![Hug :hug:](./images/smilies/hug.gif)
Note to self: Must strive to sound more bitter, or people won't notice.
It wasn't? That's what I get for relying on my imperfect memory...narya wrote:Just for the record, it wasn't me that deleted the post about the link.
*snort* Perhaps there should be a "bitter" emoticon, so everyone knows.Note to self: Must strive to sound more bitter, or people won't notice.
I keep meaning to start a Kvetching thread. For all the stuff that is annoying but not Big. But then I realize that half the people here never complain, even about things that would make me whimper in the corner for days. So I suck it up and fire off that email that made me hyperventilate for two weeks.Prim wrote:I want to say something about the Coping thread, the first of which I founded. While I realize that, soon after someone else has posted devastating and life-changing news, people might hesitate to post about any problem short of that, I don't think pain can or should be weighed and measured and compared, and I certainly don't believe it should be judged. Not in Coping. I would wish for everyone to feel welcome to post as they need to, and to be acknowledged.
Exactly. As if berating people for being insecure makes them more secure, somehow. Oy.Impenitent wrote: My problem with this whole discussion is that I have felt shamed for being ashamed.
I think this may well be the most upsetting post I have seen on this board.anthriel wrote:I think a Kvetching thread is a fetching idea.![]()
Yes, I am aware that that is sort of alliterative. Yes, I am very happy about that.
narya, thank you so much for coming in here and saying what you said; I can so commiserate with that predicament. I, too, tend to share too much (or I used to, anyway) and TMI sums it up well; I would put something out there, sharing from the heart, lots of emotion, lots of... well, somewhere between dramatic overage and courage, really, and sometimes... nothing would happen.
I KNOW that many times it was because whatever I had said was so raw, so... maybe inappropriate, that people didn't know how to follow it. The last post I deleted, the last one I probably will ever delete, was about two weeks before this thread started. I came on here one night and posted a big "I love you guys" post and totally emotion dumped on the board, and no one answered me or posted in the thread for more than 24 hours.
So I deleted it, and the next post came in within minutes. Nothing to do with what I had written and expunged, btw. It just seemed like maybe my ridiculous words were damming up an otherwise sane discussion.
And then I learned in THIS thread that the infrequent habit I had of jumping in and then scrambling out if I were over my head was actually hurting people. Upsetting, frustrating, and HURTING people. This I will not tolerate, even from me.
So I've been posting the equivalent of kitten pictures, since then. Safer, really..
For me it is both. While I am not able to take back my words in a face to face conversation, I can give my posts on a message-board some thought, edit them and even delete them, if I change my mind. Therefore some shy people are not able to open up in RL, but on the internet. To go back and delete a post which is months old, does not make lots of sense to me. It leaves a gap in a conversation and may even disrupt the meaning of it. Nevertheless I think it is a right of everyone to take back their words on a message board and I just assume that they have very good reasons for doing so.nerdanel wrote:For me, posting on a messageboard is definitely conversation - not publication at all.
... it rings in my ears as EXACTLY the same predicament that I find myself in. You are less maudlin, I am less confrontational, but both of us wonder, after the fact, if our passions have gone too far. Silence can be a good indication of just that.The reasons I might question a particular post of mine are different than yours. For instance, if I feel unclear whether a particular passionate post of mine came off too stridently, a lack of response might cause me to wonder whether others are silently thinking exactly that and in some cases might cause me to remove the post.
LordM, once again I am compelled to say that some of this disconnect in understanding comes from the fact that we are all different people, and react differently to the same situation. Even though I know I am risking another "tra-la-la" response (LOVE that stimulating dialog, boy howdy), I would say that perhaps your style of posting doesn't expose your pasty underbelly like mine does (not that you HAVE a pasty underbelly, of course, going with the literary license, here).Lord_Morningstar wrote: In particular, I hate to think that people would delete posts simply because they receive no replies. I have made many such posts, from the final posts in three front-page Lasto threads to the first act of my parodic sci-fi film script featuring pirates in zeppelins. I have to say that it never occurred for me to delete them – the fact that nobody replied shouldn’t suggest to me that they were bad, only that people had nothing to say in response.
