Subject: I have no desire to be involved. But.
Author:
Posted on: 2013-07-02 12:35:00 UTC
I'm sure you didn't mean to, but the tone of that last post comes across as being extremely condescending. As I'm sure you would never treat a fellow PPC-er like a small child in need of a reprimand, I won't make an issue of it. You might double-check in the future, though, so this won't happen again. Thanks muchly.
-Riese
(Because we don't have enough OTness. Also because music is awesome as long as it isn't from the trance genre.)
Sergio is probably going to recognise this awesome piece of music.
This entire playlist:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLbVqFwThQGQ7hfKNKITVFD-G9UGwSGQtL
Fate/Zero OST maaaaaagic :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cknbpy2WZB8
A sad, but powerful song. Fits Kiritsugu perfectly.
Plugging to my video game library's finest via YouTube:
Mass Effect 2's "Suicide Mission" theme, performed by the London Philharmonic.
Mass Effect 3's "Leaving Earth." Game OST.
The Legend of Zelda's "Gerudo Valley," performed by an orchestra for 25 years of Zelda.
The Legend of Zelda's "Song of Storms." Game OST. MAKE IT RAIN
Portal 2's "The Part Where he Kills You." Game OST.
Team Fortress 2's "Meet the Medic." Game OST.
Half-Life's "Nuclear Mission Jam." Game OST.
Half-Life 2's "CP Violation." Game OST.
StarCraft's "Terran 1." Game OST.
/obnoxious dump
I'd also like to plug this really great StarCraft-based animated series run by Carbot animations while I'm at it.
Have a look at my favourite episode!
One of the best Ace Combat OSTs ever.
I just so happen to like trance.
I guess we can agree to disagree or something. I despise trance.
I have an issue with you dismissing an entire genre of music.
Why not agree to interpret the original statement as "please don't post trance in this thread" and move on?
Well, first of all, outright dismissing an entire genre of music is generally regarded as Not Cool. Especially in a place as varied as the PPC, you're going to offend somebody.
So, yeah, no, I will call somebody out on being a jerk.
Second, this particular bit of the thread has had no response in about four days, and as you said, you don't have a dog in this fight... so why did you post this?
Third, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFzIAkPZ2gg It's a music thread, and I'll plug music if I want to.
Because Desdendelle knows Tray-Gnome recs trance music in the chat, so Des singling out trance as not-awesome looks a *lot* like a passive-aggressive jab, and passive-aggressive jabs fall under "being a jerk" in my book at least.
According to the Constitution, I have these things to say:
1/ According to Article 7, we have the equivalent of an 'assume good faith' policy. I have no idea of the context, so you'll have to judge for yourself whether it is possible Desdendelle was making a joke. I make no judgement or comment as to whether you have done so.
2/ According to Article 1, 'attack[ing] others in any form' is forbidden. If Desdendelle's comment was intended as a 'passive-aggressive jab' at Tray-Gnome, then that was wrong.
3/ According to Article 5, 'All respectful opinions that do not attack, insult, or persecute others (see Article 1) are welcome'. Thus, Desdendelle is entitled to hold the opinion that 'trance' is bad, and to express that opinion in this community. However, although not explicitly stated (and that's something we should take not of for the next Constitutional Committee), it is assumed that opinions should be stated respectfully and as an opinion. Again I make no judgement or comment, but note that Tray-Gnome and Lilac Lielac believe the opinion was not stated respectfully, but as a 'passive-aggressive jab'.
4/ According to Article 4, anyone in violation of the Constitution is to be given a chance to 'stop and apologise'. Note that there is no clause stating that offending someone is, in and of itself, a violation of the Constitution. People can be offended by many things. However, if someone causes offense by violating the Constitution (in this context, by 'otherwise attacking' another member), that is grounds for a stop-and-apologise. In this case the 'stop' part appears to have already happened.
5/ According to Article 9, 'The PPC as a community is responsible for upholding the Community'. So, here's me. Desdendelle, if you are still reading, please contact Tray-Gnome (here, in private, in the IRC, any way) and either clear up the matter to both your satisfactions, or apologise and be done with it.
