OT: Time out and/or Duke it out thread

[Lucyhere]

Rs and Pugsy...

After reading your responses, I don't see any reason to continue this particular discussion. Questioning or challenging what you said or defending my views would be of no value.

Bottom line... you do what your conscience dictates and I'll do what my conscience dictates. In the end, that's what we are all going to do anyway.

[Julie]

Just curious about something... I've posted before about certain situations where the kind of behaviour you (P, R-S, etc.) refer to has been addressed now many times, but there's another type of post which can be just as disruptive if not either taken here (though there's no actual 'fight' going on) or ignored, if only because the butt of the post by a perpetrator can be really insulting, humiliating, etc. etc. to another and 'just' ignoring does not feel like an option to the person being attacked. How can you take that to this thread when what happens is purely gratuitous and nasty without e.g. using some of the language you deem to be worthy of 'duking out'? Why should the offended party just leave things as they are, walk away, etc.. and not be 'allowed' some comeback? Maybe we grew up in different places or something, but something feels out of whack here. I'm NOT defending deletions... that's already been addressed, but what to do about situations like these otherwise has not (except for being told to ignore them).

[jnk...]

Just curious about something... I've posted before about certain situations where the kind of behaviour you (P, R-S, etc.) refer to has been addressed now many times, but there's another type of post which can be just as disruptive if not either taken here (though there's no actual 'fight' going on) or ignored, if only because the butt of the post by a perpetrator can be really insulting, humiliating, etc. etc. to another and 'just' ignoring does not feel like an option to the person being attacked. How can you take that to this thread when what happens is purely gratuitous and nasty without e.g. using some of the language you deem to be worthy of 'duking out'? Why should the offended party just leave things as they are, walk away, etc.. and not be 'allowed' some comeback? Maybe we grew up in different places or something, but something feels out of whack here. I'm NOT defending deletions... that's already been addressed, but what to do about situations like these otherwise has not (except for being told to ignore them).

Here is what one cop recommends to other cops for whenever people try to provoke them into doing or saying something that would escalate a bad situation:

How to Stay in Control When You Really Want to React

The main problem with reacting is that it may not lead you to the best course of action and outcome. Here are some suggestions that might help you reach a positive outcome:

1. Know your own triggers. Being human means just that; you are not infallible. Everyone has a bad day and everyone has buttons that can be pushed. In order to lower the number of bad days, know what sets you off. Understand that these triggers are used against you and not for you.

2. Pause. Many times you don't have to act right away. Breathe, quiet down the reaction voices screaming in your head, and focus instead on what needs to be done.

3. Think. What separates us from the rest of the animal world is our ability to think. We can choose our behaviors before we do them.

4. Observe outcomes. One of my wife's favorite sayings is, "…and how did that work out for you?" She usually says that when I react instead of respond. Look at what you've done in the past. If it didn't turn out well, then ask yourself why you are still doing the same things.

5. Work on a better response. Since you know what your buttons are, practice your response. Visualization is no longer some new-age mumbo jumbo but a proven technique used by champions and warriors alike.

6. Give yourself a break. If you do end up reacting, learn from it instead of beating yourself up over it. Life's best lessons are often learned the hard way. Wisdom doesn't come naturally; it's earned by dealing with life's obstacles.

7. Stop blaming and start fixing. Stop pointing fingers at people and start defining problems so you can be part of the solution. It's easy to get caught up in the fault game but it does no good in the end. All it does is waste valuable time and fuel emotional reactions.

8. Stop taking things so personally. Many of the comments from the street toward law enforcement come from ignorance. Not that everyone is stupid, but many people don't understand the law, policies, and what we actually do for a living. Their reactions tend not to have anything to do with you and everything to do with the situation they think they find themselves in.

9. Make a play for middle ground. Start looking for commonality and work from there. Middle ground is a good starting point. Stop looking at it from the perspective of "them vs. us."

10. Respond with purpose. If all you're going to do is inflame a situation, then keep your mouth shut. If what you say and do is not going forward toward a solution, then I would get some help as soon as possible and take a step back. Let somebody less sensitive to the current situation take lead. Laurence J. Peter, in his book "The Peter Principle," said it best: "Speak when you are angry and you'll make the best speech you'll ever regret."

