@bgriffin wrote:
@JASFLALMT wrote:
You are saying that there are 10-15 posters that an overwhelming MAJORITY of forum members have PMed you about? Riiiiiiight. Please go ahead and name these forum members that the majority of forum members have been PMing you about, and tell us how many forum members have PMed you. I call BS!!!
@shoptastic wrote:
I've mentioned it several times before (i.e., "a group of 10-15 posters who the overwhelming majority of forum members here dislike and have voiced opposition to in PMs" and will address it in another thread.
I apologize.
Me me me me!!!!!!!!!!
*****DISCLAIMER***** - JAS, please take this as someone who is not against you right now, nor interested in fighting or causing more issues than already done. I regret making those comments. I was hurt by people liking comments that I felt were meant to troll me. I feel certain people always tend to like comments aimed against me and never like anything I post. And I think there's been bad history between us. I also feel I am the one always having to doing the "lifting" to make things right, apologize for when I feel I'm wrong, and be the bigger person. I feel others never do the same for me. That's some context. I blurted out what I did out of anger. If I could take it back, I would, because I know it's going to inevitably cause trouble. Because it's already out there, I think I can address it to some degree to try to bring closure for the good. But, I'm going to try not to inflame the mistaken outburst anymore than I already have in saying it to begin with.
You're right. There are not 10-15 people, as the list is closer to 8-10. I started using 10-15 as a rough estimate in the past and have said it multiple times (including to moderators in private) and just stuck with that number. I purposely put quotes around my comments to indicate I was just quoting my prior self (roughly) and was going to start a separate thread in the MetaForum/Community Area to address this (although, now it may just be here).
I won't reveal the individuals who have PM'd me (this started a couple of years ago through very recently), due to privacy reasons and some depending on MS-ing for their income (one of the reasons why some people don't speak out). But, I've also deleted (and encouraged the other sides to do so as well) some messages, specifically, in part because I've also been warned that one or more of those who've publicly messed with me is a likely moderator. I don't know what PM reading privileges moderators have and take precautions to limit certain discussions (sometimes deleting some - although, that's been in cases usually where sensitive things have been said that could harm a person's livelihood).
As for the "overwhelming majority" part, that was speculation amongst some of us (not a fact). We believe there are more of us than there are of the 8-10 posters (and those who take their side), who have ***previously been seen*** as rude, bullying, jerks, etc. But, I was not saying that literally hundreds or thousands of posters have PM'd me. The total, still, is significant and ranges from relatively new forum members (1-3 years) to people who've been here and/or in ms-ing 5+ (possibly a decade in some cases, as "sign-up" dates don't measure full years in the industry) years.
Other posters besides myself have publicly remarked on this phenomenon previously. And, I think we were wrong to do so. I ultimately feel it's stooping to a low level in some ways, because it's passive aggressive perhaps (as you put it to describe me above). I think we could have encouraged each other to just report such individuals, ignore them, chatted amongst ourselves on ways of dealing with such people, tried to work things out formally (individually or as a group), or any number of other things rather than just saying something like what I did.
One thing I will say is that I have lost patience at times when people do the same disliked/annoying/rude things over and over and over and over on this forum. Someone recently made a remark to the effect that I had not learned something after being told in the past (completely fair point and a more complicated, unrelated topic) and my thought was how many times do I have to tell others to watch their words, don't be rude, don't be condescending, don't subordinate other people (treat them like a friend/equal rather than someone to talk down to or lecture), etc.
I want to make peace. And I also think many have improved (which is why I starred this part above: "***previously been seen***" ). I've even remarked to several posters in private that Irene has really gotten better.
******SORRY, Irene, if that felt like a call-out!!! I'm am NOT saying that to put you down, but to say that you genuinely have improved!!!!
I know there's no way to say it really other than to first point out a negative.
I'm not a perfect person and probably have all sorts of annoying habits and traits. I think many of you HAVE taken some of what people have complained about to heart and shown changes. It's possible these are weak areas you all deal with (just as I and everyone else have their own), but unless there is genuine internal acknowledgement of these issues in one's heart and a kind of "repentance" and desire to never do it again, I believe the same behaviors and attitudes will resurface.
So, what do people dislike and how have people dealt with things?:
I'll start with the second part first. One important part of life is differentiating between people you respect for their values and people's knowledge that you respect. There are many smart, experienced, and knowledgeable posters on this forum. However, having that expertise does not give one any entitlement to "abuse" others by talking down to them or being rude.
