What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?
-
not wrong. some people really do this.
Some of us are jsut assholes according to some.
so perspective is part of it.
But, yes.
-
-
Seriously, how did not one respond to this immediately with snark?
-
@brrabill said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
Seriously, how did not one respond to this immediately with snark?
because ML wouldn't accept my dang image.
-
@jaredbusch said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
not wrong. some people really do this.
Some of us are jsut assholes according to some.
so perspective is part of it.
But, yes.
-
We all have our way of handling and addressing issues and people. As we deal with 'Users' so much, I think we tend to get overly aggressive sometimes.
-
Interesting thread....
-
Sometimes the pedantry is a bit much. Don't care usually about people being rude assholes, cause I do that sometimes.
-
@kelly said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
First off, I do not want to have some kind of discussion about civility or point fingers. However, I have noticed from a number of threads that there is a general tendency in the community to find something about a post/topic/thread that is wrong/inaccurate/incomplete and focus on that item to the (to me) detriment of the overall thread.
Am I being too sensitive, or can this be a somewhat hostile place at times? (Telling me that I'm wrong here is not being hostile, btw.)
In many or most cases here, semantics/inaccuracies/incompleteness matters a lot, and can be the basis of which misconceptions, misinformation, misguidance, misunderstandings, and/or incorrect instructions form.
Also, which details are important can be subjective. While the OP might find such semantics or inaccuracies being pointed out as helpful, others may not.
I'm not saying these things are always warranted, but are more often than not, and I think it's important IT information is always as accurate as possible.
If brain surgeons were having discussions on brain surgery procedures, you're damn straight I'd want every possible piece of information they are talking about as accurate as possible.... same for anything really.
-
It's almost always possible to correct someone without being a jerk -- though it can be a challenge. It's impossible to control exactly how someone will perceive a correction or control how they'll respond to a correction.
I do agree with the OP about thread derailment. I'd rather see something like this.
Thread 1, Post 1, has an error. Post 2 corrects it. Post 3 argues post 2's correction. Forked thread for Post 4 - Post 100's debate on Post 2's correction. Once it's settled, return to Thread 1 to finish the discussion about Post 1's original point.
The above will probably never happen, but one can brainstorm :).
-
@momurda said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
Sometimes the pedantry is a bit much. Don't care usually about people being rude assholes, cause I do that sometimes.
Thank you for using pedantry. That made my day. I love it when people use uncommon words.
-
I think a lot of it boils down to whether or not we expect ML to be a site for people to be professionals, or be themselves.
I, for one, expect folks to be real. I'd act the same way face-to-face as I do in here or in a chat room. (I mean I even talk like I type, lol). I'd much rather us be ourselves here.
If you find someone rubbing you the wrong way in a thread, ask them to rub you the right way -- no, don't do that... um... kiss and make up... wait, not that either... take it out side and duel with roman candles.
-
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I think a lot of it boils down to whether or not we expect ML to be a site for people to be professionals, or be themselves.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I think it's possible for someone to be themselves but follow the ideal of "don't be a dick."
-
@eddiejennings said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I think a lot of it boils down to whether or not we expect ML to be a site for people to be professionals, or be themselves.
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. I think it's possible for someone to be themselves but follow the ideal of "don't be a dick."
I do not disagree.
One person's "being a dick" is another person's brutal honesty.
-
I have a feeling we may be moving to an impasse.
In my experience I've found "brutal honesty" used to try to excuse the behavior of "being a dick." -
@eddiejennings said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I have a feeling we may be moving to an impasse.
In my experience I've found "brutal honesty" used to try to excuse the behavior of "being a dick."<sarcasm>Did you not read my post?</sarcasm>
I said I agree with you, lol.
-
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
@eddiejennings said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I have a feeling we may be moving to an impasse.
In my experience I've found "brutal honesty" used to try to excuse the behavior of "being a dick."<sarcasm>Did you not read my post?</sarcasm>
I said I agree with you, lol.
I did read it
Then you typed "One person's "being a dick" is another person's brutal honesty." Which I'm not convinced is entirely true because [see previous post]. -
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
take it out side and duel with roman candles.
-
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I think a lot of it boils down to whether or not we expect ML to be a site for people to be professionals, or be themselves.
I, for one, expect folks to be real. I'd act the same way face-to-face as I do in here or in a chat room. (I mean I even talk like I type, lol). I'd much rather us be ourselves here.
If you find someone rubbing you the wrong way in a thread, ask them to rub you the right way -- no, don't do that... um... kiss and make up... wait, not that either... take it out side and duel with roman candles.
You're just tempting me to make @JaredBusch give me FFS in real life instead of just online.
Some people's attitude does rub me the wrong way at times around here, but I also realize there is a reason for the attitude, which makes me reevaluate things with better reasoning.
-
@travisdh1 said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
@dafyre said in What is your perspective on the overall tone of interactions here on ML?:
I think a lot of it boils down to whether or not we expect ML to be a site for people to be professionals, or be themselves.
I, for one, expect folks to be real. I'd act the same way face-to-face as I do in here or in a chat room. (I mean I even talk like I type, lol). I'd much rather us be ourselves here.
If you find someone rubbing you the wrong way in a thread, ask them to rub you the right way -- no, don't do that... um... kiss and make up... wait, not that either... take it out side and duel with roman candles.
You're just tempting me to make @JaredBusch give me FFS in real life instead of just online.
Iām ready
