Fear of failure? Fear of success? I've added a few to my ignore list. It takes a lot to get me to do that. The question about that method to escape a mean spirited member involves sabotage. Some come here to learn how to write. Some come here to get some critique. Some come here to learn about publishing their work. Some come here to share ideas about writing and flock with birds of their feather. I fall into those last three, for the most part having found employment at times in writing, yet all apply. Learning to write is a never ending process. Sharing ideas about writing and breaking the rules is what makes a forum interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_Lardner Ring Lardner was born in the same town I was. He was best known as a humorist and sports writer. He broke the rules by handing out satire to an often stoic public and one flock of feathers followed this style. Me too. In that, I'm saying there is a wide spectrum of styles and personalities on a forum of this size and candor, so why do we need to put others down who we have never met? Our personalities certainly show up in our writing. When did a market open up for mean spirits? I have yet to see a mean spirited work gain raving fans. Isn't it self sabotage to act meanly toward others?
Self-sabotage is doing things that you know have a good chance of making you fail. Sometimes it's actions (or inactions), sometimes it's words. But acting "meanly toward others"? Only if those others are people you know could benefit you in some significant way.
Never read a polemic? A genre based on the creative destruction of another person's ideas. Plenty of polemicists have had people fight and die for their ideas, in the political, religious and philosophical fields.
One thing I find often happens in the forum (and this is just one dynamic of many) is that there are two attitudes that can be taken, which clash one with the other, as regards the fact that typed words on the screen are utterly bereft of paralinguistic clues concerning intent, motivation, humor, and connotation. 1) Some chose to supplement this lack with verbiage that attempts to clarify and direct, while 2) others do not and leave the burden to the reader to be charitable and assume the best. As a mod, I often have to read posts twice or thrice, in different colors as they say in Hollywood, to see which best fits the situation when the poster has chosen syntax that can be read in multiple ways. As an interpreter, it is in my basic nature to be as precise as possible, using words and syntax that mean only what I need them to mean and not be subject to interpretation in directions other than the intended.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polemic Interesting point, still are we at war here or trying to help others become published? Although some of the list in Wiki are valid from the warlike perspective, few, if any, are out in front as best selling authors. How can anyone not benefit from just about any other member unless they are being mean spirited toward that other member? We can benefit from revisiting our resources, then pointing out someone else's errant perspective. We gain nothing by disparaging the person. And you ask questions about something you don't quite understand. Maybe I see that I wasn't clear and gain from the opportunity to correct myself. If I respond that even a moron would have understood that, I've offered a war without reason; war for war's sake. If I tell you that something you posted speaks of ignorance. I've implied that you are ignorant. Writing is considered to be an occupation of those who are oriented toward intellectualism. Even the most base poem certainly has a nested intellectual quality simply because the poet thought enough to contrive their message into lyrics. Same for naïve art. Someone may not use scientific perspective, but can blend like an Oster. There certainly are forums for making war. Why drag it into a learning environment save to discuss it as a subject, such as we are doing now?
As writers, I find that we are often amazingly ignorant of how our words affect others. Forums, granted, are usually more casual places in terms of phrasing, but I find that many times, offense is taken because the writer did not take sufficient care in being precise. And of course, sometimes they are precise and what they say is just plain offensive. We need to say what we mean and accept that others may disagree, sometimes very strongly. And of course, there is always the report button.
Using it sucks, though... Can an ignored person still PM the one who is ignoring them? Do they become aware that someone is ignoring them beyond a blatant declaration in a post? I suppose there should be a non-public method to bury the hatchet.
Polemics do help people's writing reach larger audiences sometimes. Nobody would know who Max Stirner was if Karl Marx hadn't written against his philosophy in "The German Ideology".
Generally no to both. PMs from someone ignored should remain invisible and from the senders perspective will appear only as unread. Ignored people are not informed of their being ignored by someone on any forum or chatroom I've been on.
Absolutely correct. Knowing that you and I work in the same environment, I know that you are aware of that aspect of my profession. Transparency of the interpreter is trumped only by precision of interpretation. Agreed, very much so. And it is unfortunate that this too is part of the human condition. I accept that it does not fall to me (as a mod or a human) to tell another how to be. But it is perfectly within my capacity (again, as a mod and a human) to chose the arrangement of persons with whom I do and don't participate based on those qualities to which they still have a right. That I bid adieu to someone because their manner is other than what I or the forum's venue accepts does not take away their right to be that way, it merely exercises my right to be my way or the forum's right to its venue remaining uncomprimised. And in this case, as a mod, implicit is as good as explicit. I give no coin to rebuttal based on pedantic semantics. There was a conversation just yesterday wherein a member's snidely left-handed denigration of another member, added to other incidents of like nature, earned him a pink slip. He can be any way he likes, but we don't have to accept it within our circle. There must always be leeway and room for the human condition, but there are limits.
"Begin the morning by saying to thyself, I shall meet with the busybody, the ungrateful, arrogant, deceitful, envious, unsocial. All these things happen to them by reason of their ignorance of what is good and evil. But I who have seen the nature of the good that is beautiful and of the bad that is ugly, and the nature of him who does wrong, that it is akin to me, not only of the same blood or seed, but that it participates in the same intelligence and the same portion of divinity, I can neither be injured by any of them, for no one can fix on me what is ugly, nor can I be angry with my kinsman, nor hate him. For we are made for co-operation, like feet, like hands, like eyelids, like the rows of the upper and lower teeth. To act against one another then is contrary to nature; and it is acting against one another to be vexed and to turn away." -Marcus Aurelius I understand that the entire quote may be overkill, but I feel that it is applicable to this conversation. A basic tenet of stoic philosophy is not to concern yourself with things that you cannot control, so at the risk of sounding holier-than-thou, which is not my intent, perhaps the simple solution is to simply be gracious even to the people who actively try to offend you. After all, only through grace and honesty can we keep the dignity that is rightfully ours.
Yes. (to 10 & 11) Writing and the 1st Amendment theoretically have no limits. It is our freedom to pursue our dreams, still those dreams cannot harmfully infringe on those of another. Vulgar and obscene have two different meanings. Intense and hateful do too. There are laws against the latter in both cases.
The problem with the anonymity of the internet is the consequences of being mean spirited are minimal. The worst which normally happens is that an account is banned or an account gets a reputation for being a jerk. Neither of which will bother some people. They can make a new account with a clean slate, if they want to stick with the same forum at all. No self sabotage has occurred. Those consequences would only bother some people who'd put effort into getting their forum persona well respected. That sort of user will be a little more careful not to offend. Antagonistic behavior on writing forums is no where near as widespread as on some other types of forums, precisely because a lot of people come to share knowledge, rather than to have a battle of opinions, but there will be some people who will pick fights, whatever internet forum you are on.
