Subject: I apologise, since that's how you interpret it.
Author:
Posted on: 2013-07-02 13:20:00 UTC
In fact, I apologise specifically for whatever aspects of my writing are giving you that impression. They were not intended. I was attempting to have a rational conversation, and took your statements very seriously indeed. I wish that had come across.
I do not know what actions you have taken. You indicate in this post that you have told people about the issues you are having - good. That's the first step. I do not know who those people were, except that they weren't me. I do not know if you have asked people who are causing you problems to stop and apologise.
Except right now. You have indicated that you find me condescending. To the best of my recollection, this is the first time you have said this to me. So: I apologise for coming across as condescending. I am not trying to be condescending. I am trying to help you find a solution to the problems you are having with the community. I believe that solution is inherent in the Constitution we follow - the principle of openness, of telling people when there's a problem and asking them to stop. If people have been ignoring you when you raise a legitimate grievance with them, or when you ask someone else to do so for you, that is a problem. Specifically, it's a problem covered by the Constitution.
I do not want to get into an argument with you. I stepped into this thread when it looked like it was heating up, to point out the solutions found in the Constitution. I did so because said Constitution tells me I could, and because it seemed that you had either been attacked or believed you had. I stepped in on your side.
You then took that opportunity to lay out your belief that, as I understand it, there are times when people cause serious problems in the PPC and get away with a wrist-slap. You did add that you weren't talking about Desdendelle, which left me without any idea who you were talking about, if indeed you were talking about someone specific.
I pointed out what I've said in this post, too: that if you're the only one to see a problem in someone's actions, you're the one who needs to start the process of correcting them - or punishing them, if that's what's necessary. My questions - 'have you asked them to stop? Have you explained what they're doing wrong?' - were not rhetorical questions, which I think is how you're reading them, and why you may see them as condescending. They were actual questions, intended to find out how big a problem this actually is. If you haven't done those things, then perhaps the people you were talking about don't know about it. If you have, and they are still doing it, then we have a serious problem. I was trying to find out that information, because it would help me to support you in getting people to stop. Again, I was on your side.
So: once again, I apologise for coming across as condescending. That was not my intent. If you have an issue with anyone else's current actions, this might be a good opportunity to make those concerns clear, as well. The PPC cannot hold up if people feel they have to let people get to them in the interests of preserving the peace (honourable though that intention is). If someone is causing trouble, they need to be told (in case they don't know), asked to stop, and if they refuse, a solution needs to be sought.
hS
PS: No, I don't feel threatened. I'm not sure why I would, you didn't say anything threatening. But thank you for apologising.