So I just spent some time rereading the whole thread, as suggested.
And what I find most interesting is the clear sea change in this thread. It started out with a good discussion going on. Funny how people could disagree with each other, and work out disagreements and misunderstandings just fine.
(not to mention that I asked the admin if what was posted had any merit to the discussion)
Oh, please don’t let my lack of response to that one lead you to believe that I agreed with you. Oh, on the contrary. Let’s take a look at that little exchange, shall we?
I'll quote the whole post instead of just the sound byte you quoted:
Dude, you're really coming across as though you're hacked off about something that has obviously gone on. And the easiest way to deal with it is via PM, rather than continuing in a thread where you accept but disagree with member's ideas. This is a circle and we can go round and round all day long, but we'll be covering the same ground.
You asked for people's opinions. You got people's opinions. If you're looking for a way to justify or clarify the term bullying you might as well start writing a book. As you've just said todays standards of a bully is different. In the past it was the kid who stole your lunch money, nowadays people can be bullying verbally and virtually.
Speaking of internet Bullying. Just this week in the UK, a girl was imprisioned for a death-threat of another girl as her facebook status.
So let’s look at that post. A) Yes, she’s calling you on the fact that when you came back into this thread after starting it, it does look like you’re out to settle some personal score. Both times I’ve read this thread, I came to the exact same conclusion. Granted, I have a little more information about it than EWR does. You can disagree with her if you want to, and tell her she’s wrong, but it
does merit saying that
if you were indeed pissed off about something, that taking it to that person rather than making thinly veiled comments about it in this thread, is a better course of action. B) She suggests that trying to narrowly define bullying is near impossible. Fair point. C) She comments on how the definition of bullying (for some) has changed over the years. Her opinion, but a valid one. D) She gave an example of something on the internet that had been construed as bullying or some variant thereof. Clearly does add to the discussion and could have been a jumping off point for further discussion.
So as you can see, there was a lot of merit in that post, that had very little to do with attacking you.
And now let’s look at your response:
And you're coming across as someone who was too lazy/ignorant to read the first post in the topic. Communication is how we exchange thoughts, ideas, discuss subjects. Its the whole point for the forum. To communicate. I've posted 3 maybe 4 times in this topic for the above reasons, perhaps you shouldn't have bothered.
Hmm, how do you know she didn’t read the first thread in the post? She’s commented multiple times in this thread. How come it’s just this post that makes her lazy/ignorant? Also, what part of her post even suggests that she
hasn’t read the first post? How would reading the first post change her read on the situation? If it’s because you said it’s not about you – you also say in the first post that you feel you were unjustly called a bully. I wonder why she might not really believe that this is not about you, after reading that and your subsequent posts?
The condescension is a really nice addition to the name-calling though. Way to try and make her feel stupid. And I’d like to know why her opinion is worth so little that she “shouldn’t have bothered”?
Okay, let’s continue, I then said this:
Hmm...one could argue that your post is a perfect example of berating other people into not challenging you anymore...
I stand by that. It is a
possible read of your exchange. I also never used the term “bully” here, though subsequently I seem to be accused of calling you such. But let’s see, you called EWR lazy, ignorant, and stupid enough to need the word “communication” defined for her. Oh, and told she shouldn’t have bothered to post in the thread. Hmm, sounds like berating someone to me.
Then you said this:
What part of what she said, with regards to my posts in this topic, had any merit Buffy? Absolutely nada. Not to mention she misunderstood what I meant by todays standards.
Then you say, "I'm sorry, but I think you misunderstood what I meant by 'today's standards'. What I was trying to say was..." The first question I have already answered above. .
Alright, so now we move on the “Schillaci is so persecuted” part of the thread.
Anyway, this thread is indicative of the very problem with this website, the 'cry wolf' nature of bullying, specifically regarding people who don't agree with you.
See, if you reread the thread, there was actually a lot of disagreeing going on in it, that went along just fine, until people started to be called names. Yes, sometimes people can get offended because of a misunderstanding. But sometimes, a spade’s a spade. And I do take offense at this, because I’ve defended BOTH of your rights to be here for years.
If you don't agree with someone and use words like ignorant or lazy, thats not bullying, that is having a different opinion and using words that you believe to be in the correct context.
Come on EB. Seriously? You seriously think he wasn’t making a derogatory comment there?
If you don't like being called ignorant, then you need to get your namby-pamby arse into the real world because everybody is ignorant of somethings.
That’s true, but saying, “And you're coming across as someone who was too lazy/ignorant to read the first post in the topic” (especially when that clearly is false) is different from saying, “I think you might just be ignorant of the fact that I have been bullied myself.”
