Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
good chemistry is complicated,
and a little bit messy -LW
 
PerlMonks  

A New Respect

by Intrepid (Deacon)
on Mar 11, 2006 at 04:07 UTC ( #535868=monkdiscuss: print w/ replies, xml ) Need Help??

I'd like to contribute a short message to the PMD section pertaining to "Perlmonks, The Community" (as known to the outside world, embraced by the Perl Foundation, etc), as opposed to a contribution concerning "Perlmonks, the Hobby", which is what is foremost on the minds of many Monks most likely to read a PMD.

Edit 11 Mar: on recommendation, inserted readmore tag.

Failing drastically to cover everything because the "everything" includes mostly what goes on in the Perlmonks cb - which many Monks never speak in - this message will touch on the series of ongoing incidents partially documented here and will be brief and general, essentially a short list of conclusions which I have come to as a result of the events mentioned (and others unmentioned, too numerous to count).

Firstly, if the topic of the message isn't "Perlmonks, the Toy", the amount and duration of interest in it seems shockingly low. That's apparently because despite the reality that an unused piece of software has no value, the people at the Perlmonks site and whether they are happy, growing (learning), and not demoralized isn't on the radar screen of a kid fixated on playing with his toy (and making sure that he has to share it with as few people as possible).

Secondly, the demoralizing aspects of being at Perlmonks are worse than most people experienced even in the least pleasant high school experience many could recount. As a metaphor, say a teacher of a class completely fails to adhere to any code in terms of acting on a responsibility to keep order, and lets student-on-student bullying go unchecked. Say on top of that the teacher sides with certain students, perhaps for self-protection, and when she does exercize her institutionally-granted powers to coerce changes of behavior from students, she does so with complete caprice according to mood or demands of her posse. That's an example of a demoralizing environment in which learning is incredibly hampered; and that's Perlmonks.

Finally, to return to the concrete events mentioned, the are just a couple of pretty hard-core facts that don't boil down much further than what I can state here. One is that use of the term "troll" is the new "fag" or "abo" or "paki" - the word you can use that your mates will cheer you on for, and nobody will name you a flamer for.

Second is that two people with utlimately prominent roles in acting as police of the Perlmonks community are utterly unsuited for it. One does this quite regularly and the other I have not seen do it openly for a long time, but he can, and he has apparently got the most day to day control over the running of the site. The former person mentioned is Yves Orton (demerphq) and the latter is Tye McQueen (tye).

This needs to be made very clear: I don't want the kind of control powers over Perlmonks, the Toy, or over Perlmonks, the Community/Site, that Yves or Tye have. I am not dispositionally suited for it (that means it would be a poor match for my gifts and weaknesses). So everything I am saying here is just what I believe that some future person will have to contend with as the first set of issues if they did decide to dedicate themselves to the improvement of Perlmonks, the Community.

Yves (demerphq) thinks it is fine to brandish threats over people and attempt to modify their behavior to his liking that way. Of course what this often results in is that exactly the same is returned to him. But he doesn't learn from it each time it happens. Also, to use a metaphor, imagine that a sheriff is called into a bar brawl at the Saloon. His method for dealing with it is to whip out his gun 10 seconds after arriving and shoot the first 3 people he lays eyes on after spinning around on his heel. Totally random, left absolutely up to chance. That is demerphq's strategy for keepin' the order and administrin' the justice at Perlmonks. It's actually worse than if there was no "sheriff" at all. Yves should voluntarily relinquish his power to either moderate or "borg" (prevent from chatting) today.