6/ According to Article 9, 'Grudges are no fun!'. So let's not anyone hold any, please.
This has been your Constitutional Lawyering of the Week.
hS
We have an issue, and I mean a serious issue with dealing with people. Sometimes, people do bad things, or say things that hurt other people. A slap on the wrist is fine when it's only once in a blue moon, but when it's a serious issue, what do we do?
We keep slapping their wrists.
This is not a method of getting people to stop being a problem, since there's no real punishment.
Yes, punishing somebody is a big deal. But at some point, it's something we need to start doing. I'm not suggesting banning anybody, and this isn't in response to des, but it is a general observation that I really think needs to be said.
We've let it get away from us in the past, so maybe it's time to... well, at least consider a change.
Now, the Constitution points out several times that the responsibility for upholding it lies on the community. I have not noticed people being a problem, barring this instance in which I just did what the Constitution requires. If you have noticed people being a problem, have you asked them to stop? Have you explained what they're doing wrong?
We do have procedures in place for people who keep breaking the rules. If you are the only one noticing it, then the responsibility, I'm afraid, lies on you to start the process of fixing it. That's how it works when other people don't notice things.
hS
When I replied to you, I was kind of hoping for rational conversation, or, at the very least, respect for what I was saying.
But oop, nope, I get condescending. Thank you for that.
But, while I'm here, I may as well take your bait. You want some of my problems? Fine. I will give you some of my goddamn problems.
First of all, Nesh. Yes, I am still on about this. You know why, or at least you should, since you said you would talk to her about it. But, since the opportunity arises, I am going to be blunt.
I only came back because I thought she was gone. You want to know why I'm not on the Board that often, and why I avoid the wiki altogether? Funnily enough, it's because I don't feel safe there. There is a reason why I'm only in the chat, and that's because it's the only place in the PPC where Neshomeh isn't.
Second, you. Yes, you. And your post, right here, illustrates why!
You're a condescending ass. Especially when people say something you disagree with. Seriously, your post there? It's a step above "clamping hands on ears and shouting" when people say something you don't like.
Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? Do you really think I just go around, blaming people willy-nilly? Do you think I'm a child? Do you really think that I haven't told people about the issues I'm having?
Well, guess what, sunshine. I have. The problem is that nobody f***ing listens to me.
Oh, and, while I'm on bluntly honest mode, I'm just going to say this: I resign from DA position. Why? Because I've reached a point where I honestly feel like I'd have to kill myself in order for people to actually listen to me, let alone take me seriously.
I'm sorry if voicing how I feel makes you feel threatened. That's all I have to say about this.
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.
First things first.
I have never seen a more lazy attempt at an apology.
"I'm sorry, since that's how you interpret it."
Is less of a "I'm sorry for being condescending" and more of a "I'm sorry you see me as condescending".
Additionally, you can't say "I apologise specifically for whatever" because then you've both claimed you're regretful of a specific action, and claimed you have no idea what you should be regretful over.
Secondly.
I don't think you know what condescending means, because if you did, one would think you'd tone it down a bit, at least in the post where you're apologizing for being seen as condescending.
Thirdly.
I find it kind of funny, that your response to Tray raising a grievance with you, and mentioning that people have been ignoring them; is to ignore them, and point out that people ignoring them is a problem covered by the constitution.
Fouthly
That was not, in fact, the first time you've been told you were condescending. It wasn't the first time you were told by Tray, and it wasn't even the first time you've been told in this thread.
Someone is causing trouble. Said person has now been told. Said person has been asked to stop. You haven't so much as "refused to stop" as much as you have ignored the claim more or less wholesale. I think a solution needs to be sought.
I apologise specifically for whatever aspects of my writing are giving you that impression. They were not intended.
So: I apologise for coming across as condescending. I am not trying to be condescending.
once again, I apologise for coming across as condescending. That was not my intent.
