinction, though.  Everything posted here is fair game for commentary or criticism.  But it is still impolite for one adult to tell another adult what they should be doing (unless they have been asked to do so).

A key distinction as well as a very fine one, which is why it's so tricky.  I've wanted to post about it for awhile, but held off for fear I wouldn't be able to get at exactly what I meant without being incredibly nit-picky.

I should have trusted my fellow eHellions to get it.    :)


It would also be fair for them to comment on what I said about my brother.  I think it would even be fair for them to suggest different ways of dealing with my brother as well as my sister.  But it would be rude to state (rather than suggest) that I should do X with regard to my brother.

It makes it more rude, in my opinion, if they tell me to do X with my brother, and ignore my question about my sister.

Oftentimes, that's what ends up happening.  Threads drift, but I hate to see the actual question get buried behind peripheral elements of the OP.  But, one can't tell people what to post.  




"A child of five could understand this.  Send someone to fetch a child of five." - Groucho Marx

aventurine

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6391
  • Mean, but agreeable
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2011, 04:06:15 PM »
And I think people that ask focused questions usually get fairly focused answers. The folks who ask very open ended questions usually trigger a more widely ranged discussion


I think so too, and I've tried to learn from that when it comes to my own postings.




"A child of five could understand this.  Send someone to fetch a child of five." - Groucho Marx

Dindrane

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 15463
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2011, 04:12:41 PM »
It makes it more rude, in my opinion, if they tell me to do X with my brother, and ignore my question about my sister.

In the cases where I have seen something like that happen it's my opinion that it's because with what we are given by the poster the 'sister problem' is mild and easy to address and the 'brother problem' is a huge complicated mess that the poster doesn't seem to see.

When I first joined someone had posted about cars being rude and possibly dangerous to a motorcycles participating in a fund raising drive  . . . a fund raising drive that was miles long and completely dominating the right lane of a freeway going through the heart of a busy urban area.

Many people pointed out that the cars were being left almost no options and the OP might want to contact the organizers or otherwise not participate if the organization wasn't improved. The OP seemed grumpy that she was being given advice she didn't ask for, even though according to her own post the problem was much more about the ride then about the 2 cars she was upset about.

And I think people that ask focused questions usually get fairly focused answers. The folks who ask very open ended questions usually trigger a more widely ranged discussion

I agree, but I do still think it comes off badly when someone posts just to say "You need to do X with your brother," and nothing else.  Even if they just said, "You've gotten a lot of good advice on your sister already, but I think you should consider doing X with your brother," I'd think that was completely 100% fine, and not rude in the slightest.  Or even, "I think the real issue to focus on here is with your brother.  Have you tried doing X?"

I guess I just think that posters should at least try to acknowledge the original question in the OP, even if they don't answer it, and even if the thread has drifted.  In normal conversation, I wouldn't ignore the question someone asked in order to comment on some other aspect of the situation.  Even if I thought they were missing the real issue, I'd at least say that (which would be, at least indirectly, addressing the question they actually asked).


ydpubs

  • Has a fine singing voice.
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3407
  • Reading the threads here makes me hungry.
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2011, 04:19:52 PM »
I address those thoughts because if they do seem OOT top is should be addressed, because those thoughts could come out given the provocation. I am not saying they will, but it could happen. Having explosive, angry reactions (at this point internal) may bubble up if the same situation keeps presenting itself. We've all seen, heard, experienced the "straw that broke the camel's back" blow out. And if a poster is having, what seems like an extreme reaction to a seemingly minor error, then it will be pointed out.

It's like this.

I go to a coffee shop and wait in a line. Someone cuts in front of me.

If I post: I think to myself, WTHeck is wrong with this jerkweed. How dare they cut in front of me!! What is WRONG with them, can't they see I'm in line??@??!?!

I am fuming, but I keep this to myself. I tell this person I am in line and they are cutting in... etc....

What say you Ehellions? What should I have done?


