Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 5:16 pm

Hello @Growfast,

Sometime ago, I wrote in the original thread and in this very thread the following text:

Hey Growfast,

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).

Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

Sincerely,

John

You probably didn't see it yet, so I put it back here. What do you think?

@lucio: I'm looking forward to your feed-back!

Quote from Growfast on December 25, 2022, 7:16 pm

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 5:16 pm

Hello @Growfast,

Sometime ago, I wrote in the original thread and in this very thread the following text:

Hey Growfast,

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).

Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

Sincerely,

John

You probably didn't see it yet, so I put it back here. What do you think?

@lucio: I'm looking forward to your feed-back!

I am going to post some of your quotes from that thread.

As for what had happened. John had started a thread to discuss a powermove and many people on the thread had a view that in your concept you were starting out with a unprovoked powermove on others.

I was a curt in my response on how it's a bad idea and later apologised for it in another thread. However I still believe that John hasn't apologised for his powermove in that thread. Which was "You are welcome..... ".

 

As for your quotes in the thread you linked.

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

The explanation regarding your powermove was quite clear and I don't see how it can be be made even easier to understand.

This makes it come across that you want to act dumb to deny the powermove you made.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Again comes across as acting dumb to deny your powermove. Imagine if you called out the passive-aggressiveness or powermove of someone and they responded in the way you did here ("I don't understand what you are saying, can you explain it properly")

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

Your whole best of my ability answer was "I don't understand where was the powermove".

Something about this comes off very strange to me.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

This message after your previous quote comes off as that it's only you who sees others perspective and not others (ironic how you were saying that you are not understanding my point in the same message).

 

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

The whole offended word doesn't look good on me isn't it?

"Offended" is a word that is used to say that I got annoyed over a perceived insult.

So basically you are saying it's me with the problem who read your message wrong.

Similar to the "Sorry that YOU feel that way" Powermove.

The differences could have ended quite easily if you had accepted your powermove and spelled out that you apologize for it without any powermoves in the apology.

(The whole frame wrestling thing you might do might help with the Audience to not make it seem like you have done anything wrong, but then in my view who knows what frames are being putforth, it burns the bridges even more and you come off as someone who is out for a personal win.

Is the whole frame wrestling messages make me ignore and rephrase what I actually saw and believe in? I don't know)

I am tired of doing this back and forth with John.

If anyone has any thoughts feel free to share them.

 

 

 

 

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 25, 2022, 7:23 pm

To wrap up on how this feedback originally started:

Quote from John Freeman on December 23, 2022, 5:59 am

(...)

If I would have said:

About the title: I prefer it as it is now. Thanks for the proposition though! 🙂

Would it have expressed what you said? Because if I say I prefer it short and to the point, it implies Ali’s proposition is too long that would have been not power protecting or am I wrong? That is the reason I did not write that.

(...)

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 23, 2022, 6:49 am

(...)

"I Prefer": great option

The "I prefer" solution is a neat and slick way of doing more power protection, without even adding any single word.

Pretty cool.

Yeah, I would've been cool with that "I prefer" format too. Thank you for acknowledging the feedback positively, John.

Before I respond to your latest post now, let me preface this by saying that I think you're right that there's some room for improvement in how I communicated my ideas, and happy to have gotten your feedback on that.

#1. Treat Me as a "Boss" Maybe, But Please See Me as an Equal

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

@lucio: I must admit that I was quite surprised by your post about new boss power dynamics. I totally agree with you about the dynamics with new bosses and it's valuable info for me (and all of us I think). I learned by reading it that to be socially savvy, one must put extra effort in the beginning, which is new info to me. As said in my previous post I thought I did put adequate social effort. I was surprised as at no point in time, this dynamics was part of the situation from my side. To make things clear: I'm glad that Ali is on board to moderate the forum and I wish him the best success! It's good that you can share this responsibility together. For me that was 100% clear from the start you appointed him. There is a bias towards Ali, yes you're right. But not this one. It's the same bias I have with you: you and Ali have power over me on this forum. So I'm as diplomatic with everyone here as possible and especially with both of you.

(...)

On this part, yeah, it's respectful to acknowledge my new moderator authority.

But, I'd prefer if you still view me as an equal (which I think most in the forum still do).

I don't necessarily like reading that I have power over someone which is why I did so much power protecting in my post (and, as per Lucio's feedback, it turned out that it was too much). I do it to maintain that power-through approach and collaborative attitude that I enjoy giving and receiving here in this community.

So—and this goes for anyone reading this—I might be a moderator, but please still acknowledge me as the same Ali (who is still a student here to grow with you).

#2. Do Continue Giving Feedback

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

That is why I did not even think or wanted to take it to this thread. I decided to let it go.

(...)

No man, please, I value your feedback and I can't be sure I'm communicating with you as best I can or being the best moderator I can be without you sharing your thoughts.

At best, I'd grow far slower which means far more unneeded mistakes.

At worst, I'd continue communicating with you in a way that you don't appreciate without even knowing it (and that would drive a wedge between us).

So, I think it makes for a better win-win relationship for both us and the entire forum if you simply speak your thoughts and allow me to read/respond them.

