Enough with the hostility...

[E93]

I think it is a lot easier to be aggressive when hiding behind a keyboard. Some people just get a rush from it. It happens far less frequently when people have actually met each other face-to-face. Of course not everyone can get to the Net54 dinner at the National, but those sorts of things help for keeping things civil. It would be good if we would all put a little thought into the most skillful way to put things when they are potentially contentious or conflict-inducing.

Credit goes to Wazoo, but it should be humbling that it takes a 16 year old to bring this conversation up.
JimB

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by E93

I think it is a lot easier to be aggressive when hiding behind a keyboard. Some people just get a rush from it. It happens far less frequently when people have actually met each other face-to-face. Of course not everyone can get to the Net54 dinner at the National, but those sorts of things help for keeping things civil. It would be good if we would all put a little thought into the most skillful way to put things when they are potentially contentious or conflict-inducing.

Credit goes to Wazoo, but it should be humbling that it takes a 16 year old to bring this conversation up.
JimB

It's interesting you should bring this up - I could not agree more.

I was just talking with a board member on the phone, who was upset with someone. I told him that once you see someone face-to-face, it is if they are a completely different person, and it's almost impossible to still feel the same dislike you felt for the 'guy on the internet'. I highly recommend meeting people face-to-face, especially the ones that you feel resentment toward because of internet interactions.

[ethicsprof]

I do think that it is very difficult to ameliorate hostility without some measure of self-awareness accompanied by compassion for the other. The lack of a balanced self-awareness often yields egocentricity which is a breeding ground for hostility. Typically, when we engage others on the board so as to satisfy our own self-aggrandizement, we are inclined to hurt whoever or whatever breaches the boundaries of our arenas of 'kingship'. When we engage others for reasons of collegiality and hopes for the enlivening and enlargement of communities of learning, we operate most frequently with openness and a desire to create the common good, not just our own egoistic 'good'. My hope is for an engendering
of balanced awareness and the common good---in all of us.
all the best,
barry

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by ethicsprof

I do think that it is very difficult to ameliorate hostility without some measure of self-awareness accompanied by compassion for the other. The lack of a balanced self-awareness often yields egocentricity which is a breeding ground for hostility. Typically, when we engage others on the board so as to satisfy our own self-aggrandizement, we are inclined to hurt whoever or whatever breaches the boundaries of our arenas of 'kingship'. When we engage others for reasons of collegiality and hopes for the enlivening and enlargement of communities of learning, we operate most frequently with openness and a desire to create the common good, not just our own egoistic 'good'. My hope is for an engendering
of balanced awareness and the common good---in all of us.
all the best,
barry

That makes me want to do this...

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ethicsprof

I do think that it is very difficult to ameliorate hostility without some measure of self-awareness accompanied by compassion for the other. The lack of a balanced self-awareness often yields egocentricity which is a breeding ground for hostility. Typically, when we engage others on the board so as to satisfy our own self-aggrandizement, we are inclined to hurt whoever or whatever breaches the boundaries of our arenas of 'kingship'. When we engage others for reasons of collegiality and hopes for the enlivening and enlargement of communities of learning, we operate most frequently with openness and a desire to create the common good, not just our own egoistic 'good'. My hope is for an engendering
of balanced awareness and the common good---in all of us.
all the best,
barry

I couldn't have said it better Barry. Actually, I couldn't have said it....period.

[ethicsprof]

Leon, your words are most kind. Thank you.
Scott, your picture is most funny. Thank you.
I do hope,scott, that it is a metaphor for your desire to provide such libations to your
community of scholars in a celebratory fashion.
all the best,
barry

[Hankphenom]

Several years ago, I read that some 5% of people have a sociopathic personality. Suddenly, a great deal of human behavior was explained to me. These are not psychopaths, they will not become serial killers, although I'm sure they are responsible for most of the criminal behavior. Instead, they will live more or less normal lives and seem pretty much like everyone else, except they will be doing it without any feeling or caring for other people. That doesn't mean they won't do something that's in your best interests, but only because it's in their best interests, too. We live with these people, we work with these people, and they are in our hobby, too. They come to our notice most often on the roads and in chat rooms. They are the ones who, when seeing a lane shift up ahead, drive as fast as they can to get to the head of the line before merging, and they are the ones who taunt and jeer from behind the safety of a keyboard. They are cowards, mostly, and would never act like that in public for fear of the consequences. These are the jerks of the world, known colloquially as ***holes. But they could care less about what we think of them. In fact, they think the rest of us are stupid and weak, like Ray Liotta's character Henry Hill says in "Goodfellas." 5%--1 in 20. It really does explain a lot.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by Hankphenom