I mean really, going off like that over a minor infraction is OOT. I haven't screamed at the offender, but getting that bent over something like that should be pointed out as being a bit much. That perhaps the situation does not warrant such vehemence and maybe a little more understanding for an honest mistake.

I don't mean a situation with a repeat offender, like a toxic friend or relative who does intentionally does something to upset and aggravate, that is another thing altogether..

'
No matter where you go, there you are...

ydpubs

  • Has a fine singing voice.
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3407
  • Reading the threads here makes me hungry.
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2011, 04:26:00 PM »
It's not so much that the OP actually thinks the girl is stupid.  As I understood the story, she didn't even really know the girl.  However, the girl did a "stupid" thing, so the OP referred to her in her post as "stupid."  (Not the best choice of words, I can definitely agree to that.  In the house I grew up in, "stupid" is almost a cuss word.) 

But then the OP was chastised for thinking the girl was stupid.  The girl, by her own actions, had portrayed herself to the OP as stupid.   The OP still doesn't know her well enough to know if she's stupid or not.  She was just using a convenient word that described the girl's actions.  We were calling her down for an opinion she may or may not even actually hold.  She wasn't letting her opinion of the girl color her reaction to the situation.  Rather, the girl's actions created the OP's opinion of her, so telling her she was letting her opinion get in the way made no sense in that particular situation. 

The OP was essentially saying that anyone who would do what the girl did is stupid, or at least deserves to be called stupid.  She's not just calling that one person, who presumably isn't reading her post, stupid; she's calling an entire group of people (some of whom did read her post, since at least a few people said they would have done what the girl did) stupid.

You know, if it was just the 'stupid' comment, it might have passed with only a remark or two. But "stupid", plus "I wanted to scream at her" plus "I didn't trust the waiter to actually give me a fresh burger" that caused a lot of posters to think the OP was over-reacting.

All and all, I don't think the closed thread is a good example of thought-policing, as there was much more going on than one offhand 'stupid' comment. It strongly reminded me of threads where the OP was rude, but looking for validation because of another's rudeness. The OP wasn't rude in this case, but threw in so much extraneous stuff that was hard to ignore. I'm with Deb1000Faces. If you want a question answered, ask it as clearly as possible.

That thread could have gone:

OP: Waiter served my burger while I was away from the table. Tablemate opened my bun, was she rude?

Other P's: Yes, No , Maybe...

Exactly. Those three things together added up to OOT for me. That made it more rant-like IMO.
No matter where you go, there you are...

Ms_Shell

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3804
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #40 on: January 11, 2011, 11:57:55 PM »
I go to a coffee shop and wait in a line. Someone cuts in front of me.

If I post: I think to myself, WTHeck is wrong with this jerkweed. How dare they cut in front of me!! What is WRONG with them, can't they see I'm in line??@??!?!

I am fuming, but I keep this to myself. I tell this person I am in line and they are cutting in... etc....

What say you Ehellions? What should I have done?

In your example, if I'd posted it, I would absolutely want someone to point out if they thought my reaction was OTT.  If everyone in a thread was telling me that I seemed really angry over a minor point, it would make me rethink my attitude in general.  That's just me though.
"I've never been a millionaire, but I just know I'd be darling at it." - Dorothy Parker

Granny Takes a Trip

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1506
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #41 on: January 12, 2011, 04:22:27 AM »
I address those thoughts because if they do seem OOT top is should be addressed, because those thoughts could come out given the provocation. I am not saying they will, but it could happen. Having explosive, angry reactions (at this point internal) may bubble up if the same situation keeps presenting itself. We've all seen, heard, experienced the "straw that broke the camel's back" blow out. And if a poster is having, what seems like an extreme reaction to a seemingly minor error, then it will be pointed out.

It's like this.

I go to a coffee shop and wait in a line. Someone cuts in front of me.

If I post: I think to myself, WTHeck is wrong with this jerkweed. How dare they cut in front of me!! What is WRONG with them, can't they see I'm in line??@??!?!