#3. Using Hypotheticals + Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I think Ali's post content was interesting. Just as Bel, I thought the tone was not optimal. In hindsight, I think maybe I should have addressed it here in the first place. For the sake of clarification, here are my thoughts:

If you're constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

From my understanding, this assumes that it's what I'm doing currently (of course one can say it was the "hypothetical if" but that is not my current understanding). That is not the case. However, my experience here taught me that if I go: "that is not what I'm doing/did..." or "this is not what I said, I said this.." then it goes into frame battle/imposing, risk of turkey spiral and the communication does not improve. This is from my experience, I could be missing a skill here for these situations. So I felt there was some power-protecting that was missing, not giving me the benefit of the doubt. So since my previous experiences when I see a negative and inexact interpretation of what I'm saying negative that is not in accord with what I meant/say, I let it go now rather than trying to correct it.

(...)

Yeah, it was a hypothetical "you" and the same feedback-giving format I use for sharing my thoughts on PU's marketing (see a few examples here).

What I think made it OK was:

• I said "if": which gives you an "out"—had I said "when" it would've implied you're already doing it and that would've been far more (potentially) damaging.

You might also notice that I used "you" to share the idea which does increase personal relevancy, making it good for helping certain ideas "stick" since it seems more relevant to the receiver. And, that could've given it a teacher undertone.

But, I made sure to switch to "one" when sharing what I'd consider good advice so as to not make it seem that my thoughts there are actually "personal feedback-giving":

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 19, 2022, 11:12 pm

(...)

If (uses "if" to power-protect) you're (uses "you" to increase personal relevancy to the content) constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

And, that can cost you an ally or, worse, create a potential enemy.

So, in order to take that approach of "the more public teaching I can do the better", one (switches to "one" to avoid the personal relevancy becoming personal responsibility/blame) must be careful to mix as much warmth as possible (and I think that sometimes the warmest thing you can do is indeed to just keep it private).

(...)

Maybe I could've done better here though, happy to read any thoughts.

Example #2:

A similar case here:

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I'd say that's the case because if the teacher started to assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone (and then expecting credit based on that assumption), his good intentions could actually turn into social scalping the group (which is a form of social exchange manipulation) because of that credit presupposing — all for the sake of wanting to social climb.

Here, there are 2 assumptions:

1. I expect credit
2. I want to social climb (this is almost a direct attack)

Once again, this is not the purpose of my post, if one would have given me the benefit of the doubt or asked a question I would have gladly clarified. I'm talking about a side-effect of increased status while teaching to someone in public. I never said "you should go around trying to teach people in public so they all see how great you are". I presented it as a phenomenon that could be translated in a strategy, yes. However I don't think I presented as such. If this was unclear, my bad.

(...)

In the quote, I said "the teacher" (similar to saying "one") which removes John from any personal attachment to the situation.

But, in John's feedback, he creates a personal attachment by changing my words from "the teacher" to "I" (which feels unfair).

In reality, the two assumptions made are actually:

• The teacher might expect credit: and I say "might" because notice in the first sentence it says "if the teacher" to power-protect
• The teacher in this scenario is wanting to social climb: and in the TPM dictionary, social climbing is neutral—it can be prosocial or antisocial—so there's nothing inherently wrong with it or damaging about doing it, we all do it. What's potentially damaging is taking the antisocial path to social climbing and, since I didn't specify which path, I think it's unfair to assume that I meant the negative one. I'd prefer to be given the benefit of the doubt in cases like that, especially since I meant the positive form.

Perhaps it was due to the mistakes I made in the rest of the post that caused this part to be perceived in a negative light (since it's grouped with the rest). But, I personally think this one was in the green.

OFF-TOPIC

By the way, I think that one technique you can use if you feel you were unfairly framed as doing something you're not would indeed be to go meta and address it.

Perhaps something like:

John: Hey Ali, thank you for sharing your thoughts, especially XYZ was very insightful for me, blah, blah, blah.

When you said, "If you're constantly schooling people," it felt like you were assuming that that's what I'm actually doing. So, in the future, I'd prefer if you add to the end of that something like, "and I could be wrong on that" because that comes across more power-protecting to me and, as a result, I think we'd get along better.

Happy to read your thoughts and thanks again for the feedback.

OFF-TOPIC

#4. Labeling as a Form of Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

It sounds like you're saying that bystanders/people overhearing the teacher give value/insight to the student could be takers for not acknowledging that the teacher's wisdom was helpful for them too (i.e. they're credit withholding).

Once again, this is not what I said. So same as above. I did not want to enter in conflict with the new moderator (even just by trying to correct him) for 2 reasons:

1. Same as above
2. He's the new mod, so this would have been perceived as me not respecting him in his new role (which is exactly what happened).

In this instance, if one wanted to choose another option than power protection, it could have taken in the shape of a question if something is not clear and one is giving the other the benefit of the doubt, for instance:

"I'm not sure I understand: are you saying that the people around are takers?"

I would have answered: "Great question, no that is not what I meant, they are neutral bystanders: they don't have to acknowledge anything as they did not request anything and we are not in a teacher-student relationship together".

(...)

I understand that's not exactly what you said, my statement was a summary of what you said which involved some paraphrasing to help with my own clarification.

I didn't realize I misunderstood you, my bad, John.

However, the "it sounds like" is a label that avoids the "this is how it is" format.

So, you could've corrected the statement and it wouldn't have been too disempowering for me (in my opinion) because I didn't make a claim or a conclusion, more of an observation.

And, observations can be subjective, not right or wrong. So, you're free to say, "Actually, I'm saying that..." and it doesn't cost me too many status points. (t would be the equivalent of being tough on ideas and soft on people.)

That subjectivity is also what I think makes the statement somewhat power-protecting. By saying "it sounds like" I frame the following ideas as my interpretation, not as facts of the matter/what was truly said.

But, I actually agree with you that I could've phrased my statement as a question and that might've been the better option in this case.