My understanding of condescending is that it is a deliberate attitude: Wiktionary says 'Assuming a tone of superiority, or a patronizing attitude.' At no point in this thread have I felt myself superior to anyone, or attempted to patronize them. I am not being condescending. I may sound condescending, which I have apologised for. Yes, I am sorry people see me as condescending: as I stated repeatedly in that post, I did not intend to come across that way, and so I am sorry for sounding that way. I would love to apologise for the specific thing that led to Tray-Gnome and Riese seeing my comment as condescending, but I can't, because I wasn't being sharding condescending and don't know what they're referring to. I tried to get that point across without breaking down and shouting at people - in fact, I apologised four times in that post, and deliberately kept my response calm and rational rather than complaining that I was actually being flamed, but hey, to Mandos with that - if you don't want me to be calm and 'condescending', let's try upset instead? Better?
I am not being condescending. I have not at any point in this thread attempted to be condescending, or to come across as condescending, or to write in such as way as to be condescending. I apologise sincerely and yet again for writing in such a way that people are interpreting it as condescending. I am not, and have not, laid the blame for that on them.
hS
Assume, Verb: Take or begin to have.
No where in the definition of condescending does it presuppose intent.
Rather then get upset, perhaps you should dissect your own posts, and see if you can find out why several different people, on several different accounts have thought you were being condescending.
Maybe it has something to do with the fact that you offered the most basic of advice, that only a child wouldn't think of, thereby implying the person you were talking to was a child.
"If you have noticed people being a problem, have you asked them to stop? Have you explained what they're doing wrong?"
You said those weren't rhetorical questions. The fact that they weren't is the problem.
"I apologise specifically for whatever aspects of my writing are giving you that impression. They were not intended."
"So: I apologise for coming across as condescending. I am not trying to be condescending."
"once again, I apologise for coming across as condescending. That was not my intent."
In none of those did you take responsibility of condescension, you shifted the blame onto the people who called you out on it.
Rather then ask /why/ you were being seen as condescending, you flipped it back into a "They're just wrong for thinking of me like this"
This isn't an attack on you, we just want you to understand how you sound, so that maybe you could change. If we said nothing, and allowed you to continue to hang yourself, having no idea how you were making people feel about you, then /that/ would be an attack.
((https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLBybw-IJ5U))
You're a condescending ass. [...] Seriously, your post there? It's a step above "clamping hands on ears and shouting" when people say something you don't like. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you? [...] Well, guess what, sunshine.
That isn't an attack?
So. 'Condescending' is now something I can be without intending to. Fine. Even though that definition means it specifically does not arise from any feeling of superiority or being patronizing - you know, the things I wasn't doing - and therefore is, quite literally, you having a problem with meaningless tone, I apologise for being condescending, according to your definition of the word.
hS
Suit yourself
Ignore our advice
Pretend that everyone thinking you're being condescending, has no impact on what people think of you. Continue to post as before.
I'd say that "no one will fault you for that" but, well, you know.
Word to the wise, intent is not a magic "get out of trouble free" card. If you hurt someone, you have hurt them. It's against the spirit of the Constitution to say "I'm sorry you were hurt by my words" instead of "I'm sorry I hurt you".
Interlude/Addendum/Forward: Tray and I talked while I was writing this out. He's leaving the 'Board, though I suppose that's all fairly obvious, but will stick around the IRC. So I don't expect him to read this; it is aimed at him and Poet merely because they were the ones involved. I would, however, like to take this opportunity to let everyone know that I am utterly done with tone patrolling. If you have a problem with the way someone here writes, unless they say something directly offensive or upsetting, keep it to yourself. "I don't like the sound of your voice" is not a valid reason to pick fights with someone in the physical world, and "I don't like the way you write" is an equally invalid reason to pick a fight here. I will also note that it's not my place to make this call, but I'm saying it anyway, because as per 'marketplace of ideas' theory, I suspect that others agree. And that is the end of my forward.
Poet, Tray, you are both stepping over the line here. I almost stepped in initially, a week or so ago, and went "Hey, I think Des was either being snarky, or mentioning a genre he dislikes," the same way Herr and others often talk about how they dislike modern genres, or some of us have jokingly discounted others' musical preferred genres. I felt like you were taking offense where none was intended, over something as broad as a genre, and was confused.
