This.
And it makes it a lot easier for me to know which response was in reference to which point; otherwise it gets too long and I find it too jumbled.
And similarly, in response to posts, I find it easier to compose my thoughts, and they tend to be expressed more coherently, when I'm doing it bit-by-bit, rather than replying to a great mass of text.
Maybe that's just me liking to be supersuperoverthetoporganised, though :P
I feel the same too! I love the quote button :D x
There are times to stay put, and what you want will come to you.
But there are times to go out into the world and find such a thing for yourself.
I aint no abacus but you can count on me.
What gets me is when you ask a question, just a simple question and someone either a- jumps down your throat or b- treats you like an idiot for having dare asked anything.
I duno maybe its just me that finds that but sometimes i feel like walkin on eggshells making a post just incase i upset anyone or have them jumping down my throat and end up having to change it. But then i dont think theres a lot that can be done.
Certain people, whether intentional or not, come across as aggresive and i guess maybe thats just their tone and they dont mean it so i duno if theres any way of changing things. sorry if that was pointless.
What gets me is when you ask a question, just a simple question and someone either a- jumps down your throat or b- treats you like an idiot for having dare asked anything.
I duno maybe its just me that finds that but sometimes i feel like walkin on eggshells making a post just incase i upset anyone or have them jumping down my throat and end up having to change it. But then i dont think theres a lot that can be done.
Certain people, whether intentional or not, come across as aggresive and i guess maybe thats just their tone and they dont mean it so i duno if theres any way of changing things. sorry if that was pointless.
Hey Grunge Rock Princess - your post wasn't pointless at all.
I think my only suggestion would be that if someone was to jump down your throat or there reply comes across as aggressive, is to maybe read back through the thread. The only reason i suggest this is because it's more than likely the person who is replying to you in this manner is feeling targetted/attacked, and they go into "defense mode" - it's never personal, or atleast it's never been in my case, but also people can get frustrated when in a heated debate about repeating themselves - which again comes down to reading the thread before posting so you know what you've asked hasn't been said before.
Does that make sense?
Also, maybe you could PM the user you feel has replied to you in an unpleasant manner a day or so after the incident and ask them if it was personal/ask for some reassurance as i know people have PM'd me in the past (sometimes even friends) just for reassurance that it wasn't meant in a horrible way because most of the time it isn't but it can come across like that. XXXX
Yeh i know what you mean. I try to think about whats being said but sometimes you know what its like and i'm like 'argh where the hell did that come from???' I mean i love n&d but sometimes i think people do get realli heated and kind attack and its like *hides* sorry i'm so tired so this might not make 100% sense.
I also think *at risk of being attacked* that sometimes, if theres a general opinion like 'oh yeh thats terrible' and you're like well no actually its not, its hard to say it cos then its like 'waaah how could you say that?' You know if that makes sense??
And i do agree with you that its probably not personal - its just sometimes it seems personal when your comment is picked out and questioned.. but yeh PMing is a good idea, thank you! xx
I have had people accuse me of attacking them when I wasn't even referring to them so it just shows how oversensitive people can be. So I agree with Rike and Irene on this. Very careful wording is necessary sometimes.
Before anyone starts trying to cause trouble, that is not the purpose of this thread. However, there have been quite a few F&CQ and Debate threads needing to be edited/removed recently.
What words/phrases/intonation do members find aggravate or upset them? At what point does an opinion or response, do you believe, becomes too personal and not legitimate debate?
As my previous post, this is intended to help make the community a little more approachable and generally more acceptable so please be civil.
I don't think that there is anyway there can be a list of things that aggravate or upset people, mostly just because with some 7000 active members on RYL, there will be about 7000 different answers. Something that may upset some people won't bother others (for example the multi quote issue).
Quote:
Originally Posted by The One Who
I would prefer a long post to be split up into quotes. Not only is it easier on the eye, but it's easier to pick out certain points rather than having to skim through it. It's not attacking or patronising anyone, it's just making the post easier to deal with and easier to read for others.
This is how I feel also. Sometimes I have to go back and read posts 3-4 times to figure out who is talking to who, or what point they are replying to. Especially in threads where multiple different opinions are being discussed at the same time. It's also helpful if a person only wants to reply to a couple of points in a post, rather than all of them.
I have never seen multi-quoting of one post as an automatically aggressive or attacking thing. People may use it to attack someone else, but it's what they are saying that makes it an attack, not the fact that they multi-quoted.
I think, in general, people have a hard time separating their opinion from themselves. One can disagree with a person's opinion without having any malice towards the person themselves.