#5. More Notes

Giving it some more thought, I will:

• Avoid repeating one's name: it did feel a bit off to do and I don't do it often anyway, so it's an easy change to make
• Avoid the "question + perhaps this idea" format: I think it might've come across as condescending

Feel free to leave any thoughts and thanks everyone for reading.

Quote from John Freeman on December 26, 2022, 5:22 pm

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 25, 2022, 7:23 pm

To wrap up on how this feedback originally started:

Quote from John Freeman on December 23, 2022, 5:59 am

(...)

If I would have said:

About the title: I prefer it as it is now. Thanks for the proposition though! 🙂

 

Yeah, I would've been cool with that "I prefer" format too. Thank you for acknowledging the feedback positively, John.

Of course! As you see I'm learning! Thanks for your feedback on that.

Before I respond to your latest post now, let me preface this by saying that I think you're right that there's some room for improvement in how I communicated my ideas, and happy to have gotten your feedback on that.

Great attitude!

#1. Treat Me as a "Boss" Maybe, But Please See Me as an Equal

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

@lucio: I must admit that I was quite surprised by your post about new boss power dynamics. I totally agree with you about the dynamics with new bosses and it's valuable info for me (and all of us I think). I learned by reading it that to be socially savvy, one must put extra effort in the beginning, which is new info to me. As said in my previous post I thought I did put adequate social effort. I was surprised as at no point in time, this dynamics was part of the situation from my side. To make things clear: I'm glad that Ali is on board to moderate the forum and I wish him the best success! It's good that you can share this responsibility together. For me that was 100% clear from the start you appointed him. There is a bias towards Ali, yes you're right. But not this one. It's the same bias I have with you: you and Ali have power over me on this forum. So I'm as diplomatic with everyone here as possible and especially with both of you.

(...)

On this part, yeah, it's respectful to acknowledge my new moderator authority.

But, I'd prefer if you still view me as an equal (which I think most in the forum still do).

I don't necessarily like reading that I have power over someone which is why I did so much power protecting in my post (and, as per Lucio's feedback, it turned out that it was too much). I do it to maintain that power-through approach and collaborative attitude that I enjoy giving and receiving here in this community.

So—and this goes for anyone reading this—I might be a moderator, but please still acknowledge me as the same Ali (who is still a student here to grow with you).

Great attitude! I'm glad we share the same philosophy on this matter.

#2. Do Continue Giving Feedback

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

That is why I did not even think or wanted to take it to this thread. I decided to let it go.

(...)

No man, please, I value your feedback and I can't be sure I'm communicating with you as best I can or being the best moderator I can be without you sharing your thoughts.

At best, I'd grow far slower which means far more unneeded mistakes.

At worst, I'd continue communicating with you in a way that you don't appreciate without even knowing it (and that would drive a wedge between us).

So, I think it makes for a better win-win relationship for both us and the entire forum if you simply speak your thoughts and allow me to read/respond them.

Alright, I'm glad you're open to honest (and respectful) feedback :)

#3. Using Hypotheticals + Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I think Ali's post content was interesting. Just as Bel, I thought the tone was not optimal. In hindsight, I think maybe I should have addressed it here in the first place. For the sake of clarification, here are my thoughts:

If you're constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

From my understanding, this assumes that it's what I'm doing currently (of course one can say it was the "hypothetical if" but that is not my current understanding). That is not the case. However, my experience here taught me that if I go: "that is not what I'm doing/did..." or "this is not what I said, I said this.." then it goes into frame battle/imposing, risk of turkey spiral and the communication does not improve. This is from my experience, I could be missing a skill here for these situations. So I felt there was some power-protecting that was missing, not giving me the benefit of the doubt. So since my previous experiences when I see a negative and inexact interpretation of what I'm saying negative that is not in accord with what I meant/say, I let it go now rather than trying to correct it.

(...)

Yeah, it was a hypothetical "you" and the same feedback-giving format I use for sharing my thoughts on PU's marketing (see a few examples here).

Alright, misunderstanding here. All good. I'm sure you understood that when I read "you", I understand you're talking about me.

What I think made it OK was:

• I said "if": which gives you an "out"—had I said "when" it would've implied you're already doing it and that would've been far more (potentially) damaging.

You might also notice that I used "you" to share the idea which does increase personal relevancy, making it good for helping certain ideas "stick" since it seems more relevant to the receiver. And, that could've given it a teacher undertone.

But, I made sure to switch to "one" when sharing what I'd consider good advice so as to not make it seem that my thoughts there are actually "personal feedback-giving":

Yes, I think "one" and using the conditional is optimal as now you're talking about the general case: "If one would constantly school someone" sounds much different than "If you're constantly schooling someone"

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 19, 2022, 11:12 pm

(...)

If (uses "if" to power-protect) you're (uses "you" to increase personal relevancy to the content) constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

And, that can cost you an ally or, worse, create a potential enemy.

So, in order to take that approach of "the more public teaching I can do the better", one (switches to "one" to avoid the personal relevancy becoming personal responsibility/blame) must be careful to mix as much warmth as possible (and I think that sometimes the warmest thing you can do is indeed to just keep it private).

(...)

Maybe I could've done better here though, happy to read any thoughts.

Alright, makes sense!

Example #2:

A similar case here:

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I'd say that's the case because if the teacher started to assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone (and then expecting credit based on that assumption), his good intentions could actually turn into social scalping the group (which is a form of social exchange manipulation) because of that credit presupposing — all for the sake of wanting to social climb.