In Tye (tye)'s case, the simple ... uh, call it inability to learn or complete lack of the fundamental concepts that seem to be the case for Yves ... those simple deficits are apparently not the main thing. Tye is actually truly malicious. He conceived a vendatta towards me a number of years ago, and it has been ignored as well as possible by me until recently (again, see the WWW page referenced above). It's up to the reader to try to conceive of what could happen to create the best outcome for "Perlmonks, the Community" wrt Tye McQueen. Without a doubt many who have coded pieces of "Perlmonks, the Toy" and had Tye commit their changes are sure where their "loyalties lie". But this message is about the Community, not the Toy, and while I am sure that many people could and maybe will step up with shrill defenses against what they see as an unwarranted personal attack, the evidence for a lengthy pattern of unwarranted provocation, baiting, and general negativity by Tye towards certain individuals is simply unassailable. It sets the most demoralizing and iniquitous sociological standard for Perlmonks, the Community, that I can imagine. I have a new-found respect for those who can manage to claim a role of supervisorship over a community, and then not completely fail to exercize even modest effort in doing it. The "workmanship" ethic is the same whether you are building a desk or a school, I think, and I see no pride of workmanship in this regard from Yves Orton, whatever his code is like; and from Tye McQueen I see nothing but vicious insecurity-based vindictiveness.

    Soren Andersen Intrepid

Comment on A New Respect
Re: A New Respect
by friedo (Prior) on Mar 11, 2006 at 04:27 UTC
    Dude, it's a website. Relax. Go outside and get some fresh air. It's nothing worth getting this worked up over.

      There's a great deal wrong with this rebuke. The most directly observable is that it relies on the its target being 'worked up', and needing to 'relax', and possibly to 'get some fresh air'. If you study this reliance, and the attitude which assumes it and the situations which might spark that attitude, you'll come to see this exact rebuke everywhere. And it will disgust you.

        Have you been following this soap opera? From his actions on the CB he came across as rather worked up. The fact that he is upset enough to make this post say so as well.

      Perhaps, to the OP, it is worth getting worked up. Perhaps the OP has some valid points that would better be addressed, rather than trivialized or ignored.

Re: A New Respect
by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Mar 11, 2006 at 06:27 UTC

    Why do you abuse yourself so?

    Makeshifts last the longest.

Re: A New Respect
by Your Mother (Canon) on Mar 11, 2006 at 06:38 UTC
    Secondly, the demoralizing aspects of being at Perlmonks are worse than most people experienced even in the least pleasant high school experience many could recount.

    No one here at perlmonks ever forced me to show up 7 hours a day 180 days out of the year. Neither has anyone here ever pulled a knife on me, sucker-punched me in the hall, shot a friend of mine, or threatened to fail me for not selling raffle tickets.

    You're not winning any converts with this stuff; you're just driving uninvolved parties like myself to look-up the CB instructions for "/ignore" for the first time since I've been here.

      I just prefer "/chatteroff".

Re: A New Respect
by Marza (Vicar) on Mar 11, 2006 at 06:59 UTC

    Do you do this for attention? Why?

    Is this just a continuation of this?

    You really need to step away from the computer and go outside and look at that big blue thing up top. You know the thing that has the bright light that rises and lowers every day.

    I never saw anyone borged before. Good job!

Re: A New Respect
by spiritway (Vicar) on Mar 11, 2006 at 07:36 UTC

    It seems that what you're complaining about is that there are cliques here at Perl Monks. That's true. Certain people tend to hang around together, especially on the cb. I've found that almost every time I've made a comment on the cb, I've been ignored. So - I stopped using the cb. It sounds like you're getting borged for some reason, which sucks, but we're all pretty much at the mercy of the people who have that power. Alas, we have "Hobson's choice" - take it or leave it. The value I get from Perl Monks far outweighs the seeming rudeness of some folks on the cb, so I take the good and ignore the bad. Despite its imperfections, PM has so much to offer.

      I asked several times for quick help (not worth a new node) on the CB, and I always got answers, and I also chatted with some about all and nothing and never saw anything special in the CB. Really. Perhaps some timezones are better than others.

        Hi, wazoox. I believe you - everyone hates me, and they all like you ;-). Who knows what the problem was? Maybe I was coming across as a jerk, or everyone was hung over, or whatever. It could have been the timezones, as you suggest - that particular time might have been for closed cliques, and I was an intruder. It's not that important, really - I just used /chatteroff, and the problem went away. Despite this, Perl Monks has been a great place to be, giving me information, ideas, insights, and even a good laugh now and then from the wry humor people can have here.

