Treatment of High Functioning Vs Lower Functioning on W.P

Page 26 of 26 [ 408 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 45,620
Location: Stendec

03 Oct 2020, 6:13 pm

Teach51 wrote:
I agree that clearly defining boundaries, clarifications and rules is paramount.  I agree that many transgressions are unintentional but the serious prevalence of trolling demands serious safety measures  If boundaries are clear then innocent mistakes or unintentionally hurt feelings may be significantly lessened...
This brings us back to (a) how those boundaries would be defined, (b) who defines those boundaries, and (c) what exactly those boundaries would encompass.

For example, let us say there is someone who is seriously triggered by improper grammar, incorrect punctuation, and poor spelling.  I mean, this person could go on for several pages over just one omission of the Oxford Comma, making their triggered state a serious matter.  Should everyone then be required to check everything they post against the Manual of Style, the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and Roget's Thesaurus?  Or should this one person be told to simply shut up and deal with it?

(For the record, I am not that person; but I have worked with editors who were very much like that.)

Where should the boundary be set to define what constitutes a perfectly reasonable prohibition for everyone, and what constitutes a prohibition that inconveniences all but one person?


_________________
*TRE45ON!!*
Lock Him Up!

(Claiming moral equivalency between one's own
immoral acts and those of another is a null defense.)


League_Girl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 25,461
Location: Pacific Northwest

03 Oct 2020, 6:57 pm

Unfortunately there will always be someone we cannot help because they have more problems than we can help them with and it has happened before.

I can specifically think of one user here that had that problem and mods had to ban that user permanent. Me and you fnord knew this user here and on defunct AFF.


Someone can be triggered by cars, unfortunately we can't help them with that because people can't just stop using cars and we can't demand everyone to get rid of their car and ban them from the city and our country so that person won't be triggered.

However in private chat, someone was triggered by the color red, they were getting provoked by my texts because mine were in red. They asked me to please change my font color because they have trauma with blood and red reminds them of that because of the color so I simply changed the color of my texts. Not a big deal. But if everyone was triggered by different colors including the color black to a point where no one can type, well that is a loss cause and we can do nothing about it. Every color of text is a trigger. So who do you think will be banned from that room?


_________________
Son: Diagnosed w/anxiety and ADHD. Also academic delayed.

Daughter: NT, no diagnoses.


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,768

03 Oct 2020, 9:16 pm

Fnord wrote:
For example, let us say there is someone who is seriously triggered by improper grammar, incorrect punctuation, and poor spelling.  I mean, this person could go on for several pages over just one omission of the Oxford Comma, making their triggered state a serious matter.  Should everyone then be required to check everything they post against the Manual of Style, the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and Roget's Thesaurus?  Or should this one person be told to simply shut up and deal with it?


Yes, this is an interesting one. There are grammar "nazis" who find (for example) some of my longer posts triggering as I tend to do the NT thing and skip spell check or a cursory punctuation/grammar checks. Part of the problem is that I don't spend that much time on WP and tend to rush my thoughts on canvass (so to speak).

I also had one poster complain about my using "quotes" all the time which I get in the habit of doing for the benefit of those users who have difficulty distinguishing literal Vs metaphorical.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,768

03 Oct 2020, 9:21 pm

Fnord wrote:
Teach51 wrote:
I agree that clearly defining boundaries, clarifications and rules is paramount.  I agree that many transgressions are unintentional but the serious prevalence of trolling demands serious safety measures  If boundaries are clear then innocent mistakes or unintentionally hurt feelings may be significantly lessened...
[color=black]This brings us back to (a) how those boundaries would be defined, (b) who defines those boundaries, and (c) what exactly those boundaries would encompass.


Shouldn't this just be delegated to the mods? simple solution.

But it's an interesting question. I have been trolled in the past and while the trolls involved were warned, I was told to not engage them and to be mindful of not triggering them as well (after all the trolls were autistic and I am not). At the time I was a little frustrated why the mods didn't throw the book at the trolls who were making personal attacks (I wasn't). The reason provided was they were triggered by my views.

But I think we need to know when not to engage/feed trolls, it's one of the skills you need to navigate the world of online forums.



Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,961
Location: Australia

03 Oct 2020, 9:26 pm

Fnord wrote:
Now, who gets to decide who is a troll, who is not a troll, and who is simply acting out of naivete and distress -- one or two members who hold grudges against at least one other member?  They would likely define a 'troll' as that person in everything but name.  Instead, I suggest that the moderators be allowed to decide what constitutes trollish behavior (not including imagined intent, of course), and let them police this website -- that's what they were selected for.  All we can (or should) do is report trollish behavior and DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!


But I am so, so, hungry. :mrgreen:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."

Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


THERE WILL BE NO COUP IN AMERICA!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,961
Location: Australia

03 Oct 2020, 9:31 pm

magz wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
magz wrote:
I've seen a lot of miscommunications here, especially when someone blunt meets someone easily triggered - no villain in the story but a lot of suffering can stem from it.

Further, one can be blunt on some topics and more aware of the nuances involve in discussing other topics, meaning one poster can fulfil both of those roles in different interactions.

Definitely, there are people simultanously easily triggered and blunt on WP.


Then you aren't referring to me.
I am emotionally bulletproof. 8)
Can someone hand me my cudgel? :scratch:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."

Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


THERE WILL BE NO COUP IN AMERICA!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,961
Location: Australia

03 Oct 2020, 9:39 pm

League_Girl wrote:
Teach51 and this post is helping me understand in what way I am a troll here and why I do not exist. Apparently my problems here are not genuine and I have been faking them all along here according to some users here and ones who have left. :( Of course, I already knew this, I have known this for the past 10 years.


I have even been called a fake in high school online because they didn't think I could be that innocent and I didn't even know I was being innocent. I was being myself and I was already being called a faker on the internet. I have also been told online I am naïve and there were people online that knew "This is not a troll, just a user who is naïve." So as a result it would make me a target of online meanness and even on here in the past under my old account.

It's possible all these meanies online thought I was a troll so they got provoked by me but to my view, they were just randomly targeting me because they could see I am different somehow.

But troll is just a over used term and it's become to mean "someone I cannot stand and who I find annoying" and if you don't like someone, don't like their opinion, find their posts annoying because of their OCD or communication or naivete and weak social skills.

And I was listed as a vulnerable member here but apparently that list was discontinued or there was never such a list of vulnerable members and I was lied to about it by a former mod.

I think a vulnerable member can be someone who:

Is prone to doing personal attacks because of triggers and misunderstandings

Is prone to being targeted with sly remarks and trollish responses because of misunderstandings

Is prone to getting trollish behavior from users because of misunderstandings

Easily swayed and taken advantage of

Gullible

Bad reading comprehension so they may make off topic responses or do a straw man or do accusations at another user

Mistaken as a troll for reasons above

And maybe more.


And another thing on here I noticed is, people accuse others of being bullies here but those "bullies" also feel they have been bullied here and think their "victims" are their bullies. So both sides think they are both bullies.


I'd drop the word "sly".
It doesn't help matters. :wink:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."

Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


THERE WILL BE NO COUP IN AMERICA!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,961
Location: Australia

03 Oct 2020, 10:06 pm

Fnord wrote:
Teach51 wrote:
I agree that clearly defining boundaries, clarifications and rules is paramount.  I agree that many transgressions are unintentional but the serious prevalence of trolling demands serious safety measures  If boundaries are clear then innocent mistakes or unintentionally hurt feelings may be significantly lessened...
This brings us back to (a) how those boundaries would be defined, (b) who defines those boundaries, and (c) what exactly those boundaries would encompass.

For example, let us say there is someone who is seriously triggered by improper grammar, incorrect punctuation, and poor spelling.  I mean, this person could go on for several pages over just one omission of the Oxford Comma, making their triggered state a serious matter.  Should everyone then be required to check everything they post against the Manual of Style, the Merriam-Webster dictionary, and Roget's Thesaurus?  Or should this one person be told to simply shut up and deal with it?

(For the record, I am not that person; but I have worked with editors who were very much like that.)

Where should the boundary be set to define what constitutes a perfectly reasonable prohibition for everyone, and what constitutes a prohibition that inconveniences all but one person?


A pretty extreme example you presented.
Has anything like this ever happened, here?

Argumentum ad absurdum?
A reductive argument?

The example you presented, and how it should be treated, would be clear cut, I would imagine. :scratch:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet."

Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


THERE WILL BE NO COUP IN AMERICA!