Okay, how bout this - the only person who has expressed more than mild annoyance about this has been jewel.anthriel wrote:And then I learned in THIS thread that the infrequent habit I had of jumping in and then scrambling out if I were over my head was actually hurting people. Upsetting, frustrating, and HURTING people. This I will not tolerate, even from me.
Really? Wasn't that the post that started a discussion of genetics and evolution and survival of traits with no particular purpose? Also melanin.I recently posted somewhere that people really don't have blue eyes, that eyes are "blue" in the same way that the sky is blue; it has to do with scattered light and perception, not pigment. I thought that was kinda interesting, and I checked back several times to see what people's reactions were to that.
Reactions? None. Confused But the fact that no one commented on THAT didn't upset me at all. That was just a fact that I was sharing, and people probably did read it and say "huh" to themselves and move on. I wasn't emotionally invested in that post, in other words.
Really? I had no idea! I've always found your posts to be supportive and bonding. But then, I seldom go to Lasto or the Tolkien forums. Too many times I have tried, and I've been ignored or unpleasantly put in my place. Perhaps you have been, too. It's a rougher neighborhood. In fact, the only reason I'm in this thread in Lasto now is because I'm finally able to talk about something I'm an expert on - my own feelings and observations.Anthy wrote:And then I learned in THIS thread that the infrequent habit I had of jumping in and then scrambling out if I were over my head was actually hurting people. Upsetting, frustrating, and HURTING people. This I will not tolerate, even from me.
nerdanel wrote:If I'm on the fence about making a particular post (not just at HoF, but in general online), at times the lack of response or type of response I get to that post will influence whether I leave it up.
A post is offered at a particular moment for reading by those who are then participating in the discussion, much like an offline discussion participant makes a statement only to those present within earshot.
I see posting very differently, because it is written communication and not necessarily being seen in real time, as words are exchanged in a conversation. I think it is mistaken to consider that we are speaking privately to a particular set of people at a particular time when we choose to post on a public messageboard; we don't know who or how many people read our words. I think what we write on a public messageboard becomes public; it is no longer our private property. You can't unsay what you say to people in real time, and you can't really unsay what you write on a messageboard, either, if you consider that immediately upon a post appearing, other people have a right to quote your words and they would not be remiss in doing so, even if the post is subsequently deleted.No online speaker should be compelled to continue to offer their post for others to read if they've changed their mind about sharing their comments publicly. No one who is not present when the post is initially posted has some sort of vested right to read the post simply by virtue of its having been made in the first place.
Saying that deleting posts is "not helpful to achieving any constructive purpose" seems to ignore the strong benefit to the individual poster of removing from the public view words that they no longer wish to share.
I haven't seen Jewel doing this. As I see it, she has been expressing a concern that people were censoring themselves. I haven't seen her insisting that people behave a certain way. I don't think she should be blamed for the conclusions others have reached based on this conversation. We all have the right to feel as we feel, and post according to our comfort level, and I'm pretty sure we all understand that.yovargas wrote:Your repeated insistence that people should post and behave the way that you want them to is far more irritating to me than any deleted post I can recall on this board.
I understand that some people may feel this way, but I will choose not to post (or post very sparingly and non-substantively) on any messageboard that enforces this view. You can certainly create a messageboard that takes this view and people can opt in or out of posting based on whether or not they agree.Cerin wrote:I think what we write on a public messageboard becomes public; it is no longer our private property.
You can't unsay what you say to people in real time, but you only say it to a limited number of people and (typically unless you know your words are being recorded and disseminated on the Internet), your words are not offered in fixed, provable form accessible to almost everyone in the entire world. Because the scope of the sharing is potentially much, much greater over the Internet, people should (and do) retain some degree of greater post hoc control over their words.You can't unsay what you say to people in real time, and you can't really unsay what you write on a messageboard, either, if you consider that immediately upon a post appearing, other people have a right to quote your words and they would not be remiss in doing so, even if the post is subsequently deleted.