What you are doing now - both of you - is utterly and completely out of line. You repeatedly called Huinesoron condescending, Tray called him a condescending ass - and neither of you, at any point, gave a specific answer as to what he did that was condescending. And then you proceed to further attack him for an undefined offense. Come ON, folks. This is the equivalent of telling him you're offended by one of the words he used, without specifying which word, and then getting angrier and angrier when he keeps using a word that you haven't yet defined.
Let me try and get to the point.
Huinesoron has had an eloquent and specific way of talking for as long as I have known him. He has responded to every post this way, including posts made by Kaitlyn. He has responded with agreement, and disagreement, and jocular side-issues, all with the same level tone. Occasionally with smileys also. I have noticed that sometimes, when he is disagreeing or weighing in on a more complicated topic, he gets more specific in wording, and spells things out more carefully. I do the same thing - it is, I think, because when disagreeing or dealing with complicated issues, you really, really, really want to avoid miscommunication. I guess the way he does this comes off as condescending - but it's not. He's not talking down to you. I have never, ever, ever known Huinesoron to think of himself as superior, or to condescend to the people around him. I have never known Neshomeh to talk down to the people around her, or to condescend. The repeated assertions made about them, two people who I care about a great deal, have begun to make me very, very, very angry - and perhaps moreso because there is almost never any backup to this claim. I have never seen anyone give a specific example, even when they have been asked, with an air of "Please help me fix this." So here's a suggestion: stop. Stop throwing claims and accusations and issues with people around, unless you are going to dig up the evidence to support your issues.
I don't know how hS has not yet snapped and lost his mind with anger and hurt. I've seen jabs at him more in this past month or so than I've seen leveled at anyone in a long time.
And now that I've raged and Hulk'd and flailed like a rabid dog, let me back up to another thing: this is our home. It's your home, too. You, gentle reader, this is your home. I assume. Because I assume you are a PPC member.
This is my home. It is more of a home to me than the house where I was living when I joined, and I have been here longer than I was there. It is the place where I made many of my closest friends, and where I fell in love. It is one of the only places where I have consistently found companionship and safety and peace. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I believe one part or another of that sentence could be agreed upon by many of us.
We are not whole. None of us are whole. We joke about being insane, many of us, because it is easier and less painful than wailing and weeping about it. I know this goes for most of us, in one way or another. Life has scarred all of us, left us with sensitive places and jagged edges and nerves laid bare to the sun and the wind. Were we meeting in person, and able to see each other's faces, I suspect we would all know this within a few hours or days of companionship. But instead, we are able to hide behind words, and we forget that we are all wounded. Tray, I care about you. I am angry, I'm not going to deny that, but I know that you have been hurt and scarred and wounded by the life you've led. I know that the PPC is something of a haven for you. What I think you may be forgetting is that Huinesoron is also living in a painful and cruel world, and the PPC is also a haven and a home for him. The PPC is a haven and home for Neshomeh, too, and for me, and for so many of us. And we are constantly brushing up against each other's boundaries, because they are invisible and we are fragile, and so few of us even know when we've hurt each other. You can't usually tell by someone's text that they're hurt - and so we keep on shoving past that boundary.
So I ask you, all of you, to keep that in mind. Keep it in mind, I beg of you, that the person you are about to shout at has also walked through this sharp and cruel world, and they have also, for whatever reason, found a home here. Keep in mind that the person you are angry with needs a safe place and a haven as much as you. Try, please try not to assume that simply because the other person is typing calmly, they are actually calm, or worse, sneering at you. Please remember that we use humor to defuse situations we are unsure of, not as a way of putting down things we aren't taking seriously. Remember, always, that the other person has feelings and may well be in as much pain, or just as angry, as you.
He has responded to every post this way, including posts made by Kaitlyn.
This is how he talked at 4am this morning, when we were discussing the fact that the baby had woken up eight times already.
And Tray-Gnome, I know you've left and all, but I'm sure this will magically reach you by carrier pigeon: having personally observed hS's efforts to reach out to you, mend old wounds and make you feel comfortable in the PPC again -- the posts upthread were part of that, incidentally -- I am incredibly disappointed and somewhat stunned that you chose to jump to personal insults because you don't like the way he strings words together. It hurt him a lot. Shame on you.
