Posted by Tamar on July 10, 2005, at 12:27:07
In reply to Lou's reply to Tamara-shn?B » Tamar, posted by Lou Pilder on July 10, 2005, at 11:50:50
Hi Lou,
> You wrote,[...it was in the context between {you} and another poster....application could be taken...widley...].
> Well, if it was between me and another poster, could there not be the potential for some others to think that I am ,at least, {a particular} person that the poster in question,,[....not read...]even if there could be others that the poster,[...not read...]?This is how I see it: I think that others might read the exchange and come to the conclusion that a poster reacted to one of your posts in a way that was uncivil. That poster was warned about the incivility and then there was a general suggestion not to read posts that might cause a strong reaction leading to an uncivil reply.
It is possible that people could infer that the particular poster who responded to you in an uncivil manner might decide not to read your posts, at least for the time being, until he or she feels able to reply in a civil manner.
Again, I think the issue is not about shunning you. Quite the reverse. I think the issue is that people are being asked to take steps to ensure that their participation on these boards is civil. Insofar as it is specifically about you, the important thing is that you should not put down publicly by posters who react to your posts in an uncivil manner. And also that people like me shouldn't be saddened by seeing you publicly put down.
Insofar as it is general, and not specifically about you, the important thing is that everyone should try to remain aware of their emotional responses to other people’s posts so that no one is publicly put down.
If someone chooses not read your posts because they find they react by being uncivil, then it is a sad thing because they are missing out on your participation.
Best wishes,
Tamar
poster:Tamar
thread:525619
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050628/msgs/525771.html