Are we not too old for insults?

[A Vestigial Mote]

It is nothing like this. You cannot decide to ignore the damage done by a knife wound. But you had better bet you can ignore the "pain" (so called) from any word spoken by another. You can, definitively. It is within your power not to feel anything, if you so choose, based on anything anyone says. This is a cold, hard fact that really cannot be denied.

Ignore the pain???

That would mean if I stabbed you with a knife, I'll tell you to deal with it and go on my business???

Holy crap you don't listen/read. You don't. It is so obvious and apparent. You barely read a single word written in response to you. Either that or you do not comprehend. I am sure you're just going to brush this aside as my having a "tone," like you have consistently done before, but the evidence is right here, in the above reply from me, and then your response.

Just look at the part in mine I put in red italics. Read that. Comprehend it. Then read the part in yours I put in blue italics. Can you understand why I might be frustrated by this type of behavior in a conversation? Do you understand now why I might, at times, find it hard to take you at all seriously? You seem to be entirely scatter-brained. Unable to hold a thought long enough to resolve a full reaction in your mind before you just go about your business "being right."

How do you learn if you don't take into consideration other people's response to your actions and speech??

I have stated things that do indicate that I very much use opportunities of people's responses to learn how to deal with them. Again - you weren't reading, or comprehending. Those two are the only options I feel are plausible at this point, and it makes communication with you pointless.

 

[Jim]

I guess I have some bias that only "teens" insult each other. Weirdly enough (or is it?), when I see a direct insult on RF, that person is near over 60s (well, most people are here anyhow). Are not we too old for insults?

I started reading and posting in this thread because I thought there might be some exchange of ideas about how to help reduce harmful behavior in Internet discussions and counteract its adverse effects. I don’t know if that’s happening for anyone else, but it is happening for me. Reading and posting in this thread has been very good for me. I realized that I don’t have any hope for harmful behavior in Internet discussions to stop or even diminish any time soon. That doesn’t mean that I’ll stop practicing and promoting my ideas about how to help stop it, but it did help relieve my tensions. Now I want to focus more on helping to counteract its adverse effects, which I think might be a lot more fun for me, and maybe for people around me.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Holy crap you don't listen/read. You don't. It is so obvious and apparent. You barely read a single word written in response to you. Either that or you do not comprehend. I am sure you're just going to brush this aside as my having a "tone," like you have consistently done before, but the evidence is right here, in the above reply from me, and then your response.

Just look at the part in mine I put in red italics. Read that. Comprehend it. Then read the part in yours I put in blue italics. Can you understand why I might be frustrated by this type of behavior in a conversation? Do you understand now why I might, at times, find it hard to take you at all seriously? You seem to be entirely scatter-brained. Unable to hold a thought long enough to resolve a full reaction in your mind before you just go about your business "being right."

I have stated things that do indicate that I very much use opportunities of people's responses to learn how to deal with them. Again - you weren't reading, or comprehending. Those two are the only options I feel are plausible at this point, and it makes communication with you pointless.

I'll have to come back. Comments I make are my opinion not a reinterpretation or paraphrase of what you said.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Holy crap you don't listen/read. You don't. It is so obvious and apparent. You barely read a single word written in response to you. Either that or you do not comprehend. I am sure you're just going to brush this aside as my having a "tone," like you have consistently done before, but the evidence is right here, in the above reply from me, and then your response.

I have to read what you say. What I do is quote everything in parts. Then read these in sections before replying. That's why I reply so fast. I break it up. I can't reply to a whole post all at one time. I forget the point and confuse myself. It's not intentional.

No one is the victim here. Change your tone.

Just look at the part in mine I put in red italics. Read that. Comprehend it. Then read the part in yours I put in blue italics. Can you understand why I might be frustrated by this type of behavior in a conversation? Do you understand now why I might, at times, find it hard to take you at all seriously? You seem to be entirely scatter-brained. Unable to hold a thought long enough to resolve a full reaction in your mind before you just go about your business "being right."

Not sure why you're frustrated. I'm about to get myself some bacon, eggs, and hash browns. I usually get thrown off guard when someone (any person) responds to my comments personal. It's one thing to get frustrated over the comment content. Ask for clarification. It's another to fuss at the poster for making the comment.

Unable to hold a thought long enough to resolve a full reaction in your mind before you just go about your business "being right."

Scatter-brained is what I am. Blame it on brain surgery. But your context sounds accusative rather than understanding. I addressed this above, though.

Please. Please. Please. Ask for clarification or just don't reply. It's not just you. No one is the victim here.