Re: A New Respect
by chromatic (Archbishop) on Mar 11, 2006 at 11:18 UTC

    You have the time and energy to maintain a public list of people you don't like on your homenode with a short essay for almost every one, a list of every time in recent history you have taken offense to how other people treat you, and multiple vague and rambling essays about something or other, and you still wonder why people don't know what to think of you or how to treat you?

    May I respectfully suggest you consult a mental health professional neutral and trusted third party? At the risk of performing a long-distance psychological diagnosis, I cannot understand with your thoughts or motivations and believe you might do well to talk them over with someone neutral in person.

    Update: rephrased to remove potentially loaded terms.

      May I respectfully suggest you consult a mental health professional? At the risk of performing a long-distance psychological diagnosis, I cannot understand with your thoughts or motivations and believe you might do well to talk them over with someone neutral in person.

      Please don't ever make this suggestion again, to anyone who has not already personally confided mental illness and, say, a recent repeat of an oft-disasterous decision to avoid prescribed drugs.

      The 'out of deep, sincere concern, I think that you should seek a psychiatrist' is a repulsive political idiom of our times and to see it here in perlmonks is alarming.

        If someone I care about were showing the warning signs of extreme stress or a psychological disorder, I hope that the people who noticed it would not turn away. How can I not show a fellow human being even a touch of the same concern?

        Take offense if you must, but I certainly intended none. (Psychiatrist? Psychologist? Counselor? Mediator? There are plenty of ways to discuss a situation with a neutral party that do not involve medication.)

Re: A New Respect
by g0n (Priest) on Mar 11, 2006 at 11:41 UTC
    Intrepid,

    I think you and I get along OK in the CB, so in an attempt to provide a reasonably objective contribution and try to smooth over what has become an unfortunate situation, perhaps I could make a couple of comments:

    • Yes, there are occasionally what I would consider to be incidents of bad manners on PM. You and I are both guilty of that too; no one is perfect, and there are times when all of us type something into the CB that we then regret.
    • There are people on Perlmonks whose manners perhaps generally leave something to be desired. I mention no names. But I have to keep reminding myself that this is essentially a programming site, and technical people are often (in the real world as well as virtually) a little abrupt with each other. Those of us who are prone to take offence at this should try to remember where we are.
    • There has been at least one occasion where someone borged you, and I thought at the time it was appropriate. IIRC you were being what I considered to be needlessly personal and voluble in your response to a new user asking questions that are documented in perldoc. That's something that does provoke some disapproval from others in the CB - me included.
    • Friendly criticism: you hold strong views, which is perfectly OK, but you do sometimes tend to provoke an argument (also OK - discussion of wide ranging subjects makes the CB interesting) and then express your views in lots of rapidly submitted, substantial blocks of text. Although you may not be aware of it, from this side it conveys the impression of holding forth, or what I would call 'going off on one'.

    Not that I want to convey the impression that it's all your own fault. Far from it, there does seem to have developed a 'Intrepids going off on one, lets borg him before he builds up a head of steam' approach. While I have some sympathy with it at times (it can be difficult to get a word in edgeways once you really get going), it does seem to be edging increasingly in the direction of victimisation. For what it's worth, there does appear to be an element of mischievous schoolboy humour in it.

    The relationship between you and some of the site grandees does seem to have degenerated into a downward spiral. Many another person would have given up and left the site in that situation, and it's to your credit that you have the strength of character not to have gone off in a huff.

    BUT, your response to it does come across as rather more confrontational than is really necessary. In particular, your habit of documenting who you're ignoring on your homenode. Personally, I'm not interested who you are ignoring and why, and I think many others would agree. By documenting this, you are making a pointed public statement of your opinions of particular people, which could be considered rather rude.

    It's worth bearing in mind that the way we construct our role in any relationship is through a dynamic, ongoing process of negotiation; we conform to the others expectations to a certain extent, and we help to construct the relationship by contributing a proportion of our own expectations.