I am fuming, but I keep this to myself. I tell this person I am in line and they are cutting in... etc....

What say you Ehellions? What should I have done?


I mean really, going off like that over a minor infraction is OOT. I haven't screamed at the offender, but getting that bent over something like that should be pointed out as being a bit much. That perhaps the situation does not warrant such vehemence and maybe a little more understanding for an honest mistake.

I don't mean a situation with a repeat offender, like a toxic friend or relative who does intentionally does something to upset and aggravate, that is another thing altogether..

'

Interesting point. I wouldn't think you were overreacting, actually. I have hesitated to say this, because I was in the minority, but I saw nothing wrong in the OP's reaction in the locked thread. I am an impatient and intolerant person, but not a rude one. Why? Because thoughts are thoughts. I always inwardly fume when I see people call others out on thoughts,which are not rude (I don't think that expressing them here counts, at all,I don't get that point).  I don't think we, as a society, owe it to each other to 'think the best' (something I have seen opined here, a lot). Etiquette is not about being nice, or charitable, or thinking the best of people. Often it is about thinking the worst, but not letting those feelings show.
I have a thousand parents. Sadly they
Dissolve in their own virtues and recede.

aventurine

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 6391
  • Mean, but agreeable
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #42 on: January 12, 2011, 12:45:07 PM »
Interesting point. I wouldn't think you were overreacting, actually. I have hesitated to say this, because I was in the minority, but I saw nothing wrong in the OP's reaction in the locked thread. I am an impatient and intolerant person, but not a rude one. Why? Because thoughts are thoughts. I always inwardly fume when I see people call others out on thoughts,which are not rude (I don't think that expressing them here counts, at all,I don't get that point).  I don't think we, as a society, owe it to each other to 'think the best' (something I have seen opined here, a lot). Etiquette is not about being nice, or charitable, or thinking the best of people. Often it is about thinking the worst, but not letting those feelings show.

I think you've made my point much more eloquently than I did.  The bolded is at the heart of what I was trying to express. 




"A child of five could understand this.  Send someone to fetch a child of five." - Groucho Marx

hyzenthlay

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 8751
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #43 on: January 12, 2011, 01:00:28 PM »
I don't think we, as a society, owe it to each other to 'think the best' (something I have seen opined here, a lot).

It's not directly a matter of etiquette, but neither is much of what is discussed on the site.

We've seen people on the board (and many a story in the classic section) where the poster is ready to flay someone over a perceived violation. When really, no violation occurred. Now they may never have let that slip to the outside world other then on e-hell, but if they post the story looking for vindication I think it's allowable to enlighten them about what others think of their reaction.

I do agree that we are not required to 'think the best' but I also think it's good practice not to 'think the worst.'

Granny Takes a Trip

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1506
Re: Thoughts on thoughts
« Reply #44 on: January 12, 2011, 01:21:24 PM »
I don't think we, as a society, owe it to each other to 'think the best' (something I have seen opined here, a lot).

It's not directly a matter of etiquette, but neither is much of what is discussed on the site.

We've seen people on the board (and many a story in the classic section) where the poster is ready to flay someone over a perceived violation. When really, no violation occurred. Now they may never have let that slip to the outside world other then on e-hell, but if they post the story looking for vindication I think it's allowable to enlighten them about what others think of their reaction.

I do agree that we are not required to 'think the best' but I also think it's good practice not to 'think the worst.'

I still think that people are entitled to their thoughts. Not talking about this particular thread any more, but one thing I have seen a lot of on here is people making long and very complicated excuses for people who an OP has seen as rude. 'Maybe they are having a bad day/have an undiagnosed illness/have something in their past to make them oversensitive' And so on it goes. I sometimes find ironic that the same people who are making all these excuses for the other people, seem to then hold the OP to a very high standard.
I have a thousand parents. Sadly they
Dissolve in their own virtues and recede.