Here, there are 2 assumptions:

1. I expect credit
2. I want to social climb (this is almost a direct attack)

Once again, this is not the purpose of my post, if one would have given me the benefit of the doubt or asked a question I would have gladly clarified. I'm talking about a side-effect of increased status while teaching to someone in public. I never said "you should go around trying to teach people in public so they all see how great you are". I presented it as a phenomenon that could be translated in a strategy, yes. However I don't think I presented as such. If this was unclear, my bad.

(...)

In the quote, I said "the teacher" (similar to saying "one") which removes John from any personal attachment to the situation.

But, in John's feedback, he creates a personal attachment by changing my words from "the teacher" to "I" (which feels unfair).

I read it now in a different way, the thing is that there is a negative frame around the teacher that "wants to social climb", that was never in my post and in this case I'm the teacher. So as when using "you", the person reading does identify as the teacher (that's the purpose of the post, the OP is a teacher in this case). So I think that if you would have gone with more conditional and using "risk", it would have also talked more about the general case. Proposition:

I'd say that's the case because in the case the teacher would assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone, his good intentions could potentially turn into social scalping the group because of that credit presupposing and therefore there is a risk of unintended social climbing.

 

In reality, the two assumptions made are actually:

• The teacher might expect credit: and I say "might" because notice in the first sentence it says "if the teacher" to power-protect
• The teacher in this scenario is wanting to social climb: and in the TPM dictionary, social climbing is neutral—it can be prosocial or antisocial—so there's nothing inherently wrong with it or damaging about doing it, we all do it. What's potentially damaging is taking the antisocial path to social climbing and, since I didn't specify which path, I think it's unfair to assume that I meant the negative one. I'd prefer to be given the benefit of the doubt in cases like that, especially since I meant the positive form.

Perhaps it was due to the mistakes I made in the rest of the post that caused this part to be perceived in a negative light (since it's grouped with the rest). But, I personally think this one was in the green.

Alright, it's the first time I hear that social climbing is neutral, so far I only heard it negatively. I read the dictionary entry as you pointed out and learned something new, thanks!

Yeah, so to make things clear these two assumptions were not in my head nor in my post (or I could have miscommunicated).

OFF-TOPIC

By the way, I think that one technique you can use if you feel you were unfairly framed as doing something you're not would indeed be to go meta and address it.

Perhaps something like:

John: Hey Ali, thank you for sharing your thoughts, especially XYZ was very insightful for me, blah, blah, blah.

When you said, "If you're constantly schooling people," it felt like you were assuming that that's what I'm actually doing. So, in the future, I'd prefer if you add to the end of that something like, "and I could be wrong on that" because that comes across more power-protecting to me and, as a result, I think we'd get along better.

Happy to read your thoughts and thanks again for the feedback.

Thanks! That's useful for me! Definitely a great solution.

OFF-TOPIC

#4. Labeling as a Form of Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

It sounds like you're saying that bystanders/people overhearing the teacher give value/insight to the student could be takers for not acknowledging that the teacher's wisdom was helpful for them too (i.e. they're credit withholding).

Once again, this is not what I said. So same as above. I did not want to enter in conflict with the new moderator (even just by trying to correct him) for 2 reasons:

1. Same as above
2. He's the new mod, so this would have been perceived as me not respecting him in his new role (which is exactly what happened).

In this instance, if one wanted to choose another option than power protection, it could have taken in the shape of a question if something is not clear and one is giving the other the benefit of the doubt, for instance:

"I'm not sure I understand: are you saying that the people around are takers?"

I would have answered: "Great question, no that is not what I meant, they are neutral bystanders: they don't have to acknowledge anything as they did not request anything and we are not in a teacher-student relationship together".

(...)

I understand that's not exactly what you said, my statement was a summary of what you said which involved some paraphrasing to help with my own clarification.

I didn't realize I misunderstood you, my bad, John.

All good!

However, the "it sounds like" is a label that avoids the "this is how it is" format.

So, you could've corrected the statement and it wouldn't have been too disempowering for me (in my opinion) because I didn't make a claim or a conclusion, more of an observation.

True!

And, observations can be subjective, not right or wrong. So, you're free to say, "Actually, I'm saying that..." and it doesn't cost me too many status points. (t would be the equivalent of being tough on ideas and soft on people.)

That subjectivity is also what I think makes the statement somewhat power-protecting. By saying "it sounds like" I frame the following ideas as my interpretation, not as facts of the matter/what was truly said.

True!

But, I actually agree with you that I could've phrased my statement as a question and that might've been the better option in this case.

Cool!

#5. More Notes

Giving it some more thought, I will:

• Avoid repeating one's name: it did feel a bit off to do and I don't do it often anyway, so it's an easy change to make
• Avoid the "question + perhaps this idea" format: I think it might've come across as condescending

Feel free to leave any thoughts and thanks everyone for reading.

Some feed-back about your self-observations: I did not notice not minded the repeating of my name. About the "perhaps", one that I prefer and that is power protecting when you do think something is obvious and the other has not/might not have seen it.

Have you considered ...?

This lets the other person save face or they can more easily welcome the idea/feed-back.

Thank you for this productive and honest exchange! I think it brought us closer and built more trust.

Feel free to share your thoughts on this post of course! :)

Quote from John Freeman on December 26, 2022, 5:40 pm

Quote from Growfast on December 25, 2022, 7:16 pm

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 5:16 pm

Hello @Growfast,

Sometime ago, I wrote in the original thread and in this very thread the following text:

Hey Growfast,

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).

Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

Sincerely,

John

You probably didn't see it yet, so I put it back here. What do you think?