Several years ago, I read that some 5% of people have a sociopathic personality. Suddenly, a great deal of human behavior was explained to me. These are not psychopaths, they will not become serial killers, although I'm sure they are responsible for most of the criminal behavior. Instead, they will live more or less normal lives and seem pretty much like everyone else, except they will be doing it without any feeling or caring for other people. That doesn't mean they won't do something that's in your best interests, but only because it's in their best interests, too. We live with these people, we work with these people, and they are in our hobby, too. They come to our notice most often on the roads and in chat rooms. They are the ones who, when seeing a lane shift up ahead, drive as fast as they can to get to the head of the line before merging, and they are the ones who taunt and jeer from behind the safety of a keyboard. They are cowards, mostly, and would never act like that in public for fear of the consequences. These are the jerks of the world, known colloquially as ***holes. But they could care less about what we think of them. In fact, they think the rest of us are stupid and weak, like Ray Liotta's character Henry Hill says in "Goodfellas." 5%--1 in 20. It really does explain a lot.

Hank, I met one of these people about 8 years ago and we became good friends. There was something odd and disattached about him, but I didn't understand it until he told me that he was a 'social misanthrope'. As he went on to describe himself, very clinically, I thought he was joking. But he told me that because he doesn't care about anyone (what they think, how they feel, etc.), he has had to learn the proper social responses in various situations. He was in his '50s when I met him, so he had had years to practice.

Social misanthropes are a lot different from people who are actually @ssholes by nature. The care, just not in the correct direction.

Edited to add: actually, our friendship was a one-way friendship, as he had no need whatsoever for friends. If he got upset with someone, it wasn't really 'being upset' as much as it was being perturbed because he knew the other person wasn't following accepted social rules.

[Peter_Spaeth]

That's it! All those CU guys are sociopaths, I knew it!

[cubsfan-budman]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Hank, I met one of these people about 8 years ago and we became good friends. There was something odd and disattached about him, but I didn't understand it until he told me that he was a 'social misanthrope'. As he went on to describe himself, very clinically, I thought he was joking. But he told me that because he doesn't care about anyone (what they think, how they feel, etc.), he has had to learn the proper social responses in various situations. He was in his '50s when I met him, so he had had years to practice.

Social misanthropes are a lot different from people who are actually @ssholes by nature. The care, just not in the correct direction.

Edited to add: actually, our friendship was a one-way friendship, as he had no need whatsoever for friends. If he got upset with someone, it wasn't really 'being upset' as much as it was being perturbed because he knew the other person wasn't following accepted social rules.

Are you friends with Dexter?

[sbfinley]

I do not mind heated discussion or healthy disagreement. It is unnecessary nor practical for all members to agree or to simply agree to disagree. What I do not find necessary is the overtly vulgar language and innuendos that seem token to the board now. I would agree that this community is largely full of affluent adults, but collecting cards is the product of childhood hobby and it would be ignorant to think that some of the younger collectors don't migrate here. If your response to a matter is something you wouldn't reasonably be comfortable letting your adolescent son or daughter read aloud then it probably isn't an enrichment to the board or hobby. Keep things in prospective, some people struggle to find their next meal. We spend disposable income on old baseball cards.

[frankbmd]

A civil approach with some measure of self-awareness accompanied by compassion to satisfy my own self-aggrandizement

Okay, I know they're not prewar, wanna fight about it?

[E93]

Originally Posted by ethicsprof

I do think that it is very difficult to ameliorate hostility without some measure of self-awareness accompanied by compassion for the other. The lack of a balanced self-awareness often yields egocentricity which is a breeding ground for hostility. Typically, when we engage others on the board so as to satisfy our own self-aggrandizement, we are inclined to hurt whoever or whatever breaches the boundaries of our arenas of 'kingship'. When we engage others for reasons of collegiality and hopes for the enlivening and enlargement of communities of learning, we operate most frequently with openness and a desire to create the common good, not just our own egoistic 'good'. My hope is for an engendering
of balanced awareness and the common good---in all of us.
all the best,
barry

I nominate Barry as the official Net 54 philosopher! Well said my friend.
JimB