Posting with Empathy

[OWoman]

To make a point or express an opinion. Isn't that why anyone bothers to post?

 

I'd have thought the purpose of engaging in discussion was to listen at least as much as to broadcast. Otherwise it's not a discussion, but just a whole bunch of people on "send" talking past each other. I guess I've been doing this wrong all this time - instead of listening / reading and engaging, I should just have been thumping tables and making points.

 

Apologies all. I'll shut down my "receive" channel now and join those others just on "send"...

[OWoman]

So you're honestly trying to say that there was absolutely no dig or disparaging of others in this quote?

 

 

Sorry, I just find that hard to believe.

 

No, there wasn't. It was clearly stating that EVERYONE could benefit from reflecting on empathy and their posting style. If it was intended to dig, it would have been targeted at some, rather than everyone (which, in case it needs spelling out, would include myself...)

 

I'm really quite confused as to how making it explicit that the OP wasn't referring to a particular group only somehow gets construed as a dig, as if it was intended to refer to a particular group only... How would it be possible to state it more clearly than it was stated??

[jthorne]

If points/posts are reported or not responded to, wouldn't that mean that the orig post was meant to be more of a statement than to further a discussion?

I would agree with that. I would also like to know where expressing an opinion about someone's intent is a violation of TOS. After all, it happens daily all over LS.

"Don't feed the troll."

"Your MM is telling you that to string you along."

"You posted this thread in this forum instead of that forum because you wouldn't like what they would say over there."

 

Except usually, if the assumption or opinion is wrong, someone says something to clarify or correct and moves on. I'm confused why the opinion of many but expressed by one (me) has become point of contention (and a colossal threadjack).

 

I guess people can go ahead and make their assumptions about that.

[SidLyon]

Would it have been fairer of me to state that I found, say, the depths of the Amazon rainforest, or Antarctica, or the Namib desert, to be darker, more ignorant and more vicious than I'd hoped, as a result of a disappointing experience on an internet forum when those places probably don't even have internet connectivity? Didn't seem that way to me.

 

 

...

 

I don't know the relevance of rainforest's, arctic climes, deserts and their internet connectivity to your reference to the subset of the world here on LS. They are part of the world but they are not here on LS. I understood what you said before anyway and didn't think you ought to have said something different.

 

I was addressing Tami's remark that she thought "her understanding of English was failing her".

[tami-chan]

It was OWoman who said:

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by OWoman

Oh well I guess the world - or at least, that subset represented here - really is a darker, more ignorant and more vicious place than I'd hoped.

 

 

The reference was to the subset of the world here on LS. To me that is not talking about the world generally, but specifically about LS posters.

 

Just saying.

 

True enough-but it doesn't matter...here let me re-phrase my statement:

":lmao::lmao: ...here I thought my understanding of English was failing me....it is so interesting that Jthorne totally claimed the "subset" as if it is "her"... a bit of a stretch, actually but hey, whatever...:p"

 

 

My point is ....I think she saw herself in that statement even though it was not intended for her personally...guilty much?

 

 

Edited April 8, 2011 by tami-chan