@lucio: I'm looking forward to your feed-back!

I am going to post some of your quotes from that thread.

As for what had happened. John had started a thread to discuss a powermove and many people on the thread had a view that in your concept you were starting out with a unprovoked powermove on others.

I was a curt in my response on how it's a bad idea and later apologised for it in another thread. However I still believe that John hasn't apologised for his powermove in that thread. Which was "You are welcome..... ".

 

As for your quotes in the thread you linked.

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

The explanation regarding your powermove was quite clear and I don't see how it can be be made even easier to understand.

This makes it come across that you want to act dumb to deny the powermove you made.

Well, re-reading it in the original post I see now what you mean. Not playing dumb, that's quite an accusation. (so either I'm playing dumb or I'm dumb for not understanding). For me it was an expression of warmth, but I see now that in the social exchange it may come off of as implying that I'm giving something.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Again comes across as acting dumb to deny your powermove. Imagine if you called out the passive-aggressiveness or powermove of someone and they responded in the way you did here ("I don't understand what you are saying, can you explain it properly")

Well, I just would. I've seen so many misunderstandings on forums that I would give the person the benefit of the doubt. I did not say "properly" BTW. What I said is that I did not understand, very different. It's about me not you.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

This message after your previous quote comes off as that it's only you who sees others perspective and not others (ironic how you were saying that you are not understanding my point in the same message).

Not what's in my mind nor what I meant. It's an olive branch.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

The whole offended word doesn't look good on me isn't it?

"Offended" is a word that is used to say that I got annoyed over a perceived insult.

So basically you are saying it's me with the problem who read your message wrong.

Similar to the "Sorry that YOU feel that way" Powermove.

The differences could have ended quite easily if you had accepted your powermove and spelled out that you apologize for it without any powermoves in the apology.

(The whole frame wrestling thing you might do might help with the Audience to not make it seem like you have done anything wrong, but then in my view who knows what frames are being putforth, it burns the bridges even more and you come off as someone who is out for a personal win.

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation as well. Yeah, I might have said it differently for sure. In my mind: it was a way of power protecting: "If I offended you" I think gives you the benefit of the doubt that maybe it wasn't so. Also this comes as not having understood what I did wrong (hence my question) so it's like when you do something that does not fly and people are upset and you don't understand why. That was where I was. So a better phrasing:

Please excuse me guys, this was an unintended power move, I wanted to be warm: clumsy of me!

 

Is the whole frame wrestling messages make me ignore and rephrase what I actually saw and believe in? I don't know)

I don't understand this sentence.

This feels like you are out for win-lose rather than win-win.

Not the case. I respect your perspective though.

I am tired of doing this back and forth with John.

This is not so nice, man. It frames me as someone's who's a pain in the ass as you address the community (kind of finger-pointing). If we're going for win-win then finishing on this does not not really sound like an olive branch I think.

So yes, I want to say clearly: please excuse me guys, this was an unintended power move, I wanted to be warm, clumsy of me!

I want to stress that I'm always open to feed-back. I might not always understand right away as it happens to all of us. However, my intention is still the same: to learn and improve.

I'm also still looking for a neutral (in terms of power dynamics), respectful and warm way to end up my thread.

What do you guys think about:

1. Comments and Questions are welcome! (when I propose an idea/share a situation: I am giving something in this case)
2. Any feed-back on this situation would be appreciated! (when I ask for feed-back: I am asking for something in this case)

Other formulations:

"Feel free to...": has light tasking element in my opinion.

"Happy to hear..." has a light element of judge frame in my opinion

So I'm still looking for something without any power element in it. That being said, I want to stress that I think to use the 2 above is fair. As I said I don't have anything better yet.

What are your thoughts on closing the thread with the appropriate sentence in order not do an unintended PM?

Quote from John Freeman on December 26, 2022, 6:52 pm

Correction:

Other formulations:

"Feel free to...": has light tasking element in my opinion.

"Happy to hear..." has a light element of judge frame in my opinion

I might be wrong though.

So I'm still looking for something without any power element in it. That being said, I want to stress that I think to use the 2 above is fair. As I said I don't have anything better yet.

What are your thoughts on closing the thread with the appropriate sentence in order not do an unintended PM?

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 26, 2022, 8:23 pm

Quote from John Freeman on December 26, 2022, 5:22 pm

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 25, 2022, 7:23 pm

To wrap up on how this feedback originally started:

Quote from John Freeman on December 23, 2022, 5:59 am

(...)

If I would have said:

About the title: I prefer it as it is now. Thanks for the proposition though! 🙂

 

Yeah, I would've been cool with that "I prefer" format too. Thank you for acknowledging the feedback positively, John.

Of course! As you see I'm learning! Thanks for your feedback on that.

Before I respond to your latest post now, let me preface this by saying that I think you're right that there's some room for improvement in how I communicated my ideas, and happy to have gotten your feedback on that.

Great attitude!

#1. Treat Me as a "Boss" Maybe, But Please See Me as an Equal

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

@lucio: I must admit that I was quite surprised by your post about new boss power dynamics. I totally agree with you about the dynamics with new bosses and it's valuable info for me (and all of us I think). I learned by reading it that to be socially savvy, one must put extra effort in the beginning, which is new info to me. As said in my previous post I thought I did put adequate social effort. I was surprised as at no point in time, this dynamics was part of the situation from my side. To make things clear: I'm glad that Ali is on board to moderate the forum and I wish him the best success! It's good that you can share this responsibility together. For me that was 100% clear from the start you appointed him. There is a bias towards Ali, yes you're right. But not this one. It's the same bias I have with you: you and Ali have power over me on this forum. So I'm as diplomatic with everyone here as possible and especially with both of you.