Opinions are also not infallible. Just because it's an opinion doesn't mean it can't be disproved. People form opinions after gathering information on that topic. If a person has only been exposed to information espousing a certain view, their opinion will be based off that view.
To explain with an example, if everything I had ever learned about cats said that cats lay eggs, my opinion would be based on that. If I got into a debate with someone, I would argue that cats lay eggs, because that is what I know. Just because it's my opinion, doesn't mean it's not wrong (because it is). If people were to provide information refuting my opinion, they aren't attacking me, they are trying to educate me to alternative views.
If someone were to ask me why I think cats lay eggs, they aren't attacking me either, simply trying to learn why my opinion is what it is. Do I think cats lay eggs because I've seen it? Or because I read it in a veterinary journal? Or a tabloid? Did another person tell me that? How reliable are the sources I'm basing my information on? In a proper debate, refuting the sources of the opinion is an acceptable method of debating (if I remember my debate lessons correctly).
Trying to change someone's opinion by introducing additional views and information isn't attacking them. Unfortunately, I think people often interpret it this way.
I honestly thing that is a large reason so many of the debates on RYL deteriorate into arguments. I think one of the best things we all can do is approach all comments assuming that it's not meant as an attack. I think once we all start assuming that everything is an attack we get defensive, and the whole thing deteriorates.
I think one of the best things we (all the people on RYL) can do to improve the debate forum is to know ourselves well enough to realize when we are taking things personally, and remove ourselves from the debate. I think one of the other things we can do is avoid becoming involved indebates that we know invoke an emotional reponse. For example, if you know you don't deal with racism well and you become emotional/upset, don't get involved in an racism debate.
Given that, I also think that when multiple people hold the same or similar opinions it shouldn't be seen as an attack. When you have so many people in one place there are bound to be people to agree with each other. I may agree with someone on one thread, and then disagree with them on another, that is just how it is.
In response to Charlie's question (which I know wasn't aimed at me, but I still want to reply) I think the only way to really stop the "ganging up" is to say "if your opinion agrees with the majority side, don't post" which isn't fair. Everyone should be able to post their opinion or view on a subject even if there are already multiple other posts with a similar viewpoint. Short of doing that, I honestly don't think there is a way to stop "ganging up" issues, or at least not one I can easily see.
Well it breaks my heart to see you this way,
The beauty in life, where's it gone?
And somebody told me you were doing okay,
Somehow I guess they were wrong.
Also, things such as "when you say X, I feel Y" as opposed to "I am being attacked" or "you are being aggressive". It sounds like a tiny difference but it gets away from blaming the other person for your feelings whilst still letting them know what impact their words had upon you. It means that even when things are misinterpreted they are less likely to escalate into something more serious.
Have to say, when someone comes along and goes "Calm down" (which is usually followed by a "jeeesh" which irritates me even more) during a discussion or debate, it's usually aimed at an individual via quotation of someone, and i find it incredibly annoying when at the time i am indeed calm, but that phrase on the whole just makes me want to scream because it works me up, as i feel what i have said people are taking in the wrong context, and even after saying "I am calm, i'm just giving my view" people will still continue to say "Calm down" which erks me something chronic.
But for people to continue saying that despite the fact you are calm, do you not perhaps think there might be a reason why you appear not calm to the people reading your posts? Possible the phrasing of your sentences or emotive language used.
I can see why calm down could make tensions run higher than they already are. But how could people phrase it differently to avoid it working people up? I think we can all agree the "jeesh" following it is unhelpful. Would "I think perhaps people need to take a step back from the situation to avoid it becoming too heated" be better? Or how about " You have said x,y and z, to me these phrases come across as agressive and confrontational and I feel attacked, please could you try and think about the tone your posts are conveying". But then sometimes I think any criticism of someone's debating style or posts is going to provoke an emotional response from them and send them on a defensive.
But for people to continue saying that despite the fact you are calm, do you not perhaps think there might be a reason why you appear not calm to the people reading your posts? Possible the phrasing of your sentences or emotive language used.
I can see why calm down could make tensions run higher than they already are. But how could people phrase it differently to avoid it working people up? I think we can all agree the "jeesh" following it is unhelpful. Would "I think perhaps people need to take a step back from the situation to avoid it becoming too heated" be better? Or how about " You have said x,y and z, to me these phrases come across as agressive and confrontational and I feel attacked, please could you try and think about the tone your posts are conveying". But then sometimes I think any criticism of someone's debating style or posts is going to provoke an emotional response from them and send them on a defensive.
