I thought the forum crush thread was just a for fun thread, nothing to take seriously in there.
Is this a safe space for intelligent conversation?
- Thread starter deivejek2|9
- Start date
I thought the forum crush thread was just a for fun thread, nothing to take seriously in there.
I have noticed the atmosphere has changed around here recently as well. However over the last couple of days it seems to have evened out a bit and things are getting back to "normal." I've noticed there seems to be a lot of negativity that arises when beliefs are brought into question. A topic that seems to bring this out the most is horoscopes. There have been a LOT of scathing remarks in such threads and I don't understand the need for it.
I have also pulled back on reading and posting around here as the forum went through yet another one of its upsets. It's hard to even be in this place when all of that is going on. But it seems lighter in here now, so maybe the "safe" feeling will return.
I have also pulled back on reading and posting around here as the forum went through yet another one of its upsets. It's hard to even be in this place when all of that is going on. But it seems lighter in here now, so maybe the "safe" feeling will return.
the forum goes through a natural cycle of inflation--->alienation. After a period of alienation we will have a quite time of reflection and re-identification with our "ideal forum"...thoughtful blogs will sprout, threads filled with meaningful dialoge will abound. We will become full of our own awesomeness and believe in our own power to understand and solve everything. Then we will feel a sudden loss of that power and we will tear ourselves apart.
Yes it is. Because until we have specific examples as a calibration point for discussion, we can only speculate about what constitutes unsafe or not.
With regards to the community, I don't think he should follow through with my suggestion as it's going to cause a huge uproar. I like Zak but if he doesn't feel safe here, his best bet is to not post at all.
i have a taste for silly debate on silly matters. i think it's harmless in the silly lighthearted threads. some of the one liners here crack me up and i get a kick out of posting my own attempts. i don't think it's any more fair to say "no skylarking" than it is to take the kind of attitude that people's feelings don't matter. but i agree that people should definitely try to be considerate in serious matters and try to be open to understanding the other person's point of view. i feel a bit more aware of this after reading the comments on this thread.
I like Zak and if he doesn't feel safe here, the best thing for him to do is exactly what he did by opening this discussion.
He's letting us know that the atmosphere here could be better.
We need to be respectful. Be courteous, be kind.
Let that be your calibration point.
This place is, bar none, the most restrictive and oppressive experience I've had on a forum, because of the expectation to "be courteous and kind".
Take it as you will, I'm not asking for anything, I'm here by my choice.
Take it as you will, I'm not asking for anything, I'm here by my choice.
To the degree that speaks to respecting the individual, even when one does not value the individual
- Mar 17, 2010
- 4,872
- 1,225
- 766
- MBTI
- ????
- Enneagram
- 9w1
From the rules in the FAQ here: http://forums.infjs.com/faq.php
Nobody's going to start "giving a list of offenders" unless they particularly enjoy infractions.
/argument
I think there's been a lot of addressing of "why". I believe what you meant to say was "who".
Here's the thing, Korg. The forum membership is largely at the mercy of what the staff chooses to do. We can try to deal directly with people, but I think this thread is one good example of how well that goes. The only remaining recourse we have as a forum if we believe there are issues is to beg the staff to do something about it. Guess what's been going on?
I get that you don't like it. Everybody has things they don't like. What I think is funny is that you and a variety of others seem to think it's only OK when you bitch and complain about what you don't like, but somehow it's horrible behavior for others to complain about what they don't like.
@tovlo hit the nail on the head here.
Her post is rather important ; So please read it fully. Those who think the forum is overly sensitive, very restrictive, or has too many "feeler qualities" ecte.
For the record folks this forum is rather lite on the rules and has a rather easy going staff the most part. They could easily be a lot more strict. And I find it funny that people who complain about the staffs strictness also have a tendency to push posting styles bordering on personal attacks, rude behavior, lack of sensitive towards others and in general disrespect of the forum.
I once said that everyone has a vested interest in this forum's future. This is still true. But if your views are so counter to the core of the forum, so outside what is good for the forum. There has to be a line drawn when something becomes unacceptable.
So I think its important to understand this forum can't be any more rude, rough or harsh. Because that's not what a lot of the members here need. And its not the purpose of this forum.
I'm sure if someone wanted a less restrictive forum, as well as a thicker skinned population there are forums out there. I understand many here need that kind of environment to be able to have harsh debates and still have everyone be okay. Even when things turn truly ugly. But those needs can't be fulfilled here. That's not the kind of forum we are.
Last edited:
Firstly, I think as the OP said in one of his subsequent posts that we are having a conflict of styles. I am sure that there is some deliberate rudeness but some of it is not. Certainly, I've had the experience of reading a tone in a reply different from the writer intended. When we cannot hear the poster's voice, our brains substitute it's own voice which can be misleading or not. I have also read threads where members have complained of rudeness and I honestly could not see it. Perhaps, that is my own insensitivity. The issue here seems to be that we are all perceiving things somewhat differently.
The reason I believe [MENTION=1425]Korg[/MENTION] mentions the problem of "who", is that for him and myself that would be the approach we would take to get to the heart of the problem. Knowing who so that we can focus on their particular style and determine what is offensive not that the intention is to put that person on the spot. Also, knowing who reassures others that they are ok or even helps them to take a look at their own style for similiarity to the mentioned persons style. However, that is not an option or route we can take. Forum rules forbid it, so it must be discarded.