-- Departments : Best Practices For...Responding vs. Reacting -- Choose to take action based on logic, not emotion. October 07, 2014 by Amaury Murgado

http://www.policemag.com/channel/career ... cting.aspx

[Julie]

JNK - I respect you and so much of what you say, but while there are certainly some wise things in what you posted here, not all really apply to what I'm talking about and I don't necessarily feel so much 'provoked' by the 'other' as simply insulted by someone with no reason at all (except that she didn't like my correcting her medical knowledge) and her nasty response was gratuitous... she wasn't looking to fight, more to humiliate, to taunt, etc... my problem was leaving what she said 'out there' for the world to see - even if only for a day til it disappeared - without validly having some kind of rebuttal, but it would have descended into he said, she said if the obvious (to me) ones were used... in other words I STILL don't know (short of ignoring things) what a useful comeback would have been... THAT's what I've been asking for here all this time. Something to either get an apology out of her, someone perhaps to back up what I'd said, or a way to get her to amend her note. I don't know or I wouldn't be asking. I'm just not sure the cop manual is the way to go in this situation , not quite appropriate.

[jnk...]

JNK - I respect you and so much of what you say, but while there are certainly some wise things in what you posted here, not all really apply to what I'm talking about and I don't necessarily feel so much 'provoked' by the 'other' as simply insulted by someone with no reason at all (except that she didn't like my correcting her medical knowledge) and her nasty response was gratuitous... she wasn't looking to fight, more to humiliate, to taunt, etc... my problem was leaving what she said 'out there' for the world to see - even if only for a day til it disappeared - without validly having some kind of rebuttal, but it would have descended into he said, she said if the obvious (to me) ones were used... in other words I STILL don't know (short of ignoring things) what a useful comeback would have been... THAT's what I've been asking for here all this time. Something to either get an apology out of her, someone perhaps to back up what I'd said, or a way to get her to amend her note. I don't know or I wouldn't be asking. I'm just not sure the cop manual is the way to go in this situation , not quite appropriate.

I believe it to be VERY appropriate for those who consider the usefulness of threads to be infinitely more important than their own personal reputations. For those who view it otherwise, I have no solutions to offer them either. Sorry.

I still say, though, for the situation you describe, the best thing is often simply to ignore the snarkiness and just to reply with something like: "It appears we may have a difference of opinion on this, but I will let my statement stand as is. Thanks."

I think you might be surprised just how much replies like that to nastiness can increase your reputation over time as someone no one can provoke down into the gutter with them.

And for the record, I respect you too, Julie. I think you and I may be coming at all this from different angles but aren't really that far apart on the goals. And I would define your goals as whatever you chose as the primary reason(s) in the "why are you here" poll. That was basically what it was for.

[palerider]

steaming piles of vindictive vitriol

followed by this in the sig:
"be kind... takes so much less energy."
now, *that* is funny.

[jnk...]

steaming piles of vindictive vitriol

followed by this in the sig:
"be kind... takes so much less energy."
now, *that* is funny.

Well, if we're critiquing sig lines, the sentiment of "my attitude depends on who YOU are" is certainly understandable but nevertheless could imply that someone lets others choose his way of dealing with them. I would suggest that choosing one's own attitude and way of dealing with others might be a greater position of strength and happiness and productivity. However, I consider it an inalienable right for you to choose your own approach to all that. And I would not hesistate to express heartfelt commendation and admiration for your demeanor in recent days, for whatever my sentiments are or aren't worth to you. I have on many occasions been humbled and impressed when I've seen how amazingly insightful and helpful you have been to some posters. I just hope my saying so publicly doesn't make you gag. Because I'm sure Jim (along with some others) is gagging like the dickens at this very moment.

[grayghost4]

Julie .... the only response to a TROLL and or GUEST is no response.

We all know who and what they are !