I'm not quite understanding why your first paragraph was aimed at me, as for the most part, it isn't just me that has been told to "calm down, jeesh!" by other members - infact, i've seen it happen quite a lot to other members in debates/discussions i've not even been a part of, when, from re-reading these peoples posts, they don't even come across as aggressive. I just feel that statement as a whole is not necessary, i wouldn't even expect it from a moderator - if a moderator was to say that in a generalised manner i'd be pissed. If they were to put "Can we please remember to keep this civil and to make sure everyone re-reads what others say before replying" would be far more beneficial and a good warning for everyone involved to take a look at what they're saying/how they're wording there point of view, and that if they feel uncomfortable they have the ability to step back.
I think that the example sentence is good in principle, but perhaps the "please could you try and think about the tone" goes a bit far as it shifts the blame for your feelings back on to them. They may well have something to think about, but equally the reader could be being over-sensitive and should also be thinking about their interpretation. Once the issue has been raised the ball is in their court. Even if their tone has been way out of order it sounds like a reprimand, and if someone is already feeling aggressive it would probably inflame them further.
The other thing that I have noticed a lot is things being taken out of context. If you feel insulted or slighted and your blood is rising, please please please re-read what was written before jumping down somebody's throat. I have seen threads where people are in broad agreement derailed by this kind of thing.
Similarly I have to add caveats every time I make a generalisation, even when I have clearly said "most", "some", or "many" because there is usually somebody who misreads it as "all" and takes offence because they once knew somebody whose brother's girlfriend's auntie is an exception to the norm.
I think in re your first paragraph it can go both ways (kind of like you said). The poster may not realize how their tone sounds, but at the same time the reader may be over-analyzing the tone. Especially because it can be hard to gauge tone in written posts. Addressing tone in posts is a hard topic because I think that in a lot of cases no matter how it is brought up, the person its aimed towards is going to take at at least some modicum of offense. Even if someone posted and said "I'm sorry, but the tone of your post is coming across as very aggressive to me and I wasn't meaning to make you mad" which, even though it puts most of the blame on the reader, may still be taken as offensive. Someone reading that may focus on the word "aggressive" and interpret it as "they said i'm being aggressive, which is a personal attack!".
I also agree with the other two things you've said. Crys mentioned earlier that she had someone get really upset with her because they thought she was talking about them, when she really wasn't.
I honestly approach every post assuming it's not about me. It makes it a lot easier to not take things personally when I'm reading them. Rather than think everyone is attacking me, I try and give them the benefit of the doubt.
Well it breaks my heart to see you this way,
The beauty in life, where's it gone?
And somebody told me you were doing okay,
Somehow I guess they were wrong.
I'm not quite understanding why your first paragraph was aimed at me, as for the most part, it isn't just me that has been told to "calm down, jeesh!" by other members
Because you used the pronoun I, therefore I assumed you were talking about yourself. My apologies. Though I still feel any member who is repeatedly told to calm down when they are calm should probably ask themselves the questions I asked.
Quote:
i find it incredibly annoying when at the time i am indeed calm, but that phrase on the whole just makes me want to scream because it works me up,
Last edited by Heidi Tiger : 23-07-2009 at 09:01 AM.
I can't stand people who split my posts up into multiple points and then systematically criticise them on their own while missing the bigger picture entirely. Generally, I write a point that's quite concise and meant to be taken as a whole, but people like to pick on the way I've phrased absolutely everything. For example, in a recent post, someone TOLD (not asked) me to stop using exclamation marks! I like exclamation marks. For me, they are not a negative thing.
But then I guess my experiences are different, because when I make a post people essentially line up to jump all over it, and are ruder to me than they would be to any other person. Never quite figured that one out. Even when I'm being civil, people act like t*ssers.
"Don't use that word, I find that very offensive".
How about "don't tell me what to do!". I cannot pre-empt what people will find offensive, partially because it's impossible and partially because I lack empathy anyway and have the psych notes to prove it. This is a forum with many oversensitive pedants.
unfourtunately.. i think as long as we have debates on a site based for people with mental health issues..
we are going to have people flying off the handle with their opinions
AND
we are going to have people that feel attacked\offended
im trying to think of ways around this because otherwise my post is pointless. i guess id just like to say i wish i could think of a way where we could avoid all the hurt.
i guess we just have to moderate ourselves too. watch what we post, think before we speak, respect one anothers opinions while sticking to the topic at hand. however, i know no ones ever going to follow that lol i know i would have trouble.
"They say time heals all wounds. I don't agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessons, but it is never gone." - Rose Kennedy