(...)

On this part, yeah, it's respectful to acknowledge my new moderator authority.

But, I'd prefer if you still view me as an equal (which I think most in the forum still do).

I don't necessarily like reading that I have power over someone which is why I did so much power protecting in my post (and, as per Lucio's feedback, it turned out that it was too much). I do it to maintain that power-through approach and collaborative attitude that I enjoy giving and receiving here in this community.

So—and this goes for anyone reading this—I might be a moderator, but please still acknowledge me as the same Ali (who is still a student here to grow with you).

Great attitude! I'm glad we share the same philosophy on this matter.

#2. Do Continue Giving Feedback

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

That is why I did not even think or wanted to take it to this thread. I decided to let it go.

(...)

No man, please, I value your feedback and I can't be sure I'm communicating with you as best I can or being the best moderator I can be without you sharing your thoughts.

At best, I'd grow far slower which means far more unneeded mistakes.

At worst, I'd continue communicating with you in a way that you don't appreciate without even knowing it (and that would drive a wedge between us).

So, I think it makes for a better win-win relationship for both us and the entire forum if you simply speak your thoughts and allow me to read/respond them.

Alright, I'm glad you're open to honest (and respectful) feedback 🙂

#3. Using Hypotheticals + Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I think Ali's post content was interesting. Just as Bel, I thought the tone was not optimal. In hindsight, I think maybe I should have addressed it here in the first place. For the sake of clarification, here are my thoughts:

If you're constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

From my understanding, this assumes that it's what I'm doing currently (of course one can say it was the "hypothetical if" but that is not my current understanding). That is not the case. However, my experience here taught me that if I go: "that is not what I'm doing/did..." or "this is not what I said, I said this.." then it goes into frame battle/imposing, risk of turkey spiral and the communication does not improve. This is from my experience, I could be missing a skill here for these situations. So I felt there was some power-protecting that was missing, not giving me the benefit of the doubt. So since my previous experiences when I see a negative and inexact interpretation of what I'm saying negative that is not in accord with what I meant/say, I let it go now rather than trying to correct it.

(...)

Yeah, it was a hypothetical "you" and the same feedback-giving format I use for sharing my thoughts on PU's marketing (see a few examples here).

Alright, misunderstanding here. All good. I'm sure you understood that when I read "you", I understand you're talking about me.

What I think made it OK was:

• I said "if": which gives you an "out"—had I said "when" it would've implied you're already doing it and that would've been far more (potentially) damaging.

You might also notice that I used "you" to share the idea which does increase personal relevancy, making it good for helping certain ideas "stick" since it seems more relevant to the receiver. And, that could've given it a teacher undertone.

But, I made sure to switch to "one" when sharing what I'd consider good advice so as to not make it seem that my thoughts there are actually "personal feedback-giving":

Yes, I think "one" and using the conditional is optimal as now you're talking about the general case: "If one would constantly school someone" sounds much different than "If you're constantly schooling someone"

Quote from Ali Scarlett on December 19, 2022, 11:12 pm

(...)

If (uses "if" to power-protect) you're (uses "you" to increase personal relevancy to the content) constantly "schooling" the same person in front of others and they're power-aware enough, they might start to get sick of it (or at least annoyed by it).

And, that can cost you an ally or, worse, create a potential enemy.

So, in order to take that approach of "the more public teaching I can do the better", one (switches to "one" to avoid the personal relevancy becoming personal responsibility/blame) must be careful to mix as much warmth as possible (and I think that sometimes the warmest thing you can do is indeed to just keep it private).

(...)

Maybe I could've done better here though, happy to read any thoughts.

Alright, makes sense!

Example #2:

A similar case here:

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

I'd say that's the case because if the teacher started to assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone (and then expecting credit based on that assumption), his good intentions could actually turn into social scalping the group (which is a form of social exchange manipulation) because of that credit presupposing — all for the sake of wanting to social climb.

Here, there are 2 assumptions:

1. I expect credit
2. I want to social climb (this is almost a direct attack)

Once again, this is not the purpose of my post, if one would have given me the benefit of the doubt or asked a question I would have gladly clarified. I'm talking about a side-effect of increased status while teaching to someone in public. I never said "you should go around trying to teach people in public so they all see how great you are". I presented it as a phenomenon that could be translated in a strategy, yes. However I don't think I presented as such. If this was unclear, my bad.

(...)

In the quote, I said "the teacher" (similar to saying "one") which removes John from any personal attachment to the situation.

But, in John's feedback, he creates a personal attachment by changing my words from "the teacher" to "I" (which feels unfair).

I read it now in a different way, the thing is that there is a negative frame around the teacher that "wants to social climb", that was never in my post and in this case I'm the teacher. So as when using "you", the person reading does identify as the teacher (that's the purpose of the post, the OP is a teacher in this case). So I think that if you would have gone with more conditional and using "risk", it would have also talked more about the general case. Proposition:

I'd say that's the case because in the case the teacher would assume that the help he provided to one was help needed by everyone, his good intentions could potentially turn into social scalping the group because of that credit presupposing and therefore there is a risk of unintended social climbing.