    For the future I'd like to suggest the following:

    Intrepid: I understand your point of view, but continuing to be confrontational will just perpetuate the problem. A few homenode edits might show a willingness to compromise.

    power users: While I can see an element of mischevious humour in borging Intrepid when the CB messages from him start to flow thick, fast and strongly opinionated, it is unfair to treat him differently from anyone else - whatever has happened in the past.

    --------------------------------------------------------------

    "If there is such a phenomenon as absolute evil, it consists in treating another human being as a thing."
    John Brunner, "The Shockwave Rider".

    Can you spare 2 minutes to help with my research? If so, please click here

      and it's to your credit that you have the strength of character not to have gone off in a huff
      Intrepid was borged for a day. Instead of taking his forced cooling off period from chat, he created cannotsilence and returned to the chatterbox to continue.
      it is unfair to treat him differently from anyone else - whatever has happened in the past.
      But he is different, as evidenced by this thread. He just won't quit or start over. The purpose of perlmonks is to have fun enjoying perl, not picking pointless fights.

        -- for this post. While I agree with most of what you said (and, for the record, what I've seen of the proceedings show Intrepid behaving in a rude, utterly childish and irrational manner IMO), the fact that you posted this as AnonyMonk puts it into the realm of sniping and will only serve to further strengthen Intrepid's persecution complex. I thought g0n's post was a good attempt at bridge-building, more forgiving than I would have been but then sometimes you have to do that.


        All dogma is stupid.
Re: A New Respect
by Anonymous Monk on Mar 11, 2006 at 12:45 UTC
    It sounds like you are easily demoralized, and need genuine help in the real world (get laid).

    Considered by bobf: Reap: needless personal, inflammatory attack
    Unconsidered by planetscape: keep (and edit) votes prevented reaping

      This was already suggested -- it is, in fact, the very first reply to Intrepid's post. You do not add anything by restating it with the sneering enhancement of '(get laid)'.

        This was already suggested -- it is, in fact, the very first reply to Intrepid's post.

        It is? If that's what you read into my reply, then you are probably just as deluded and self-obsessed as the OP.

Re: A New Respect
by davis (Vicar) on Mar 11, 2006 at 15:57 UTC

    Patient: "Doctor, it hurts when I stick this spoon in my eye!"

    Complaining about the chatterbox is similar to complaining to a TV company that a program that no-one forced you to watch offended you so deeply that you felt compelled to watch to the end so you could absorb the full horror.

    You don't get on with (quite) a few members of the chatterbox. The chatterbox is optional. To quote Bill Hicks: "I think I see a way outta this!".

    Update Minor semantic fix.


    davis
    Kids, you tried your hardest, and you failed miserably. The lesson is: Never try.
Re: A New Respect
by liverpole (Monsignor) on Mar 11, 2006 at 18:06 UTC
    Inteprid, you acknowledge in your "first letter" that you are overly sensitive, and that is certainly evident from all you've written about your struggles here.  It's true that nobody gets along with everyone; just as it makes the world more interesting that we each have our own personality, so, too, can it be a source of conflict, frustration, and anger.

    Might I suggest that you take a short rest from Perlmonks, when you get so worked up about it?  It's not to say you're wrong in all of your opinions, but if it is SUCH a source of hostility for you, perhaps some time away will give you a fresh perspective.

    Or another good way to deal with frustrations you have, especially if they anger you to the extent that you feel the need to meticulously record every one of them, might be to step back, take a deep breath or ten, and practice letting go.  It very well could be the "attack" you perceived in one case wasn't meant the way you took it.  Sometimes reacting with overt sensitivity causes your judgement to be biased towards seeing emnity that isn't really present.   And even if you are justified in feeling singled out, isn't sometimes the best way to deal with an attack to simply ignore it, and devote your energies toward more positive, worthwhile pursuits?