[robysue]

Just curious about something... I've posted before about certain situations where the kind of behaviour you (P, R-S, etc.) refer to has been addressed now many times, but there's another type of post which can be just as disruptive if not either taken here (though there's no actual 'fight' going on) or ignored, if only because the butt of the post by a perpetrator can be really insulting, humiliating, etc. etc. to another and 'just' ignoring does not feel like an option to the person being attacked. How can you take that to this thread when what happens is purely gratuitous and nasty without e.g. using some of the language you deem to be worthy of 'duking out'? Why should the offended party just leave things as they are, walk away, etc.. and not be 'allowed' some comeback? Maybe we grew up in different places or something, but something feels out of whack here. I'm NOT defending deletions... that's already been addressed, but what to do about situations like these otherwise has not (except for being told to ignore them). (emphasis added)

I understand that you think you should have the right to respond to any and all attacks. But here's the thing I keep coming back to: There's this thing that Jesus told his followers:

"You have heard that it was said, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also." (Matthew 5:38-39)

Turning the other cheek is a powerful idea, but it's what I believe we are asked to do when others insult and attack us, particularly in a gratuitous fashion. It's not an easy thing to do: The natural reaction to being attacked is to attack right back in an effort to defend ourselves. And yet, Jesus is correct: Turning the other cheek is a better solution than insisting on extracting our pound of flesh when someone attacks us.

Now I can't make you or anybody else turn the other cheek when attacked. But I do have the right to ask you to consider turning the other cheek when you are attacked. And you and everybody else has the right to ignore my request. But again, I still have the right to ask that you turn the other cheek instead of hijacking a helping thread.

I'd also like to quote jnk's comments to your post:

Here is what one cop recommends to other cops for whenever people try to provoke them into doing or saying something that would escalate a bad situation:

How to Stay in Control When You Really Want to React

The main problem with reacting is that it may not lead you to the best course of action and outcome. Here are some suggestions that might help you reach a positive outcome:

1. Know your own triggers. Being human means just that; you are not infallible. Everyone has a bad day and everyone has buttons that can be pushed. In order to lower the number of bad days, know what sets you off. Understand that these triggers are used against you and not for you.

2. Pause. Many times you don't have to act right away. Breathe, quiet down the reaction voices screaming in your head, and focus instead on what needs to be done.

3. Think. What separates us from the rest of the animal world is our ability to think. We can choose our behaviors before we do them.

4. Observe outcomes. One of my wife's favorite sayings is, "…and how did that work out for you?" She usually says that when I react instead of respond. Look at what you've done in the past. If it didn't turn out well, then ask yourself why you are still doing the same things.

5. Work on a better response. Since you know what your buttons are, practice your response. Visualization is no longer some new-age mumbo jumbo but a proven technique used by champions and warriors alike.

6. Give yourself a break. If you do end up reacting, learn from it instead of beating yourself up over it. Life's best lessons are often learned the hard way. Wisdom doesn't come naturally; it's earned by dealing with life's obstacles.

7. Stop blaming and start fixing. Stop pointing fingers at people and start defining problems so you can be part of the solution. It's easy to get caught up in the fault game but it does no good in the end. All it does is waste valuable time and fuel emotional reactions.

8. Stop taking things so personally. Many of the comments from the street toward law enforcement come from ignorance. Not that everyone is stupid, but many people don't understand the law, policies, and what we actually do for a living. Their reactions tend not to have anything to do with you and everything to do with the situation they think they find themselves in.

9. Make a play for middle ground. Start looking for commonality and work from there. Middle ground is a good starting point. Stop looking at it from the perspective of "them vs. us."

10. Respond with purpose. If all you're going to do is inflame a situation, then keep your mouth shut. If what you say and do is not going forward toward a solution, then I would get some help as soon as possible and take a step back. Let somebody less sensitive to the current situation take lead. Laurence J. Peter, in his book "The Peter Principle," said it best: "Speak when you are angry and you'll make the best speech you'll ever regret."

-- Departments : Best Practices For...Responding vs. Reacting -- Choose to take action based on logic, not emotion. October 07, 2014 by Amaury Murgado

http://www.policemag.com/channel/career ... cting.aspx

These are useful tips for figuring out when to "turn the other cheek" (i.e. not respond), when to respond, and when necessary how to respond so that your response does not make a bad situation worse by reacting rather than responding.

You wrote this back to jnk:

JNK - I respect you and so much of what you say, but while there are certainly some wise things in what you posted here, not all really apply to what I'm talking about and I don't necessarily feel so much 'provoked' by the 'other' as simply insulted by someone with no reason at all (except that she didn't like my correcting her medical knowledge) and her nasty response was gratuitous... she wasn't looking to fight, more to humiliate, to taunt, etc... my problem was leaving what she said 'out there' for the world to see - even if only for a day til it disappeared - without validly having some kind of rebuttal, but it would have descended into he said, she said if the obvious (to me) ones were used... in other words I STILL don't know (short of ignoring things) what a useful comeback would have been...