I was gonna post something, but I was running it by some other people before I said it, and you got in first. I feel I should say it anyway.
"getting hurt is part of being friends with someone. it's a natural conclusion of opening your heart, what makes friendship worth it is if the other person regrets doing what hurt you.
I was too harsh with that last comment, and I am sorry for it. I regret posting it. I went past a line that I really should not have.
My significant other came to me, talking about giving up on the ppc because of how she was talked too, and when she responded to you, your response was "I'm sorry that you think I did that."
The second paragraph was about how I hurt you. The third was about how you hurt someone I cared about.
The two of us could go back and forth till we're blue in the face and can't think through our rage. Or, we could talk this out, in private or in public, to do what we can so that we're both better for it.
When you're enemies with someone, you use pain to bring them down, but when you're friends, you can learn from the pain, and become stronger from it.
Whether it was condescension, or an attack, or an accident, or whatever, is irrelevant. You hurt someone.
Whether it was from anger, or spite, or whatever, is irrelevant. I hurt you.
We both regret it, so apologies are done with. Now let's talk about it, so we can both be better from all this."
I can point to the exact wording that caused the impression of condescension, would you rather I do it here, via email, or in the chat?
And even less of a chance that I want upsetting emails in my inbox to greet me when I get home from work.
I guess that leaves here.
First things first. It wasn't how you said it, as much as it was what you said.
Secondly, if someone comes forward with a problem, you'd think they'd be met with respect, or at least a bit of consideration before "Let's make sure they remembered to do the most basic of steps first."
"have you asked them to stop? Have you explained what they're doing wrong?"
This line of thought is what really sounds condescending. Tray isn't four. And this kind of problem, about punishments being too light, the way that that gets fixed is by telling people, and making everyone aware of it. So when someone points it out that it's a problem (exactly like they're supposed to) and the response is "sorry, no one else notices so you have to go solve it on your own" it does in fact sound a lot like covering ears and refusing to listen.
Lastly, in her response, Tray said you were treating her like a child, and that no-one listens to her. She also outlined what the problem was, albeit in an upset tone.
Your response to this, was to say that you were sorry she thought you were condescending, and then tried to give reasons as to why you weren't condescending.
So in other words, you didn't listen to her, exactly like she said happens.
I can see why tray would quit, and frankly, I am seriously inclined to follow.
What exactly would constitute '[meeting] with respect, or at least a bit of consideration'? I can see a few options:
1/ Offer an expression of sympathy, which achieves nothing.
2/ Immediately demand names, offenses, and appropriate punishments.
>The way Tray-Gnome was talking didn't necessarily indicate that there were specific people in question. In fact, Tray-Gnome said it was 'a general observation', which led me to the third option:
3/ Attempt to find out if there were actual people under discussion, by saying something like 'If you have noticed people being a problem...'. Then maybe I could have laid out the procedure in the Constitution, to whit: ask them to stop, explain what they're doing wrong, ask for an apology, and then, if they don't continue, to ask the community to intervene. I could have pointed out that the only person who can take the first three of those four steps is the person who notices something is wrong - that, in fact, 'the responsibility lies on [them] to start the process of fixing it' - ie, to bring it to the community's attention.
>This is, in fact, what I did.
And despite your protestations that a four-year-old would have done the things I suggested, Tray-Gnome hadn't. Of the two people she specifically named in the follow-up post, the people who she clearly indicated as repeat offenders, one of them was me. Guess what? Tray-Gnome had not previously raised this issue with me. In fact, the last time I had any contact with her, she specifically said that she was not angry with me and never had been. So, the answer to my questions was apparently 'no'. Tray-Gnome may have 'told people about the issues I'm having' - but she hasn't raised them with the people who are causing them.
You equate 'it's your responsibility to start the process' with 'sorry, no one else notices so you have to go solve it on your own'. That's not what I meant to say. What I meant was more along the lines of: the person who notices is the only person who can start things.If you notice something, you need to call people's attention to it. I have not seen Tray-Gnome do this on the Board in about a year. I do not know what has happened in the IRC; that's why I was asking. However, I do know that neither of the people she named use the IRC.