I agree that a messageboard may exist for an exchange of ideas, but silence can indicate a critique of the form/tone in which those ideas were expressed. If I'm already on the fence about form/tone, silence may cause me to wonder if others agree with my self-critique. This happens very occasionally, not constantly.I'm kind of taken aback by the idea that people consider deleting their posts based on whether there's a response. Perhaps it's because of the way I view a messageboard as primarily an exchange of ideas, rather than as an opportunity for socializing.
See my point above re: the limited scope of sharing in an in-person conversation.But this is it. You say posting is like conversation, but you can't unshare words in a conversation.
And it's fine if you choose not to edit your own posts for this reason, as long as you acknowledge that people who choose to edit may have other reasons for doing so than implying disrespect for the value of their online interactions.I have posted many things on our family of messageboards that would no doubt embarrass me if I re-read them, but I wouldn't think of removing them unless I were figuratively shaking the dust of a community off my feet, which is a sign of repudiation of that community. To me it would imply disrespect for the reality/value of the interactions that took place.
I agree with all of this, which is why I think posting is not at all like conversation. Perhaps that's the crux of the issue. If you treat posting like conversation (which it is unlike in so many ways), I can see that you might have reason to do quite a bit of deleting.nerdanel wrote:You can't unsay what you say to people in real time, but you only say it to a limited number of people and (typically unless you know your words are being recorded and disseminated on the Internet), your words are not offered in fixed, provable form accessible to almost everyone in the entire world.
I don't mean that posts should be viewed as public; I mean that our words are, in fact, public once we post them. The comforting notion that edit/delete allows us to retrieve our words is somewhat illusory, since we don't know who might have quoted and saved them for reply, nor how they may have taken flight in the ether or cemented themselves in the minds of others.I understand that some people may feel this way, but I will choose not to post (or post very sparingly and non-substantively) on any messageboard that enforces this view.
I acknowledge that there are many reasons people edit/delete, and that it most likely doesn't imply disrespect on their part, for the people or the conversation they were a part of. But I think deleting posts in their entirety after the fact is inherently disrespectful of the conversations and community in which they took place -- of the reality and value of those interactions at that time -- even if the deleter intends no disrespect.And it's fine if you choose not to edit your own posts for this reason, as long as you acknowledge that people who choose to edit may have other reasons for doing so than implying disrespect for the value of their online interactions.
I'd say her calls of "dishonesty" and "passive aggressive" went well beyond "expressing a concern" about self-censoring. I'd say the same about your labeling this as "disrespectful". In both cases this is a problem with your perceptions, not with reality. Nobody else should be expected to change their behavior because your perceptions are flatly wrong.Cerin wrote:I haven't seen Jewel doing this. As I see it, she has been expressing a concern that people were censoring themselves.yovargas wrote:Your repeated insistence that people should post and behave the way that you want them to is far more irritating to me than any deleted post I can recall on this board.
I don't remember, exactly; that discussion certainly plowed on, though, and I loved every minute of it.Frelga wrote:Really? Wasn't that the post that started a discussion of genetics and evolution and survival of traits with no particular purpose? Also melanin.I recently posted somewhere that people really don't have blue eyes, that eyes are "blue" in the same way that the sky is blue; it has to do with scattered light and perception, not pigment. I thought that was kinda interesting, and I checked back several times to see what people's reactions were to that.
Reactions? None. Confused But the fact that no one commented on THAT didn't upset me at all. That was just a fact that I was sharing, and people probably did read it and say "huh" to themselves and move on. I wasn't emotionally invested in that post, in other words.
My fellow geek buddy narya wrote:The blue eyes and blue sky explanation also applies to the apparently blue veins in your wrist.
Cerin wrote:yov wrote:Your repeated insistence that people should post and behave the way that you want them to is far more irritating to me than any deleted post I can recall on this board.
I haven't seen Jewel doing this. As I see it, she has been expressing a concern that people were censoring themselves. I haven't seen her insisting that people behave a certain way. I don't think she should be blamed for the conclusions others have reached based on this conversation. We all have the right to feel as we feel, and post according to our comfort level, and I'm pretty sure we all understand that.