This paragraph makes me uncomfortable. I think so far, that anyone who has replied to this thread has a genuine concern about the matter because the tension on the forum is uncomfortable. I don't think the intention is to shut anyone up. Instead, it is a struggle to understand how members could be causing offence with their style. There are some fairly obvious situations but my impression is that we are talking about a grey area here. Members of one type are finding the style of members of other types abrasive. The problem is that sometimes, the other types are not aware that they have crossed a line. We need to determine where that line is because we obviously aren't aligning and we may have to do it repeatedly as tiresome as that is. Now, I have great sympathy for the non-infjs because this has been an issue for my entire life. I really don't see the rudeness that I am often accused of displaying in RL. I've simply had to collect a series of examples over the years that guide me not to express myself in certain ways. I don't understand it but I accept it as necessary for effective communication. We need guidelines and we need members to say things like, "The way you said this is rude. Could you rephrase so that I can truly appreciate your point?"
I would also like to say that I in no way support deliberate rudeness or crudeness.
I agree that a line has to be drawn but so far it isn't clear where that line is. I will give an example. Recently, I was admonished by a member for how I was using the statement, "No." among other things. From my point of view, I saw no problem but he made me aware and when I reread my posts and imagined an aggressive tone I could see his point. Now, I know better but I wouldn't have known if he hadn't been specific.
Last edited:
I liked what you posted [MENTION=3710]kiu[/MENTION]; and I agree. I think that there is a point where you start to look at solving the problem to avoid the tension. I think the rep feature is a good way to make someone aware if you find their post offensive.
I also think that perception plays a role in the matter as well. I think you will have a tendency to imprint you own negative feelings about someone onto everything they post and not to be too blunt, that if you are a Feeling type you will do this more. There are several people that I don't particularily care for--not really dislike, but just a sense that I would rather not interact with them. I don't use the ignore button, but I just choose not to respond to most or all of what they post.
For me, what I find hard is when people won't take ownership of their stuff. I mean you got a problem, say something. You feel you did something out of line, say something. It works both ways. I apologized to Zak because I wanted to acknowledge his feelings. I understand that that is important for some people. I also think it needs to move past that point and that is what I see Korg and Kiu trying to say. We acknowledge that there is a bit of tension here. I get that. I also think that we need to acknowledge that it may in part be due to the feelings assoicated with what happended with NAI. I left here for awhile because I couldn't be here. I think some of the "negativity" is because we are all a bit raw about that. I am not saying all of it but I think some of it.
It is our perception that is the only difference here in a lot of what is going. You percieve someone as negative then that is how you react to them. If you choose to operate from a position of negativity with the language of negativity, then you will feel negative. Sure that has been stuff said that makes me go WTF by certain people, but I don't take it personally. I am comfortable with the idea that they are expressing themselves and I don't have to agree with them or assume they are talking about me specifically. I think what surprises me is the way I see others internalizing people's comments. I think some of the complaints resolve around how things are said, more than what is said. It is the same arguments though, do you force everybody to be the same or respect the differences?
My two cents is that the "who" starts with each of us first before we start splashing poision on everybody else.
I also think that perception plays a role in the matter as well. I think you will have a tendency to imprint you own negative feelings about someone onto everything they post and not to be too blunt, that if you are a Feeling type you will do this more. There are several people that I don't particularily care for--not really dislike, but just a sense that I would rather not interact with them. I don't use the ignore button, but I just choose not to respond to most or all of what they post.
For me, what I find hard is when people won't take ownership of their stuff. I mean you got a problem, say something. You feel you did something out of line, say something. It works both ways. I apologized to Zak because I wanted to acknowledge his feelings. I understand that that is important for some people. I also think it needs to move past that point and that is what I see Korg and Kiu trying to say. We acknowledge that there is a bit of tension here. I get that. I also think that we need to acknowledge that it may in part be due to the feelings assoicated with what happended with NAI. I left here for awhile because I couldn't be here. I think some of the "negativity" is because we are all a bit raw about that. I am not saying all of it but I think some of it.
It is our perception that is the only difference here in a lot of what is going. You percieve someone as negative then that is how you react to them. If you choose to operate from a position of negativity with the language of negativity, then you will feel negative. Sure that has been stuff said that makes me go WTF by certain people, but I don't take it personally. I am comfortable with the idea that they are expressing themselves and I don't have to agree with them or assume they are talking about me specifically. I think what surprises me is the way I see others internalizing people's comments. I think some of the complaints resolve around how things are said, more than what is said. It is the same arguments though, do you force everybody to be the same or respect the differences?
My two cents is that the "who" starts with each of us first before we start splashing poision on everybody else.
I think anyone who needs names named already suspects that they are part of the problem. (As I did.)
So maybe, just stop being jerky then.
So maybe, just stop being jerky then.
I have a deep antipathy toward those that claim absolute anything, that said I appreciate that that is how they function. I do not engage folks who believe this way on most serious matters because I do not trust in their ability to understand or see as valid any viewpoint or belief that they do not hold.
But I do believe that those who hold strong irrational beliefs about the way the world works are more likely to find peace, love and happiness in their lives than those who hold strong rational beliefs about the way the world works. (and it irkes me)
Get em Mom!
