** 09-Jan-2021 World View: Answering insults
John wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:50 pm
> You can also still post in other threads, provided that you do so
> respectfully.
> So, nope. There's no censorship or propaganda site here.
Bob Butler wrote: ↑Sat Jan 09, 2021 3:17 pm
> My problem at the moment is with other posters posting insults,
> flame or other junk addressed to me. I try to respond to issues
> and with ideas respectfully, but my posts are moved anyway. A lot
> of it I can understand. I wouldn't want the flame and insult
> posts either. I still feel inclined to respond respectfully
> anyway. I get the impression of a double standard, that you will
> tolerate reddish propaganda but censor anything blue. You may
> watch your decisions if you want to live up to the policies you
> declare.
> Also the S&H thread is flooded with junk. I have provided other
> places where you can put it, but even this post and this
> discussion has nothing to do with Strauss and Howe. You seem
> determined to throttle it. If you avoided a conflict with Eric,
> you could show a similar respect for Strauss and Howe.
I don't know if you're asking me for advice, but I get insulted all
the time. You need to have a philosophy and systematic way of dealing
with insults. I can tell you what I do, if that helps.
I really hate getting into flame wars, so I do everything possible to
de-escalate.
If someone corrects an error, even accompanying the correction with an
insult, then I just thank him for the correction. Thanking a person
for a correction usually disarms him, and he stops insulting.
When someone insults me for the first time, I usually just respond
factually without responding to the insult. Usually that ends it.
When someone insults me again, you can't ignore the insult because
they'll just use worse and worse insults. You can't appease a bully.
When I return an insult, I try as best as possible to follow a
principle of equivalence. If someone calls me an idiot, I'll call him
a jackass. It's better to under-insult than to over-insult, since
bullies will often back down after any insult at all.
Remember: The objective is to avoid escalating and to do the opposite
-- de-escalate and return to a factual discussion. You have to
consciously want to de-escalate, because it's very very easy to
escalate.
And, quite honestly, I always have the feeling that you want to
escalate, rather than de-escalate. You have to want to de-escalate.
You always seem to do the opposite. I remember when I made that silly
mistake about South Pacific, and you didn't just correct the error.
You posted multiple times with long rants insulting me. The correct
way to respond to that situation was to correct the error, and then
present some nostalgiac information about the play. At any rate, a
brief correction was all that was necessary.
Another thing to keep in mind is that when you make what you claim to
be a factual statement, and it's controversial or it contradicts the
person you're writing to, then you have to back it up with sources.
If you don't do that, then people will assume that you're making
things up. For me personally, when you talk about agricultural ages I
don't have the vaguest clue what you're talking about, so I assume
that you're making it up, and I ignore it. This might be a good way
for you to use this S&H thread -- use it to write several posts with
an explanation, with sources, of this subject.
And that's the answer to your wishes to "respect Strauss and Howe."
If you don't want junk in this thread, then just don't post junk in
this thread or any thread. Use this thread in a constructive manner,
and all the old posts will soon be long forgotten.