    @ARGV=split//,"/:L"; map{print substr crypt($_,ord pop),2,3}qw"PerlyouC READPIPE provides"
Re: A New Respect
by pboin (Deacon) on Mar 11, 2006 at 19:22 UTC
    Intrepid:

    I've suggested you take a break and adjust your priorities, so have several other monks. You've even gotten a suggestion to get some neutral counselling. You really should consider taking that advice.

    I'm not mocking you, I'm giving you the best advice I can. It appears (to me) that you're borderline obsessed with this stuff. Let it go, persue something that brings you joy for a few days and see what happens...

      borderline obsessed

      To say that he is 'obsessed' would be to make a simple observation. Is it because of your mother that you use psychiatric language?

        Using psychiatric terms to explain the behaviour of someone who is doing something that doesnt appear to make sense is hardly wrong. The OP appears to be unreasonable, the documents he posted sound like the rantings of a deranged madman. His behaviour in the CB from what I've seen is of someone who is quite simply not all there.

        You seem to think that its automatically wrong to use such terms to try to explain the behaviour of someone who appears to be irrational. Id say such a position is it itself irrational, and insulting to those making the judgements. They are entitled to hold their own opinion and its not up to you to decide if their criticism is appropriate or not.

Re: A New Respect
by jZed (Prior) on Mar 11, 2006 at 22:08 UTC

    I was hesitant to reply to this, but I think you deserve a direct indication of how I will respond to various behaviours.

    If you don't want me to support you getting permanently banned from PerlMonks, then don't keep doing things which violate clearly stated rules such as inventing new user-names when you are borged and publishing CB logs offsite without permission of those quoted.

    If you don't want me to support you getting borged, then don't swear at other monks in the CB. (A part of yesterday's log and something that I've personaly witnessed twice previously and that I see you conveniently omitted from your postings.)

    If you don't want me to use the CB to criticize your behaviour, then don't insult and berate newcomers for their lack of knowledge of perl or of PerlMonks and don't publish voluminous put-downs of monks you dislike or ignore.

    If you want me to respect you, then do as I have seen you do on many occasions - help people with technical questions, give advice to lovelorn monks, send good wishes to fellow monks in bad health or career binds, share interesting tidbits you've garnered in your studies of world culture, throw a bad pun or bon mot into the conversation at the right time ...

    Intrepid, somewhere in there is a guy I like and respect, but if you insist on hiding him, you are the one who will have to live with the consequences.

      don't keep doing things which violate clearly stated rules such as inventing new user-names when you are borged and
      It's not clear to me that there is such a clearly stated rule.
        I thought you weren't supposed to do it period (ala metaperl)

        -Lee
        "To be civilized is to deny one's nature."

        Is that the only criticism you have of his comments? I gave jZed a ++ for them, because I think he summarized the situation very well, and in a reasonably humane fashion.

        There is a clearly stated rule about creating multiple nicks without consulting the powers that be. The rule says that you don't do that. It's pretty bleeping obvious that if one of the gods IMO correctly removed someone's ability to use a site facility for a period of time, and that person then then creates new accounts in order to flout that restriction, then that person has broken a (clearly stated) site rule. Unless, of course, that person also received permission to create new nicks from the same people who banned him.

Re: A New Respect
by acid06 (Friar) on Mar 12, 2006 at 05:36 UTC
    I don't have much too say about it since I don't usually hang around that much in the chatterbox.

    But there was this one where I was overly active, talking about something (which I don't really remember, maybe something YAML related) which sparkled some strong views from many other monks. One of those was Intrepid. He seemed very unreasonable while discussing things and someone private messaged me saying that he was a troll and I should ignore him. I didn't actually understand that by ignoring him, he meant /ignoreing him, but it seemed fairly reasonable to just ignore whatever he was saying about that subject.

    I think these demonstrations of unreasonable behaviour is what created this "bad aura" around Intrepid. However, I don't really agree with people making a campaign to "silence" him (i.e. everyone should /ignore him). And I don't really know about this "borging" thing, since I wasn't around when the incident happened (although I don't talk much, I usually read the chatterbox).

