Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Lou's request-crztlnahc bryte

Posted by Lou Pilder on July 24, 2015, at 6:13:19

In reply to Re: What if subsets of readers disagree?, posted by bryte on September 3, 2014, at 19:00:22

> > 1. How does one know which subset of readers is correct?
> Who says any subset is correct? Or that one being correct rules out the other being correct?
> >If being seen to be more civil by one subset involves being seen as less fair by another subset, which subset is more important?
> Methods that are more readily seen may create deeper impressions than methods that are seen less. Hsiung elected a very visible method of intervention. Discussion of how it is seen may be a byproduct of the fact that it is seen.
> > 2. How should Bob decide whether to act, when his judgment is questioned by subsets of readers with opposite beliefs?
> Should? That is subjective. He could choose to act in a manner that is more embarrassing rather than less embarrassing, according to his published statements. In published journals he advised his professional peers believe there may be value in a method that is more embarrassing to some people as compared to methods used by other moderators in other groups.
> > 3. Can he use his judgment in deciding how to resolve this problem?
> He has used his judgement. He chose to be very visible - not only in his methods, but in promoting his methods via peer reviewed publications, social media, appearance in a leading national newspapers and active explanation of his methods in a mental health forum otherwise intended for mutual support among peers. He has also in some cases limited discussion of his very public expression of his judgment, setting boundaries he claims or expects are recognizable by a significant portion of his group - even though a significant portion maintains the boundaries are not consistent or predictable. We do not know if his judgement is truly the best judgement for a group. He asserts knowledge of what is best for the group, but lacks any reliable measure of benefit other than anecdotes and the continued existence of the group.
> > 4. If he should not use his judgment, how should he come to a decision as to whether to, or how to act?
> Humble leaders exercise judgment modestly. Leaders who trust their community trust the judgement of a community of peers. Many medical professionals rely on evidenced based practices. Evidence related to administration social networking has developed significantly since Hsiung established some basic methods from which he has not departed. Hsiung has based much of his practice on promoting, publicizing, defending or practicing his own methods rather than embracing judgements of a global community of social network providers that matured around him while his methods were informed in large part by decisions he made during the adolescence of his social network project.
> bryte,
You wrote,[...his own methods...]
Do you see in him using his own methods to be parallel to the methods of any historical person as to how his methods of denying me equal protection of his rules, and the allowing of anti-Semitic hate to be seen by him as being supportive here which could constitute abusive discrimination of power that could result in Jews being victims of anti-Semitic violence?




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:Lou Pilder thread:1050116