I have stated things that do indicate that I very much use opportunities of people's responses to learn how to deal with them. Again - you weren't reading, or comprehending. Those two are the only options I feel are plausible at this point, and it makes communication with you pointless.

Well, my comment above isn't an excuse for your tone, though. I honestly forgot the point of the conversation because you're attacking me and not the content. Can you refresh me what we were talking about????

 

[Jim]

Sometimes in discussions about insults and personal attacks, some posts seem to me to imply that the only problem is in people feeling hurt, that no one should care about anyone else’s hurt feelings, that the only thing anyone needs to do is never feel hurt themselves, and that never feeling hurt is harmless and easy for anyone to do.

I don’t think that the only problem is in people feeling hurt. I care about people feeling hurt. I think that never feeling emotional pain would be as unhealthy as never feeling physical pain, and far from easy for most people to do.

 

[Heyo]

Sometimes in discussions about insults and personal attacks, some posts seem to me to imply that the only problem is in people feeling hurt, that no one should care about anyone else’s hurt feelings, that the only thing anyone needs to do is never feel hurt themselves, and that never feeling hurt is harmless and easy for anyone to do.

I don’t think that the only problem is in people feeling hurt. I care about people feeling hurt. I think that never feeling emotional pain would be as unhealthy as never feeling physical pain, and far from easy for most people to do.

"Offence is always taken, never given."
I think that is the first rule one has to learn to deal with offensive contend. How to deal with it is the next step.
Ignore,
flag,
retaliate,
deescalate,
demand a duel,
you have many options, some more viable than others.

 

[Jim]

Sometimes in discussions about insults and personal attacks, I see some posts denying that they happen, some denying that it’s a problem, and some stigmatizing anyone who objects to them. That generates discussions that might magnify the harmful effects of some behavior, and cloud that issue and divert attention from it.

Some harmful behavior that I see is vilifying or disparaging the character, capacities, motives and intentions of a person or of a group or category of people. A few people have said openly that they try to hurt people, that they use personal attacks, or that they enjoy seeing people squirm under their attacks, but I think that mostly people are unconscious of the hostility in their posts, in denial about it, or making excuses for it. That doesn’t make the behavior any less harmful. It only makes it harder to have any fruitful, beneficial discussions about it.

One thing that I think helps perpetuate that behavior is multiple displays of admiration and approval for insults and personal attacks across faction lines. Again, people might mostly be unconscious of the hostility in that, in denial about it, or making excuses for it.

Even people who see the behavior as a problem might not see any more harm in it than some temporary hurt feelings, and discussions being derailed. I see much more harm in it than that, not only for everyone in the forums and for our discussions, but also rippling out into the world around us. I think that the popularity of that behavior in Internet discussions might be helping to perpetuate all kinds of cruelty, violence and oppression in the world, and could even be doing direct long term psychological damage to some people possibly including some children.

i realized yesterday that I don’t have any hope for any of that to change any time soon. That doesn’t mean that I’ll stop practicing and promoting some ideas for helping to stop it, but I’m feeling less urgency about it now, and I want to focus more on helping to counteract the harmful effects.

 

[Jim]

I think that there is often hostility and malice in debating across faction lines in Internet discussions. I think that it’s natural and healthy for people to feel threatened, distressed or offended by that. I think that it would be very wrong and unhealthy for everyone, for people to try to never have those feelings, or to pretend that there is never any good reason for them. The hostility and malice might not always be conscious and intentional. People might be wrong sometimes when they think it’s happening. I don’t see those as reasons for people to try to never feel hurt, injured, threatened or offended, to pretend that there never really is any hostility or malice in an anyone’s posts, or to pretend that it is not a serious problem that affects all of us and the world around us.

Insults and personal attacks in Internet discussions might continue to be popular for decades or maybe even a few generations. I don’t see that as a reason not to be doing now what needs to be done to help stop them. However that may be, there might be a lot that anyone who wants to can do, to help counteract their harmful effects.

 

[Heyo]

Sometimes in discussions about insults and personal attacks, I see some posts denying that they happen, some denying that it’s a problem, and some stigmatizing anyone who objects to them. That generates discussions that might magnify the harmful effects of some behavior, and cloud that issue and divert attention from it.

Some harmful behavior that I see is vilifying or disparaging the character, capacities, motives and intentions of a person or of a group or category of people. A few people have said openly that they try to hurt people, that they use personal attacks, or that they enjoy seeing people squirm under their attacks, but I think that mostly people are unconscious of the hostility in their posts, in denial about it, or making excuses for it. That doesn’t make the behavior any less harmful. It only makes it harder to have any fruitful, beneficial discussions about it.