    Either way, there's something here that some people here seems to not quite understand.
    PerlMonks isn't merely a web site. PerlMonks is *the* Perl website.
    PerlMonks + some selected mailing lists is pretty much the entirePerl community.

    If this guy tries to find a job somewhere PerlMonks aware he might even suffer in the RealWorld(tm) from all of this.


    acid06
    perl -e "print pack('h*', 16369646), scalar reverse $="

      PerlMonks + some selected mailing lists is pretty much the entirePerl community.

      No. But OK :-)

      Either way, there's something here that some people here seems to not quite understand. PerlMonks isn't merely a web site. PerlMonks is *the* Perl website. PerlMonks + some selected mailing lists is pretty much the entirePerl community.

      If this guy tries to find a job somewhere PerlMonks aware he might even suffer in the RealWorld(tm) from all of this.

      Then he should stop trying to get the rest of the known universe to cap his ass. I don't think his decision to be principled also means he has to be a fuck about it.


      Considered by planetscape: Reap: Anonymous troll /vulgar language.
      Unconsidered by planetscape: keep (and edit) votes prevented reaping

      Considered by frodo72: is it at least possible to edit vulgar words?
      Unconsidered by davido: Vote was keep=14, edit=10, reap=3. No mandate. Old node. Future considerations will not be considered.

Re: A New Respect
by Anonymous Monk on Mar 12, 2006 at 08:43 UTC

    Both of the guys you are criticising have made massive contributions to the site. They are the main admins. They are the main developers. Almost every new feature for the past few years has been coded by one or the other. They are both regularly helpful to people in the CB. And I've never seen them say anything like what I've seen you do:

    Intrepid: username removed;, you are one of the lowest fuck-faced scumbags I have ever encountered online - your talking-behind-the -back sliminess and putrescent immature arrogance just cause massive retchation

    Which was what caused demerphq to borg you the other day. (Funny how you leave that part out of your rant.) I've regularly witnessed you make rude, offensive, or threatening comments in the CB. You've been known to all out attack people in the CB for misunderstanding something you asked, or giving you an answer you dont feel is correct.

    I was lurking when much of the recent events happened. Your characteriation of it just doesn't match what I saw. From what I saw you carried a much bigger responsibility for what happened than you are willing to admit. Which in my eyes makes you a liar.

    To me the situation is simple, who is more important for the sites wellbeing? Two guys who regularly contribute their time and skills to the good of everybody or a disruptive offensive liar like you?

    IMO the answer is clear. If you can't live within the rules then YOU should go away.

    Edit by castaway: username removed.

Re: A New Respect
by eric256 (Parson) on Mar 12, 2006 at 18:04 UTC

    If you don't want to be called a troll, then don't make personal hate lists (your ignore lists), logs of "bad" behaviour i.e. chat logs, or large ranting posts like this with no basis and worse, no possible good outcome.

    You appear to be suffereing from the exact same things that you accuse demerphq and tye of. Ironicaly I seldom find them on the same side of arguments so it greatly amused me that you put them in the same group. This is no defense of them, but i would think you are going to get negative reactions from anyone you publicly put on your hate list, and in addition to that by putting it down in writing like that you make it obvious to everone that you never intend on making amends in any way so why should they be nice to you?

    You do your own brand of name calling in this post and your home node and yet that is the very thing you claim to be fighting agianst, did i miss something?

    Violence begets violence, hate begets hate.


    ___________
    Eric Hodges
Re: A New Respect
by Plankton (Priest) on Mar 12, 2006 at 22:03 UTC
      Thanks for the neat summary!
Re: A New Respect
by Anonymous Monk on Mar 14, 2006 at 13:40 UTC
    You have the ability to be a really nice person. Not just when you want to be, just 'cause you can be. Unfortunately, you don't seem to want to bend for people as they bend for you.

    There's no king here. Yeah, there are administrators, but it's not the same. If you feel that making the "bad people" leave will be some sorta success, or "fixing" them will make things better, you got another thing coming.