Sometimes the best comeback is no comeback at all. In other words, I think this is a case where you would have been much better off just turning the other cheek.

You had already publicly corrected the medical information in Poster A's post. So after Poster A made the gratuitous attack, anyone reading the thread could see Poster A's original post, your correction to that information, and Poster A's attack on you. Had you chosen to ignore the personal attack, anybody reading the thread had plenty of information to figure out whether you or Poster A was posting reasonably correct medical information.

Julie, please do not take this the wrong way: When you decided to assuage your bruised ego with an attack of your own, you got down in the mud too. And your choice to get down in the mud then reflected (very) badly on you. In other words, your counter attacking did more to damage your reputation than the original attack by Poster A did.

THAT's what I've been asking for here all this time. Something to either get an apology out of her, someone perhaps to back up what I'd said, or a way to get her to amend her note. I don't know or I wouldn't be asking. I'm just not sure the cop manual is the way to go in this situation , not quite appropriate.

[/quote]You can ask another person for an apology. Once you ask for an apology, the other person can either choose to apologize or not. But you cannot force someone to apologize to you. And nobody on the forum can force Person A to apologize to Person B.

If you ask for an apology and the other person refuses to apologize you have a choice: You can continue to harp on the issue or you can let it go. It's up to you.

[robysue]

Rs and Pugsy...

After reading your responses, I don't see any reason to continue this particular discussion. Questioning or challenging what you said or defending my views would be of no value.

Bottom line... you do what your conscience dictates and I'll do what my conscience dictates. In the end, that's what we are all going to do anyway.

Lucy,

You are entitled to your opinion. We are entitled to ours.

You can choose to do what you want to do. And we can continue to shake our heads and say, "Why????" when what you keep doing is not effective at "fixing" the problem you want to fix and can be regarded by others (not just myself and Pugsy) as contributing to the very problem you want to fix.

[Julie]

Sure, but ... I'm an atheist so will go stick my head in the sand someplace... not going to get an answer I can relate to because the OP was not a troll in the usual sense, just nasty. And I'm definitely over it, was just interested in what others might have to say, but few have jumped in, so will stop beating this poor horse.

[palerider]

Sure, but ... I'm an atheist so will go stick my head in the sand someplace... not going to get an answer I can relate to because the OP was not a troll in the usual sense, just nasty. And I'm definitely over it, was just interested in what others might have to say, but few have jumped in, so will stop beating this poor horse.

one does not have to be "christian" to recognize good advice in peacefully getting along with others, and 'not feeding the trolls'.

[jnk...]

The basic principles of nonviolence are often adopted for political, social, or pragmatic reasons completely independent of religious or ethical beliefs or the lack thereof.

[Julie]

Should have said of course there's loads of great advice in all religions (I'm usually lost in endless arguments with my bro., an RC priest) but maybe have a problem because of that... a little too knee-jerk when presented with answers from that space... sorry, don't take it personally.

[robysue]

Sure, but ... I'm an atheist so will go stick my head in the sand someplace... not going to get an answer I can relate to because the OP was not a troll in the usual sense, just nasty. And I'm definitely over it, was just interested in what others might have to say, but few have jumped in, so will stop beating this poor horse.

one does not have to be "christian" to recognize good advice in peacefully getting along with others, and 'not feeding the trolls'.

PaleRider thank you for pointing this out.

The basic principles of nonviolence are often adopted for political, social, or pragmatic reasons completely independent of religious or ethical beliefs or the lack thereof.

Jnk, thank you for pointing this out.

Julie, if you are offended just because I quoted a passage of the bible that states a major part of polite behavior in many cultures regardless of religious or ethical beliefs, I am sorry. I am not a very religious person, but I do find many of Jesus's teachings (as well as the Budda's teachings and many others) particularly meaningful in own struggle to define ethical behavior.

I also believe that atheists can have strong ethical and moral systems that are built on a variety of (nonreligious) sources, either implicitly or explicitly. And many atheists that I know have given a lot of thought to what they believe is ethical or moral behavior towards their fellow human beings and have ways to justify their ethical beliefs and moral that do not rely on the existence of a god that they do not believe in.