Look at Schillaci response to EWR (who if you read the comment his response is for really ha misunderstood because Schillaci has explained in the thread what is going on and that its a discussion, not about something that happened involving him).
I’ve already dealt with this part above. He says it’s not about something involving him but it is easy to think differently based on his comments in this thread.
Break down what your actual problem is with his comment?
There isn't actually anything wrong with it - calling someone ignorant of the facts is not wrong, particularly if they are giving an opinion on something and they haven't read the whole debate.
Calling someone lazy is not wrong, particularly if they could simply read a few comments to make them able to understand what is going on.
I’ve read the whole thread (twice) and I came to the same conclusion as she did. And I’ve said already that calling someone ignorant and ignorant of the facts are two different things and it was not the latter that we saw here.
Nah, this thread shows the exact reason this forum is declining, one incident has happened and people want to jump on a bandwagon.
Actually, this thread was going along fine until the two of you started making this personal.
I say grow up, get a tougher skin and go outside a bit more!
So why does everyone else need to get a thicker skin, but Schillaci has every right (in your opinion) to go after EWR the way he did? Shouldn’t he just have gotten a thicker skin?
I personally love how members of a forum can get irate over people suggesting that members should get a tougher skin, then get very aggressive.
Hey don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.
The people who need to get a tougher skin are the very people who can't seem to appreciate that being called ignorant isn't being rude, it is stating a fact.
Again, depends on how you say it.
If it upsets you that people use words correctly, then you really need to toughen up.
I can use the word “asshole” correctly. Doesn’t mean I should.
People here might like to live in a world wear everything is sugar-coated and then claim to be bullied by someone who cuts through the bullshit and says it as it is, but thats not anyone buts the one wh is offendeds problem.
Wrong. It’s everyone’s problem when a couple of people think they can treat others however they’d like and then hide behind saying they’re just “telling it like it is”.
Heck the owner of the forum started a thread about how young is too young to watch Buffy and she had to start it by acknowledging that it might cause arguments.
Don’t twist my words to suit your case. I wasn’t concerned that it would start arguments, but that
like in this thread people would get personal about it rather than arguing points of view. There’s a difference, which some people still don’t seem to get.
Thats the place you guys have created, thats the forum that currently stands because people get so easily offended by what others say.
Its pathetic, it really is.
Yes, it is pathetic, that people are treated as such that they have to get offended at all.
Schillaci said:
I'm not even going to reply to you here Buffy, because to you, all I am is a lying crap talking belittling bully - of course none of these are insults..
Oh, I'm sorry, maybe you need to
toughen up. And after making that statement, are you honestly still going with this facade that this whole thing is not about a personal incident that happened to you? Because funny how you made that same comment to me before, during that personal incident…
Once again taking what I said and twisting it completely out of context(and not understanding part of what I was saying), just as what most people have done here trying to attack me. Ignoring the gargantuan double standard being applied to my posts and the posts about me, which, for the third time now, I never wanted this topic to be about me.
First, glad that you are allowed to take what other people say and twist it but you’re going to criticize someone else for allegedly doing it.
Second, no one here was attacking you, until YOU started attacking others. Maybe YOU need to reread this thread.
Third, you never wanted this to be about you? Then why do you keep making it personal? And double standard? You want to be able to call other people whatever names you want to and then expect us to keep others from calling you arrogant? Doesn’t work that way. Or are you suggesting that the people disagreeing with your earlier posts were attacking you?
Its arrogant to defend yourself, and express your ideas with conviction, but it is not arrogant to accuse someone of being intentionally misleading by using this topic to 'air dirty laundry', nor is is apparently ignorant to post an assumption in a topic when the person hasn't properly read the topic.
If you reread her post, she wasn’t accusing you of anything but having a personal issue going on that would better be resolved by talking to the person (let’s just come right out and say it – me) rather than trying to get it resolved clandestinely in this thread. And as said above, there’s nothing to suggest that she hadn’t properly read the topic.
So here's the bottom line.
Feel free to discuss bullying. Try to define it, say what it is or isn't. But everyone here is entitled to their say. Leave the personal comments and condescension at home.
If you don't think discussing bullying has any value, then don't discuss it. But other people have the right to talk about it if they want to.
If you just want to dump on this site, go elsewhere. It's clearly established that here we expect people to treat each other with respect. If you don't like that, or can't do that, go elsewhere.
There is plenty of rudeness and cruelty in the real world and people don't deserve to have to deal with it here too for no reason. "Sugar coating"? Maybe. But it's much better than having to read what's happened to this thread all over the board.