    This place is great 'cause of the people here. Not necessarily people like tye or demerphq, but right down to every single person who's spent more than 5 minutes to pitch in. It's like an orgy potluck. You remove the people, and everything goes down hill. They... we perlmonks. It's not the site. It's the community. You can't easily seperate the two. It's all the wrong suggestions that get corrected, all the innovation, the slapstick, the joy and the pain.

    It cannot be bent to a new shape violently without creating a new thing that. It doesn't work that way, when everything here is voluntary.

    I've seen the interactions between everyone here. It's almost like the workplace. Yeah, people may not like each other at times, but they don't go around flaming each other or picking fights. Frankly, you get very abrasive with people very quickly and escalate it, more so now than ever. Just let it go. No one goes around flaming you before this entire escalation. There’s no commodity to fight over.

Re: A New Respect
by Joost (Canon) on Mar 15, 2006 at 02:55 UTC
    Intrepid,

    I haven't been following permonks much in the last months, but in my experience, the chatterbox is the most volatile part of the site. It's where people give quick - and sometimes unwarranted - responses to remarks and questions.

    Like it or not, the politeness and thought that is used in most of the postings on this site is concieved by me and probably many others as less important in a chat environment, because the chatbox is fleeting, not archived, prone to sillyness and socializing etc. etc.

    Also, keep in mind that since the chatterbox isn't archived, it's very hard for anybody who "wasn't there" to form his or her opinion on behaviour in there.

    I'm not sure what you want to achieve with this post. I also , if I'm honest, don't really care who you like or dislike. If people on this site annoy you, ignore them, switch of the chatterbox, whatever. If you want a feature added to the code that would help you do so, propose it. I would probably support it, since I can think of a few people I would like to forget :)

    Joost.

Re: A New Respect
by Intrepid (Deacon) on Mar 15, 2006 at 13:20 UTC

    ReGreetings, Monklies and Perlverts.

    It's been a few days now since my posting (the top node of this threaded discussion). I've got a followup now for a couple different perceived audiences among my readers. If you want the tone to be conciliatory or repentive and want to spend no more than 18.4 seconds reading, give up now.

    First for some: my wee heart isn't lying broken and bleeding on the floor, never fear. The thing about being hurt by the words of others, for me: only what comes across to me with sincerity will I take to heart. And some of the hurtful things I've heard in my life from people who had some sincerity towards me, have been among the most helpful to my eventual growth and progress. The stuff that's been said to me (purportedly) or about me, above, mostly doesn't consititute having come from sincerity, so it doesn't mean much.

    For some others: snap judgements are as cheap as the electrons they float on. Anybody can make a snap judgement. It not only lacks the sincerity I spoke of above, which is something that is expensive for humans to produce from their insides, but it also takes no great gift of intelligence to emit. Kudos to those who just downvoted in order to see how low the node was rated ("gasp! who would do that?" ;-) without having to give in to the compulsion to slap a snap judgement on the pile too.

    For readers in general:

    Truthtellers in the Monastery will remember that I have been holding a viewpoint about the value of the XP and node reputation system here for years, that is different from the majority opinion.

    There are those who will rant that discounting the node rep votes on something I post is tantamount to being a "troll". As with much else, that's a radical oversimplification. You can only reduce the words used to describe the truth so far, before the truth gets damaged and then vanishes. To dumb-down the definition of what a "troll" is so far that it turns out as "anyone who posts to Perlmonks but doesn't care what people think of his posting (as manifested by node rep)" is so violently stupid-minded that it comprises sort of a litmus test for me: If you are so dumb that you will buy this ersatz version of the truth, I don't want to have any sort of meta-relationship with you anyway. Call it personal Darwinism if you like - thinning the herd. People who have a disability like mongoloidism, for example, or autism; and have good open hearts, bravery and compassion for others; I want to know -- I'd feel priviliged to know. Self-described "kewl outcast hax0rs" or "BOFHs" with all their shallow, fragile self-respect riding on their computer cleverness who then cannot be bothered to do the work of honestly trying to read with comprehension fairly short articles by others, I don't need to know.