 

In reality, the two assumptions made are actually:

• The teacher might expect credit: and I say "might" because notice in the first sentence it says "if the teacher" to power-protect
• The teacher in this scenario is wanting to social climb: and in the TPM dictionary, social climbing is neutral—it can be prosocial or antisocial—so there's nothing inherently wrong with it or damaging about doing it, we all do it. What's potentially damaging is taking the antisocial path to social climbing and, since I didn't specify which path, I think it's unfair to assume that I meant the negative one. I'd prefer to be given the benefit of the doubt in cases like that, especially since I meant the positive form.

Perhaps it was due to the mistakes I made in the rest of the post that caused this part to be perceived in a negative light (since it's grouped with the rest). But, I personally think this one was in the green.

Alright, it's the first time I hear that social climbing is neutral, so far I only heard it negatively. I read the dictionary entry as you pointed out and learned something new, thanks!

Yeah, so to make things clear these two assumptions were not in my head nor in my post (or I could have miscommunicated).

OFF-TOPIC

By the way, I think that one technique you can use if you feel you were unfairly framed as doing something you're not would indeed be to go meta and address it.

Perhaps something like:

John: Hey Ali, thank you for sharing your thoughts, especially XYZ was very insightful for me, blah, blah, blah.

When you said, "If you're constantly schooling people," it felt like you were assuming that that's what I'm actually doing. So, in the future, I'd prefer if you add to the end of that something like, "and I could be wrong on that" because that comes across more power-protecting to me and, as a result, I think we'd get along better.

Happy to read your thoughts and thanks again for the feedback.

Thanks! That's useful for me! Definitely a great solution.

OFF-TOPIC

#4. Labeling as a Form of Power-Protecting

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 9:00 am

(...)

It sounds like you're saying that bystanders/people overhearing the teacher give value/insight to the student could be takers for not acknowledging that the teacher's wisdom was helpful for them too (i.e. they're credit withholding).

Once again, this is not what I said. So same as above. I did not want to enter in conflict with the new moderator (even just by trying to correct him) for 2 reasons:

1. Same as above
2. He's the new mod, so this would have been perceived as me not respecting him in his new role (which is exactly what happened).

In this instance, if one wanted to choose another option than power protection, it could have taken in the shape of a question if something is not clear and one is giving the other the benefit of the doubt, for instance:

"I'm not sure I understand: are you saying that the people around are takers?"

I would have answered: "Great question, no that is not what I meant, they are neutral bystanders: they don't have to acknowledge anything as they did not request anything and we are not in a teacher-student relationship together".

(...)

I understand that's not exactly what you said, my statement was a summary of what you said which involved some paraphrasing to help with my own clarification.

I didn't realize I misunderstood you, my bad, John.

All good!

However, the "it sounds like" is a label that avoids the "this is how it is" format.

So, you could've corrected the statement and it wouldn't have been too disempowering for me (in my opinion) because I didn't make a claim or a conclusion, more of an observation.

True!

And, observations can be subjective, not right or wrong. So, you're free to say, "Actually, I'm saying that..." and it doesn't cost me too many status points. (t would be the equivalent of being tough on ideas and soft on people.)

That subjectivity is also what I think makes the statement somewhat power-protecting. By saying "it sounds like" I frame the following ideas as my interpretation, not as facts of the matter/what was truly said.

True!

But, I actually agree with you that I could've phrased my statement as a question and that might've been the better option in this case.

Cool!

#5. More Notes

Giving it some more thought, I will:

• Avoid repeating one's name: it did feel a bit off to do and I don't do it often anyway, so it's an easy change to make
• Avoid the "question + perhaps this idea" format: I think it might've come across as condescending

Feel free to leave any thoughts and thanks everyone for reading.

Some feed-back about your self-observations: I did not notice not minded the repeating of my name. About the "perhaps", one that I prefer and that is power protecting when you do think something is obvious and the other has not/might not have seen it.

Have you considered ...?

This lets the other person save face or they can more easily welcome the idea/feed-back.

Thank you for this productive and honest exchange! I think it brought us closer and built more trust.

Feel free to share your thoughts on this post of course! 🙂

Got it, I agree this was a productive and honest exchange, thank you as well for being open to it :).

Will keep your thoughts and feedback in mind for the future.

Cheers!

Quote from Growfast on December 26, 2022, 9:00 pm

Not playing dumb, that's quite an accusation. (so either I'm playing dumb or I'm dumb for not understanding).

I don't understand what you mean here at all. Accusation? Huh? I am confused, I am open to feedback, could you explain it a bit in detail?

(Your own power move against you)

 

 I did not say "properly" BTW. What I said is that I did not understand, very different. It's about me not you.

That properly is an example of a similar situation. You took it quite literally. You didn't understand the core message I was giving.

Not what's in my mind nor what I meant. It's an olive branch.

How generous of you, How do not have a Nobel Peace Prize yet?

I have noticed that you seem to conveniently say how you meant a different thing when called out on the power move many times in this thread.

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation as well. Yeah, I might have said it differently for sure. In my mind: it was a way of power protecting: "If I offended you" I think gives you the benefit of the doubt that maybe it wasn't so. Also this comes as not having understood what I did wrong (hence my question) so it's like when you do something that does not fly and people are upset and you don't understand why.

In your mind your powermoves aren't powermoves at all but for who is addressed to it is.

This is like punching someone and saying that in your mind you were doing a friendly fist-bump.

I don't understand this sentence.

I am not even surprised at this point. You are getting quite predictable.

Not the case. I respect your perspective though.

Likewise

This is not so nice, man. It frames me as someone's who's a pain in the ass as you address the community (kind of finger-pointing). If we're going for win-win then finishing on this does not not really sound like an olive branch I think.

I am calling you out and I know I am coming off strong here. Getting called out is never pleasant.

