|
Author
|
Topic: Tact, and the use thereof....
|
hauptfrau
New Member
Member # 0
|
posted 09-23-2000 05:06 PM
   
I've been observing the Flame Wars™ on the Other List™, have actively participated in one on that list and inadvertently almost started one here. One of our new readers is currently getting his back end scorched on the OL for reasons similar to mine. I'm detecting a trend here. I think New Reader, Hauptman and I have a similar way of phrasing things and we get ourselves into trouble for it. From my POV, we three are well read and knowledgeable about the periods and topics we discuss, and we can back up our statements with evidence for our position. None of us are close-minded, we just demand real historical facts when we debate topics, and won't settle for less to be convinced. I don't think that's where the problem lies, I think it's in the presentation somewhere.... As innocent as some of our posts seem to us on this side of the keyboard, we have been accused of being *prejudiced
*narrow-minded
*superior
*egotistical
*rude
*insulting
*....well, you get the drift Now I'm famous for being sarcastic, so I can see how that could be misconstrued if I don't include enough smilies. Hauptmann often answers questions in a rush so he's very cold and abrupt in his answers. Frankly, I don't see a problem with any of New Reader's posts on the OL, except that he really seems to know about history... So I put the question to you all- How can we phrase things to avoid hate mail? I'd like to hear some discussion of how to best phrase things so they are not taken amiss in a format such as this. None of us intend to put you off, and we really do like participating. However, if you all think we're being narrow- minded, egotistical snots, and we think you're being thin-skinned, at best there will be lots of hurt feelings and at worst participation will lag and the board will die. Since the "I've had it and I'm leaving!" syndrome seems to plague every board, I'd like to hear some constructive ways to avoid it here. I'm willing to take constructive critisism, and so is Hauptmann. Heck, I'll go out on a limb and say we could all use some pointers once in a while. I think it would make participation more fun for all.  Except BobR and Robert de Tyre that is.... They're so tactful they've never p'd anyone off in their lives! Maybe they should give us some pointers!! Gwen, who really wants to learn to play nice with others. 
Registered: A Long Time Ago! | IP: Logged
|
|
Anne-Marie
Member
Member # 8
|
posted 09-24-2000 03:52 AM
hey all from Anne-Marieone could take the question and apply it to us all. Similar epithets have been hurled at most of us who attempt to do the medieval in the common medievaloide re-enactment setting. By setting ourselves upa s doing it "right", we imply that everyone else is wrong. That gives it a moral judgement, and so the "wrongdoer" feels they must justify their righteousness, usually with the use of four and five letter words in our direction.... I'm not saying this applies to Gwen or any one else in particular. What my point is is that all of us encounter this kind of situation and I for one would love to ehar how folks handle it. Up here, I'm known as perky (folks who really know me know what a crock that is!) which I guess is my way of dealing with the scantily clad belly dancers wanting "feedback" (ie compliements) on their coin bra..."my! that certainly is SPARKLY!" said with a big perky smile.... what do other folks do? or are you in a situation where you are the norm, and not the abberation? --AM
Registered: May 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Hob
Member
Member # 46
|
posted 09-26-2000 03:41 PM
I think that one of the keys to gently educating others is to remember that falsehoods are often useful steps on the way to the truth. As an educator in the sciences, I'm intensely aware of how often what we teach is incorrect. Many of the ideas put forth in grade school and high school biology are horribly oversimplified, to the point where they make the professor cringe to teach them. Any given concept that you try to teach has immense depth, to the point where there are people who devote their entire lives to exploring that little tiny piece. A simplified view is always incorrect, but sometimes necessary as a step in the process. To relate this back to teaching historical accuracy, I have two recommendations. 1) I think that it's important to acknowledge the steps that the other person has taken to even get to the question. For someone to post a question interesting enough for you folks to argue about, they're already far far beyond the average person. Be aware of the effort they've made and how easy it is to dismiss/slam them without intending to. 2) To use a mathematical metaphor, some errors are mistakes in basic math and some are just rounding. It's important to distinguish between someone who's actually getting something _wrong_ and someone who's just sort of "rounding off". Correcting the former will be welcomed, if phrased tactfully. Correcting the latter will be seen as being a snooty busybody. Hob, who needs many lessons in tact as well.
Registered: Sep 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
Mike T
Member
Member # 23
|
posted 10-30-2000 01:29 AM
Hi, All. What is tact? I once was told that "Diplomacy was to do and say; The nastiest things in the nicest way." I guess this means that we want our opinions understood and appreciated (and accepted) without hurting or damaging others with possibly diametrical opinions. I think that the only thing that one can do is remember that we are all friends here, whether or not we have ever met, hugged, kissed or shared a drink. We have a common goal, and this is shared to a greater or lesser extent with everyone who has ever had an interest in out area of study, from the kid who loved "Prince Valiant" in the Sunday comix to the guy who is the current multiple Phd author of the latest research paper that we would sell our whatever to get ahold of. I don't know how this helps us all get along, as we are, by nature, vicious and devious, but it might help to remember. I am a Mason, and sometimes I see a fellow Mason who is, in so many words, not quite what I thought of as a Mason, yet I will gladly help this person if he is in need, because he is my Brother. Bob can probably tell you about the ACW history of Masonic Fellowship. I sometimes have to remind myself that I am in a similar boat with the historical community, not because of any oath I took, but because of a common goal I assume these other folks have. God knows, I have bitched up a storm or two over the years. The good thing is that, for the most part, the sin is of omission and ignorance, which can be helped. The other part, the bad feelings and the accusations of superiority complexes, can only be helped in the same way that segregation is being fought, and that is with the truth that we may seem different, but inside, we are all pretty much the same. Mike T. (hoping not to remain in this serious mood too long)
Registered: May 2000 | IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