    If you are one of the people listed in the top node (or the document cited in that node), or part of their gang, and you think you came off to the readership in a reply as if you had "really tried to give that stubborn, *#*%$!# Intrepid some good advice for his own sake", then please realize that if you were cited as having lost my respect awhile ago (as by having been noted on the list on my home node), nobody with the first clue about human beings is going to believe that your 'searing (but well-intentioned!) reply' constituted an attempt to be productive or helpful. The verbal sparring that continues in the cb and on this node doesn't constitute a good-faith effort to resolve the issues I've decided to raise above. Neither obvious self-defense moves nor spinning accusations around on the 'blamer' constitute a good-faith effort to turn these lemons into orangeade.

          Soren Andersen -Intrepid-

      As it is written, "XP is an imaginary number, given to you by a stranger."

      But seriously, it is also a way to see if what you say is perceived to have value, either because of an intrinsic value associated with your position, because of the way you say it, or because of who you are. Personally, I really like getting feedback on the things I write -- it helps me know when I come across as a jerk, and when I come across as a helpful person. I can use such guidance to adjust my real-world communication skills.

      Some people are primarily internally referent, and others are more externally referent. There have been lots of interesting experiments demonstrating this with rooms that weren't square and desks that slant. You may be an internally referent person, and so you can say with some honesty that you (mostly) don't care what other people think of you. But I think you can go too far in hardening yourself from the opinions of others -- in extremity, this borders on psychopathy:

      "A psychopath is defined as having no concern for the feelings of others and a complete disregard for any sense of social obligation."

      I'm not calling you a psychopath. I'm trying to demonstrate through reductio ad absurdum logic that anyone who interacts with a community is, in some sense, accountable to that community, whether they like it or not. If a large part of a community thinks you have behaved in an immature manner, then you are foolish to write them off; better to humble yourself and accept reproof (even some that is undeserved) than to persist in arrogance. I would say that the negative reputation of your original node indicates that three out of four monks don't appreciate either: a) your ideas, b) the way you are presenting them, or c) they just plain don't like you. Personally, I only downvote if I don't like the way someone presents their ideas, so that might be a good place to start.

      I had hoped, when I read the title of this original node, that you had committed yourself to treating the denizens of PerlMonks with "a new respect" -- that you were trying to make a fresh start. I think that option is still available to you.

      For the record, this comment is 'sincere' and intended in a kindly way. I am not allied with any of the people you negatively reference in your letter or your first posting on this subject, and I've been around enough to see a little of what has gone on in the Chatterbox, so I don't think you can dismiss me as having made a 'snap judgement'. But if you don't want to accept what I have to say, I'm sure you can find some pretext. :)


      No good deed goes unpunished. -- (attributed to) Oscar Wilde
      I thought this thread was about the interaction between you and the other CB monks? How'd it go into the XP system?
      The stuff that's been said to me (purportedly) or about me, above, mostly doesn't consititute having come from sincerity, so it doesn't mean much.
      That right there is why people don't get along with you. You absolve all chances of any responsibility in the least that you are part of the problem. If you continue on like this, no one will ever see you as a nice person, or someone that is nice but just disagree with. You'll become a troll.
Re: A New Respect
by shmem (Canon) on Oct 27, 2008 at 00:57 UTC

    Your valuation of respect seems to be quite low, at least looking at you respecting other people. Denouncing other people on your home node as showing

    aggravating degrees of cluelessness, ignorant behavior (including the chosing of a deliberately offensive user nickname), repeatedly asking about things without paying attention to the answers they've already been offered, etc

    - no matter in what context - isn't respectful behaviour: it's calling them names. Please stop that.

Log In?
Username:
Password:

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: monkdiscuss [id://535868]
Approved by Petruchio
help
Chatterbox?
and the web crawler heard nothing...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others wandering the Monastery: (4)
As of 2014-09-22 03:00 GMT
Sections?
Information?
Find Nodes?
Leftovers?
    Voting Booth?

    How do you remember the number of days in each month?











    Results (177 votes), past polls