I saw most of your responses as win-lose. But in your perspective it's a win-win.

I'm also still looking for a neutral (in terms of power dynamics), respectful and warm way to end up my thread.

I am looking for your apology on your power move which I had talked earlier about so that we can end this thread on a power neutral, fair way.

I won't say warm because I haven't been warm in my message here at all and I feel you are have been quite cold and calculative in your messages. (In my perspective of course and my perspective is quite important to me and I am sure your perspective is that you are the second coming of Jesus)

 

Other formulations:

"Feel free to...": has light tasking element in my opinion.

"Happy to hear..." has a light element of judge frame in my opinion

What do you think of your way of ending threads "You are welcome to share...... "?

Is it a powermove according to you are is it something very neutral?

(I sure believe it's a stronger PM compared to "feel free" or "Happy to hear")

 

Quote from Growfast on December 27, 2022, 6:24 am

Quote from John Freeman on December 26, 2022, 5:40 pm

Quote from Growfast on December 25, 2022, 7:16 pm

Quote from John Freeman on December 25, 2022, 5:16 pm

Hello @Growfast,

Sometime ago, I wrote in the original thread and in this very thread the following text:

Hey Growfast,

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).

Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

Sincerely,

John

You probably didn't see it yet, so I put it back here. What do you think?

@lucio: I'm looking forward to your feed-back!

I am going to post some of your quotes from that thread.

As for what had happened. John had started a thread to discuss a powermove and many people on the thread had a view that in your concept you were starting out with a unprovoked powermove on others.

I was a curt in my response on how it's a bad idea and later apologised for it in another thread. However I still believe that John hasn't apologised for his powermove in that thread. Which was "You are welcome..... ".

 

As for your quotes in the thread you linked.

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

The explanation regarding your powermove was quite clear and I don't see how it can be be made even easier to understand.

This makes it come across that you want to act dumb to deny the powermove you made.

Well, re-reading it in the original post I see now what you mean. Not playing dumb, that's quite an accusation. (so either I'm playing dumb or I'm dumb for not understanding). For me it was an expression of warmth, but I see now that in the social exchange it may come off of as implying that I'm giving something.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Again comes across as acting dumb to deny your powermove. Imagine if you called out the passive-aggressiveness or powermove of someone and they responded in the way you did here ("I don't understand what you are saying, can you explain it properly")

Well, I just would. I've seen so many misunderstandings on forums that I would give the person the benefit of the doubt. I did not say "properly" BTW. What I said is that I did not understand, very different. It's about me not you.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

This message after your previous quote comes off as that it's only you who sees others perspective and not others (ironic how you were saying that you are not understanding my point in the same message).

Not what's in my mind nor what I meant. It's an olive branch.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

The whole offended word doesn't look good on me isn't it?

"Offended" is a word that is used to say that I got annoyed over a perceived insult.

So basically you are saying it's me with the problem who read your message wrong.

Similar to the "Sorry that YOU feel that way" Powermove.

The differences could have ended quite easily if you had accepted your powermove and spelled out that you apologize for it without any powermoves in the apology.

(The whole frame wrestling thing you might do might help with the Audience to not make it seem like you have done anything wrong, but then in my view who knows what frames are being putforth, it burns the bridges even more and you come off as someone who is out for a personal win.

Wow, that's quite a strong accusation as well. Yeah, I might have said it differently for sure. In my mind: it was a way of power protecting: "If I offended you" I think gives you the benefit of the doubt that maybe it wasn't so. Also this comes as not having understood what I did wrong (hence my question) so it's like when you do something that does not fly and people are upset and you don't understand why. That was where I was. So a better phrasing:

Please excuse me guys, this was an unintended power move, I wanted to be warm: clumsy of me!

 

Is the whole frame wrestling messages make me ignore and rephrase what I actually saw and believe in? I don't know)

I don't understand this sentence.

This feels like you are out for win-lose rather than win-win.

Not the case. I respect your perspective though.

I am tired of doing this back and forth with John.

This is not so nice, man. It frames me as someone's who's a pain in the ass as you address the community (kind of finger-pointing). If we're going for win-win then finishing on this does not not really sound like an olive branch I think.

So yes, I want to say clearly: please excuse me guys, this was an unintended power move, I wanted to be warm, clumsy of me!

I want to stress that I'm always open to feed-back. I might not always understand right away as it happens to all of us. However, my intention is still the same: to learn and improve.

I'm also still looking for a neutral (in terms of power dynamics), respectful and warm way to end up my thread.

What do you guys think about:

1. Comments and Questions are welcome! (when I propose an idea/share a situation: I am giving something in this case)
2. Any feed-back on this situation would be appreciated! (when I ask for feed-back: I am asking for something in this case)

Other formulations:

"Feel free to...": has light tasking element in my opinion.

"Happy to hear..." has a light element of judge frame in my opinion

So I'm still looking for something without any power element in it. That being said, I want to stress that I think to use the 2 above is fair. As I said I don't have anything better yet.

What are your thoughts on closing the thread with the appropriate sentence in order not do an unintended PM?

All I see is you trying to Lawyer your way out of apologising for your powermove and going on these extensive messages trying to go meta.

(This is like if someone caught you stealing and called the cops and you go meta and say

"You are accusing me of stealing and calling the cops, that's not nice. In my perspective it I do things for my need just as you. I am extending an olive branch here and would like to conclude our business in a warm way. To me it's important to give people benefit of the doubt" ) 

while also positioning yourself as someone looking for a win-win when ironically you completely avoid apologies.