This was posted on Times and Seasons by Jim F. and has become a part of their official standard suggestions for posting. I think it's great, so I thought I'd share it. I've taken the liberty to rephrase a few things to make them more appropriate for hatrack.
"A few practical suggestions for posting and commenting:
1. Ask, “How will this sound to those who read it?” Reading out loud helps give me a feel for the answer to that question.
2. I should remember, however, that my readers are not reading out loud and they may not be disposed to read what I’ve written with the dulcet voice that I imagined as I wrote. If I try reading my post or comment in a harsh voice, I may hear why someone else will be upset with what I’ve said.
3. Consider whether I would speak to my mother or father with the tone I’ve used.
4. Ask, “Does this further the discussion or attempt to put a stop to it?” If the latter, why?
5. Ask, “Does my response to the post or comment in question involve a judgment of that person to which I am not entitled?”
6. As I read, ask myself, “How can I understand this in a way that makes sense?” If it doesn’t make sense, there’s a good chance that I’ve not understood it. I don’t have to agree with it, but since most people make sense most of the time, I should take the fact that it doesn’t make sense to me as a sign that I probably didn’t understand it.
7. If what I say runs counter to commonly accepted wisdom or to the norm, I must take special care to make my sincerety and thoughtfulness clear and to explain how my position fits with mainstream thought.
8. If what I say is what “everyone” says, then I probably ought to ask myself whether I’m saying what is true and needed here, or I am just repeating “what one says in these circumstances.”
9. Whenever I disagree with someone, whether about politics or chocolate, I should ask, “How is she or he likely to respond? My comments ought to be designed to further the conversation and to make it better, not to make a jatraquero or jatraquera angry, to score debating points, to humiliate the person I’m addressing, or . . . .
10. If a friend of mine has posted something uncivil, as a friend, I ought to gently speak to him or her about that post.
There is no end of making rules, so nobody can post a list of rules which, if obeyed, will prevent all contention. Not even a list of rules of thumb nor a list of practical suggestions can do that. But we know when our comments are not in a spirit of love and friendship, and we ought never to post except in that spirit, even if we disagree strongly. Strong disagreements between loved ones, disagreements that do not signal the destruction of love and friendship in spite of their strength, are possible. When we disagree, those ought to be the kinds of disagreements we have."
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
Not sure I agree with #7, as long as you make it clear that you understand that you are "going against the flow"
I would also say there are times and threads that "saying what one says in these circumstances" is entirely appropriate, especially with some of the more personal and hurtful circumstances that jatraqueros seem comfrotable (and comforted by) divulging here. I know I am often reduced to that by the sadness with which I read some of those.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Jim-Me, I had to rephrase #7, and perhaps I did it harm in the process. I was thinking of posts containing very non-mainstream scientific conclusions without much evidence to show why these beliefs are reasonable and how they fit into our commonly accepted understanding in science or society.
"saying what one says in these circumstances" I interpreted as applying within a context of avoiding contention during discussion and disagreements. I saw it as the opposite side of the coin from number 7. In other words, when either totally departing from the norm, or simply restating the norm, take extra care and thought with what you say.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Does he have a guideline for ignoring posters you don't consider worthy of your esteem?
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Did someone say something?
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
People who can disagree respectfully have always impressed me as some of the wisest and happiest people I've ever known. I would love to learn how to be able to do that under any and all circumstances. I loved these guidelines, particularly the idea of always seeking to further the discussion instead of shutting it down.
Anyway, I hope others may have enjoyed reading these as much as I did. Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
(((Belle)))
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
It seems to me that we can boil these down to:
Be decent, and treat people decently.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I say one, then, Tom: be decent.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Be excellent to each other.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
*grin* That went through my head, too, Icky.
Posted by Sid Meier (Member # 6965) on :
you all suck.
j/k
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
--I--
Posted by JaimeBenlevy (Member # 6222) on :
Treat others the way you would like others to treat you My mommy taught me that one Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Did she make it up herself?
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: 7. If what I say runs counter to commonly accepted wisdom or to the norm, I must take special care to make my sincerety and thoughtfulness clear and to explain how my position fits with mainstream thought.
I'm sorry. I don't mean to sound argumentative, but I have a problem with this, even after your explantion. And I'll tell you why.
This assumes that "mainstream thought" is privileged and that anyone who does not hold to what is considered mainstream is wrong until they can justify themselves. I don't agree with that, but then again I've always suffered from not being espeically mainstream.
This dictum makes me feel like it is expected that if I express an opinion, scientific or otherwise, that is out of the mainstream, I must come, hat in hand, and beg to have my "non-mainstream" view considered. It also makes me feel as if I am being told that I should feel somehow ashamed for being out of the mainstream. Sorry, but that is a non-starter as far as I am concerned.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
I'm still struggling with the comment that "most people make sense most of the time".
Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
Flying Cow.
I missed that one.
One time I suffered through a speech at an honor society induction by a gentleman who was billed as highly intelligent. Trouble was, his talk was basically a series of unconnected sentences strung together. Afterward, others raved at how wonderful his comments were. I kept going over them in my mind, assuming that I just had missed his point. But no. It wasn't me. He just didn't make any sense at all, no matter how high his IQ was.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
LMA, <laughs> #7 is the one I had to edit the heaviest, and so it's obvious that I must have messed it up.
My thought was that if I wanted to claim that all mammals photosynthesize or something strange like that, (to pick something at random) it requires more in the way of background, showing people why I find it reasonable to believe this and how it connects to our standard understanding of mammalian metabolism, why we've overlooked this phenomenon up to now, and so on. This doesn't mean that non-mainstream throught is automatically wrong, just that it requires more effort to effectively engage the rest of hatrack in a conversation about it. If I were to just state that mammals photosynthesize without any other information, then I leave everyone with no way to understand or judge this, and they will likely have to dismiss it.
<laughs> Number 7 is the one I changed the most, so naturally it's the one that's the most messed up. Posted by littlemissattitude (Member # 4514) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tatiana: My thought was that if I wanted to claim that all mammals photosynthesize or something strange like that, (to pick something at random) it requires more in the way of background, showing people why I find it reasonable to believe this and how it connects to our standard understanding of mammalian metabolism, why we've overlooked this phenomenon up to now, and so on.
You mean they don't? I know a guy who is perfectly reasonable otherwise (well mostly) who swears up and down that he photosynthesizes.
Okay. I see what you mean.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Well, maybe this is how new theories are born. I certainly love to soak up the sun, hour by hour, for no discernible reason. Maybe your friend is right! Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
#6 interests me. Susan Elgin says it this way: in what kind of world would this statement I think is totally wrong, actually be right? Relate to the speaker with an awareness that he's in that world.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Screw that! Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Ninjas:
1)Photosynthesize 2)Ninjas fight all the time 3)Ninjas flip out and kill people
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
*stab*
That explains EVERYTHING.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
You caught me with my guard down, mack. You really got me that time.
Touché.
Posted by Beren One Hand (Member # 3403) on :
quote:"Susan Elgin says it this way: in what kind of world would this statement I think is totally wrong, actually be right? Relate to the speaker with an awareness that he's in that world."
I do that all the time:
"Hey, are you the mayor of crazyland?"
Posted by Will B (Member # 7931) on :
That wasn't what Elgin had in mind, but, hey, whatever works!
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
Flying Cow. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
I know a guy who is perfectly reasonable otherwise (well mostly) who swears up and down that he photosynthesizes. ![[Wink]](wink.gif)