thoughts on Letting It Go

Navigation

User login

Online users

JT
Thomas 27
jlw
ChynaDoll
einmaleins
decorabilia
theunabonger
Laurian
Merwyn Haskett
benny

Support OlyBlog

OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation:

OlyBlog is powered by:

Who's new

Ron
memetic_alchemy
cfs
Badlonspb
davefromcarolina

Upcoming events

The Immigration and Border Dialogues Conference(Now)
june madrona, josh kane + more under the bridge this friday(2 minutes)
Olympia Choral Society this weekend!(1 hour)
This week on ConspiraZine!(22 hours)
Pizza Party Event with live music at Fertile Ground, 311 9th Ave, SE, on Saturday, May 17th, 2008(1 day)
may 17th @ the midnight sun(1 day)

thoughts on Letting It Go

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:03pm.

In the middle of a hotly contested thread somebody calls you a jerk. Here are two possible responses:

Nice way to uphold the Social Contract. You're a typical entitled Liberal/Republican who believes the rules don't apply to them. To me you're the real jerk.
vs.
That was inappropriate, I didn't call you any names. (And then return to the topic of discussion)

Something tells me the second response works best.

Merwyn Haskett's blog
Login or register to post comments

Bingo!

Submitted by Rick on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:19pm.

> It's OK to be nice. <
enpen's social contract

"That was inappropriate, I didn't call you any names."

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:35pm.

Good advice. Do you have any advice for the other person?

At best: "You're right, I'm

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:36pm.

At best: "You're right, I'm sorry."

At worst: Not saying anything but at least not doing it again.

We should hope for the best

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:39pm.

Not sure about someone who habitually engages in your "worst" option. Who doesn't know that by now?

Right on

Submitted by Sarah on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:43pm.

Nicely stated.

So Gug

Submitted by JT on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 1:47pm.

did you call Tschida a jerk in a PM?

“America passes the critical gate test. Open the gate and see where people go – in or out. This is still the country people flock to.” George Will

Thanks for asking

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 2:42pm.

because I'm not responding to Tschida comments anymore. Tsch and I exchanged a number of PMs that day, beginning with this one from me:

Fri, 12/14/2007 - 12:14pm
Look, when you start pissing off people like *****, you are really pushing some buttons. I think you need to figure out what it is you really want to contribute here. If it's more than 50% acrimonious commentary, maybe this isn’t the place for you. I would honestly like to see you keep posting here, though. Can't you give it a try?

He responded, but I won't share those because of my great respect for privacy. Then after a few more predictably escalated exchanges I posted this:

Fri, 12/14/2007 - 1:41pm

Save your persecution complex for someone else. If you ever get your head served on a platter, it's only because you act like an ~~jerk~~ ass here too often. You try to deny your responsibility by claiming you are being unfairly targeted because of your political beliefs. Not so. You are being treated like a jerk because you are behaving like one. All you are accomplishing here is bringing out the worst in others. Sorry to see you waste your efforts and everyone else's time.

While I never actually said "You are a jerk," I certainly characterized his behavior that way. So, yes, I effectivly called him a jerk in a PM. At the time I thought that was a better place to do so than in a public comment. I also thought we could have a good old man-to-man moment. I am sorry to say that I called him even worse than a jerk. So sorry that my final PM to Tschida that day was "See, now I feel like a complete ass!" He never resonded to that one. I'm not particularly proud of my behavior that day and would be perfectly happy to appologize to Tschida if he sought one. However, I am just not inclined to establish communications and I don't think he's interested in any apologies.

EDITED: My first draft used "***" instead of "ass." When I rewrote it to include all the language I wrote "jerk" instead. This now shows the corrected version.

when someone sends you a message and you receive

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:30am.

the message, the received message belongs to you. You should feel free to disclose it if you are so inclined. Privacy of the sending party has been relinquished unless it is specifically retained in the body of the message.

Private bullying and threatening is not helpful in my estimation. I think your respect for Tscida's privacy here is unwarranted. The lack of disclosure may actually make things worse.

For all these reasons, I chose to publish Rob's threatening pm to me. I think the discussion, especially if it is in docent mode, needs to be open.

Choosing to disclose only half of conversation does not help imho. I think you would be better served to disclose all or none. Maybe a simple answer and apology, if apology is warranted, makes more sense than partial or full disclosure of the pms.

MIke

Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 9:28am.

The considerable flaw in your reasoning is that if Tsch wants to share his PMs, he is free to do so. I am not the one preventing it. I strongly disagree with you about privacy rights. Unless the sender threatens you somehow or is "innapropriate," that privacy should be respected. But it's very good that you let people know where you stand. That a private message to you is the same as a public comment on a thread. Let's agree to disagree shall we? In this case, Tsch mentioned something I said in a PM. JT asked about it. I provided the full PM in question. Not sure how that's a problem. I'm detecting a slight chip on the sholder these days Mike. Am I wrong?

I agree,

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 10:36am.

If I send someone a private message, I send it with the expectation that it is going to remain private. The laws say differently, I suppose, but they don't make people just. It's an ethical question in my opinion.

here is the signature that I use on emails from home:

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:09pm.