I might respect a person's knowledge and listen and even utilize it. But, if they are scumbags, I wouldn't respect them as a person and wouldn't be their friend. This is someone I would never hang out with, call at night to chat or if I were in need of something, or try to develop any kind of personal relationship with outside of formalities. Some people take that route here. They will "use" the experts (who sometimes show atrocious interpersonal skills) for their knowledge, but never interact with them outside of that on a personal level, nor respect that person.
I mean, do you really want that or people to think of you in that way? Not everyone will "fight" you on a forum and may be civil (as we should), but they personally dislike you. Does anyone really want that? I know I wouldn't! And I don't think you or others truly would either. And, this is where understanding what makes many people feel this way can lead to positive changes. But, it does require first acknowledging the issue in one's heart and taking steps to fix it.
I guarantee I'd stand up for you or anyone else who has done this. People can and do change! I would encourage others (privately) to do so as well and to embrace you all (and have done so with Irene, as mentioned above). That end result would be awesome for the forum: a unified, friendly, encouraging, engaging, respectful, and tight group.
But, that brings me to the issue(s) at hand: What upsets people about a small group of posters who have these characteristics?
1.) Any personal attacks against others. This would include mocking people and "messing" with others the way some of you have done to me. You know the threads in question. These were threads designed specifically to put me down with no other purpose. Several of them existed in the past and I was never once given a personal apology by anyone (that I know of). But, this is more of an extreme and rare - personal attacks that is. I think passive aggressive attacks and mocking are more common. Being snide, showing rude snarkiness, and the like are often more common. Many of you have done that with me with little jabbing comments here and there and I have not liked that.
Yet, make no mistake, all of this behavior is horrendous - from full on personal attacks to subtle ones.
2.) A condescending, rude, subordinating, and lecturing kind of tone. I don't know if people realize they're doing it, but it's noticed by those who are on the receiving end and those who just generally dislike this behavior. When speaking to a fellow forum member, there is no need to sort of "subordinate" them and treat them like they are a child to be lectured to. It's often about tone. Make your point as an offering up of knowledge to aid someone. Don't condescend or talk down to someone.
And IF you MUST criticize, do it constructively. I've previously mentioned the "sandwich" method by Steven K. Scott (taken from his book, The Richest Man Who Ever Lived) that some forum members really liked in the past. I'll it repeat here (it's conceptually modeled after a sandwich):
1.) THE TOP LAYER OF BREAD: Start with something positive (such as a compliment of the person or something they've done right). This helps the person understand you are on their side and trying to offer constructive criticism. And the positive comments up front disarm/soften them up for the "meat" (i.e., the criticism).
2.) MEAT - DELIVER THE CRITICISM: Make it short and only say what is needed (don't rub it in, dwell too long on it, etc.) I'd have to look this up, but I believe Steven K. Scott also says only offer up ONE criticism at a time with the sandwich approach. I think this may be part of the method, but don't 100% recall. For sure, the criticism comes in between the two positives, however.
3.) THE BOTTOM LAYER OF BREAD: End with a positive comment. After you deliver constructive criticism, then finish with something nice/positive/encouraging, etc. This buffers the harshness of the critique and again reassures the person you care about them and are on their side. This will help them accept the criticism.
Steven K. Scott has said in decades of doing business, he's never once seen this method fail when he's employed it. Every single time he's used the sandwich method, the person has genuinely taken in the criticism.
For reference, Scott is a multi-millionaire businessman, who has held (possibly still holds) the direct-marketing industry record for sales success rate. Direct marketing is when you see those infomercials on late night TV or a shopping channel. They usually have 30 seconds or so to pitch you an idea. It's very tough. Time is short and most people fail. Yet, he had something like a 63% batting average and his ads led to billions of dollars in product sales, including: The Total Gym (yup, that Chuck Norris commercial was written and directed by him); Lori Davis hair care products, and various medical and acne products. Lots of his informercials were famous mega-hits and he's often said his greatest skill was communication. The "sandwich method" is from a chapter in, The Richest Man Who Ever Lived, which is a book on wisdom for business and life.
3.) Try to listen to people and understand things from their perspective. Don't assume things. Ask questions if you're not sure of something. Don't get aggressive if someone has a different point of view or a different personality or communication style than your own. Don't impose yourself.
4.) If someone says something is offensive. Take it seriously. Don't first try to justify your behavior and tell them they are wrong. Take seriously that what you have said and/or our tone is hurtful to that person or offensive in some way and try to speak in a different way if possible (sometimes it may not be).
5.) Be fair. Don't nit pick certain people or talk to certain people only in a critical way, but not do it with others.
(continued below):
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 12/23/2019 03:41PM by shoptastic.