One thing that I think helps perpetuate that behavior is multiple displays of admiration and approval for insults and personal attacks across faction lines. Again, people might mostly be unconscious of the hostility in that, in denial about it, or making excuses for it.

Even people who see the behavior as a problem might not see any more harm in it than some temporary hurt feelings, and discussions being derailed. I see much more harm in it than that, not only for everyone in the forums and for our discussions, but also rippling out into the world around us. I think that the popularity of that behavior in Internet discussions might be helping to perpetuate all kinds of cruelty, violence and oppression in the world, and could even be doing direct long term psychological damage to some people possibly including some children.

i realized yesterday that I don’t have any hope for any of that to change any time soon. That doesn’t mean that I’ll stop practicing and promoting some ideas for helping to stop it, but I’m feeling less urgency about it now, and I want to focus more on helping to counteract the harmful effects.

I hope I'm able to formulate this in a way that doesn't invoke Rule #2.
While I'm possibly more on the insensitive side of this discussion and fear a PC culture that stifles discussion, there are limits and I think those limits have to be known and accepted by the majority. I.e. they might be shifted through internal discussion. The visibility of the limits would increase when they were more public.

 

[Jim]

I hope I'm able to formulate this in a way that doesn't invoke Rule #2.
While I'm possibly more on the insensitive side of this discussion and fear a PC culture that stifles discussion, there are limits and I think those limits have to be known and accepted by the majority. I.e. they might be shifted through internal discussion. The visibility of the limits would increase when they were more public.

If you’re saying that to me, I have no idea what you’re trying to say. If you can’t say it more clearly without breaking forum rules, it’s okay with me to PM me if you want to.

 

[Jim]

I hope I'm able to formulate this in a way that doesn't invoke Rule #2.
While I'm possibly more on the insensitive side of this discussion and fear a PC culture that stifles discussion, there are limits and I think those limits have to be known and accepted by the majority. I.e. they might be shifted through internal discussion. The visibility of the limits would increase when they were more public.

I’m not sure if this has anything to do with anything I’ve said. What I’m promoting to help reduce the popularity of harmful online behavior, and to help counteract its effects, is not anything for moderators to do, and it doesn’t require any agreement on what behavior is harmful.

 

[Milton Platt]

I guess I have some bias that only "teens" insult each other. Weirdly enough (or is it?), when I see a direct insult on RF, that person is near over 60s (well, most people are here anyhow). Are not we too old for insults?

If that were true, you would not have made this post.......

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If that were true, you would not have made this post.......

I lost you?

 

[Milton Platt]

I lost you?

I don't think so......
You said "Are not we too old for insults?"
I said "If we were, you would not have made this post".

Meaning, if we were too old for insults, none would be made and you would have no reason to posit the question.

 

[Jim]

@Tony Bristow-Stagg @Trailblazer Now I’m thinking of trying to clarify for myself where we agree and disagree. One example is that II disagree with calling the beliefs you’re promoting “the Baha’i Faith,” More important than that, it looks to me like you’re doing more in Internet discussions to repel people away from Bahá’u’lláh than to attract them because you’re doing it with your backs turned to the divine guidance that is available now.

Oops! Wrong thread.

 

[Thief]

I guess I have some bias that only "teens" insult each other. Weirdly enough (or is it?), when I see a direct insult on RF, that person is near over 60s (well, most people are here anyhow). Are not we too old for insults?

oh the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.....

 

[Thief]

I guess I have some bias that only "teens" insult each other. Weirdly enough (or is it?), when I see a direct insult on RF, that person is near over 60s (well, most people are here anyhow). Are not we too old for insults?

and so much for my online relationship with half of the members here

 

[Trailblazer]

because you’re doing it with your backs turned to the divine guidance that is available now.

Thai is that divine guidance?

 

[Thief]

Thai is that divine guidance?

haggis dogma @Revoltingest

here is your prophet

 

[TransmutingSoul]

@Tony Bristow-Stagg @Trailblazer Now I’m thinking of trying to clarify for myself where we agree and disagree. One example is that II disagree with calling the beliefs you’re promoting “the Baha’i Faith,” More important than that, it looks to me like you’re doing more in Interest discussions to repel people away from Bahá’u’lláh than to attract them because you’re doing it with your backs turned to the divine guidance that is available now.

That's the way you see it Jim, I see it is most useful to just say I wish you all the best that Faith and this world can offer.

Regards Tony