NOTICE: This is a private and confidential communication for the sole viewing and use of the intended recipient. This communication and any attachments may contain information protected by attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please immediately notify the sender and delete and destroy all copies of this communication. The unauthorized disclosure, distribution, copying, or use of information contained in this communication may violate the electronic communication privacy act, 11 USC 2510 et. seq. The Washington Privacy Act, RCW 9.73 and Article I of the Washington State Constitution.

Even with this message, the message I send belongs to the recipient when they get it. If you expect that a private message remain private, you should probably confirm that such is a thing is agreeable with the recipient prior to hitting the send button.

I'm not going to sue you Mike,

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:15pm.

and I'm not talking about the legalities here. My values tell me that if I receive a "private message" then I'm not going to share it without the sender's consent. It's OK that you don't feel the same way, we just disagree. I know now that if I send you a message you won't consider it private. I'm not judging you or saying you're wrong here, we just disagree, and it's OK.

Is this spelled out in the social contract?

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:22pm.

Is this a common expectation? Where did your values on this come from? It might be best if this is a common expectation to address this in the social contract. I am not aware if this has come up before. My values tell me don't say anything in a private message that will make you squirm when it ends up on the front page of the Olympian.

Just talking about me here, not OlyBlog.

Submitted by Rob Richards on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:30pm.

I'm a pretty private person in general, I suppose that shaped my thoughts on "Private" messages. Plus, the word "private" is in it, and to me that means it's private.

we simply disagree

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:40pm.

Yep

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 11:01pm.

What Rob said.

yep

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:06pm.

we can agree to disagree

Submitted by Mike on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 8:17pm.

I am having a lot of pain and waiting for surgery. It's probably making me testy. Chip on the shoulder is always about the same size I think.

But on particulars, because that is one place that you and I generally see eye to eye, can you find a link or caselaw or anything to suggest that a message sent to you has any reasonable expectation of privacy for the sender as you suggest?

I could be wrong, but I don't any thing like that kind of expectation of privacy exists.

My take on the matter from an ethical point of view is that I have little or nothing to say in a pm that I would not say in an open forum. I prefer an open model and I think privacy is a comforting illusion in much the same way that I think having a gun in the home might make me safe is a comforting illusion. I believe the facts indicate otherwise in both instances.

I still think...

Submitted by chad360 on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 2:30pm.

...an "asshat" thread for flame-prone geeks like me and the rest of the OlyBlog crew who are so socially cross-wired that we don't know which way is up would be a great step in the right direction.

I just need to say some stuff:

I think a blog about doing something (like making glass or whatever) should be moderated, but a blog about a place like Olympia, WA should not...in short, I think it is a bit silly about all the docents, etc...Advice for OlyBlog: just let it be, it is what it is, and moderating stuff just seems like trying to hold back the tide--

--without a safe place to fume in I'm not sure where to start, but it seems the definition of acceptance is to recognize differences and different ways of communicating/arguing and to craft a space for that with a big sign on the door, "Watch out! >Flaming Asshats Ahead< Use With Caution!"

*Banging my Head repeatedly

Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 5:43pm.

*Banging my Head repeatedly onto my Desk*

Who do I think I am, Jimmy Carter? It's just not going to happen.

I wouldn't go so far to say "turn the other cheek" when I don't always play by that rule, but if the "strike" hasn't even left a red mark (let alone a bruise) is it really worth fighting over?

If it's obvious the friction is causing the dry grass to smoke don't fan it.

People need to vent, it's natural. That's why some people write down what they're feeling...and then shred it.

Why do you hate your desk Merwyn?

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 5:54pm.

Stop before you end up with a forehead like mine.

Like yours?

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 5:59pm.

You mean slowly growing back to your neck....without hair?

By the looks of things Norm

Submitted by Guglielmo on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 6:03pm.

You're right on track to join the club. Don't you worry, our mixers are great fun.

I paid the life member dues long before puberty

Submitted by Norm on Tue, 01/22/2008 - 6:04pm.

I'll be indoctrinated soon enough.

ow! why so upset?

Submitted by chad360 on Wed, 01/23/2008 - 11:03am.

Hola, I didn't get the Jimmy Carter reference, but I did get what you are saying about polite responses etc...and I think that rocks, but do you hear me?

I think trying to tell people on a public blog how to act/talk is like herding cats. Not saying that the Social Contract is good/bad, etc...just my opinion, even though it was my suggestion (way back) to try a social contract.

I guess where I'm coming from is about ideas of "ownership":

-is OlyBlog copyrighted?

-is it a trademark?

-who "owns" this space?

I think exploring rage & hate online is alot healthier than fisticuffs at the bar or road-rage, and while I realize that this OlyBlog space is not a place for abuse, I wonder to what extent "free speech" can exist in a civil society that cannot or will not accept the fact that alot of folks are angry/stressed/upset.

Has anyone read this book? "Civil Society" by Brian O'Connel

This was part fo the required reading for some nonprofit classes I took at the UW Tacoma: it is pretty good read and a good seminar workbook.

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. Contributors to OlyBlog are citizen journalists who care about their community and are tired of corporate media.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our Social Contract. You should also look at our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Olyblogger of the Month:

decorabilia

Online users

Comment viewing options