Posted by alexandra_k on July 24, 2009, at 4:24:21
In reply to Re: make change, posted by Dr. Bob on July 20, 2009, at 4:02:24
> OK, you're not satisfied with me, but what you can change about me (and the rules here) is limited.
Fine. But what you can change about us accepting or condoning your actions (that we don't believe is justified) is limited too.
> May I ask how you think your posting behaviors and how others handle their posting and conflict might be improved?
May we ask you how you think your posting behavior and how you handle your posting and conflict might be improved?
> The issue isn't whether I felt stung, but whether a post like that could lead another person to feel stung.
B*llsh*t. The issue is whether YOU judge that a post like that 'could' lead another person to feel stung. A person 'could' feel stung by about anything at all. You judge the 'reasonableness' of that and allocate blame / responsibility according to YOUR criterion. Other people have told you repeatedly that people feel stung by your blocking behavior. You have made the decision not to change your posting behavior despite that. But lets not pretend that you have some objective criterion or an independent grip on a truth that others are blinded to.
> I'd like people here to feel it's safe to post and not that they're in danger of getting a faceful of cat.
How about people being in danger of getting a 'faceful of cat' in the form of being blocked by you for one year? Why is it that that isn't factored into an assessment of the justifyability / unjustifyability of your posting behaviour?
poster:alexandra_k
thread:904398
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20090707/msgs/908303.html