Lastly, in her response, Tray said you were treating her like a child, and that no-one listens to her. She also outlined what the problem was, albeit in an upset tone.
Your response to this, was to say that you were sorry she thought you were condescending, and then tried to give reasons as to why you weren't condescending.
So in other words, you didn't listen to her, exactly like she said happens.
Okay, I'm not sure if you're actually not noticing my words, or deliberately ignoring them.
I apologise for coming across as condescending. That was not my intent.
That in no way equates to 'I'm sorry you thought I was condescending'. It equates to 'I'm sorry I sounded that way'. The former shifts responsibility onto the listener - the latter retains it in its entirety for myself. I offered the explanation of my intentions as a way of reassuring her that the offence was accidental, not deliberate. If someone offends me in some way, that's something I'd want to know, not something I would get angry at them for telling me.
And no, Tray-Gnome did not use an 'upset tone'. She used a deliberately and aggressively insulting tone. She used my genuine attempt to help to attack me with pointless namecalling, and to tell me off for asking a question (to which the answer was 'no'), and to attack another member of this community who has not spoken to her in a year.
7. If someone says something that seems offensive, but you’re not sure exactly what they meant, ASK them first, before jumping down their throats. Astonishingly enough, most people aren’t out to offend anyone. [...] Don't be afraid to ask what someone meant- it isn't silly to want the full facts.
You and Tray-Gnome have completely ignored this section of the Constitution. Riese gave a nice example of the sort of response that should be given in this case - indicating the impression that was given, assuming good faith, and politely suggesting I 'double-check in the future'. Had that been the only reply, I would have come back with 'I sounded condescending? I'm sorry, I definitely didn't mean to. I was trying to [this this this]. Can you specify how it sounded condescending, so I can watch it in the future?'. You and Tray-Gnome did not. You launched an aggressive attack, refused to accept any of the six separate apologies I have offered, and in fact have spent most of your words in this thread dissecting in great detail why my apologies are not good enough for you. Whether in person or by proxy, Tray-Gnome has made absolutely no effort to apologise for her direct attacks and flames.
hS
In regards to tray telling you; "I don't have a problem with you" and "You can be condescending sometimes" are not mutually exclusive, and I've had tray tell me specifically she's told you the latter before.
I know you apologized, that's good, that's long done with, that got accepted 2 responses ago.You wanted to know why tray and I thought you sounded condescending. I did that, and then you screamed at me, and went over all the ways I handled this situation badly. Something I apologized for too.
Screw this, I'm done.
You apologised specifically for crossing a line in one post, not for your consistent assumption of bad faith on my part prior to that post. Neither have you offered any apology or even acknowledgement on Tray-Gnome’s behalf that she flamed me.
I only responded because I understood that you wanted to talk this out and clarify the motivations on either side. This you have completely failed to do. Instead, you have imparted motives to me which are so far from true it’s not even funny, repeatedly and totally misrepresented my words, ignored my question as to what would have constituted ‘respect’ and ‘consideration’, and refused to even consider the very serious concerns I raised with your behaviour and Tray-Gnome’s.
And, since you have now claimed it repeatedly, I’m going to address the point that ‘I've had tray tell me specifically she's told you [‘You can be condescending sometimes’] before.: I’ve made a comprehensive search of the Board history and read every email Tray-Gnome and I have ever exchanged, and I can’t find any instance of her raising this concern, even obliquely. She appears to be mistaken. If someone needs to see the exact results of my search, I’m perfectly willing to share them.
But hey, for all that, I’m going to let the whole thing drop. You can keep your apologies. I don’t particularly need them. All I will close by saying is that I urge you to ensure you are following the guidelines laid out in the PPC Constitution. We have it for a reason, and violating it at any time is not a good thing.
hS
I'm sure you didn't mean to, but the tone of that last post comes across as being extremely condescending. As I'm sure you would never treat a fellow PPC-er like a small child in need of a reprimand, I won't make an issue of it. You might double-check in the future, though, so this won't happen again. Thanks muchly.
-Riese