Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumResources: Researches, Studies, TheoriesLearningFeedbacks & clarifications

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Feedbacks & clarifications

#561 · January 5, 2023, 2:21 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 5, 2023, 2:21 am
@mats-g
What an awesome, awesome post, man, thank you so much!
I agree with you that a) some parts of it felt personal, b) some parts of it "went strong" and c) some parts of it didn't grant the benefit of the doubt.
It's because:
There's an element of "personal" when one's behavior is harming your community, ignores all your chances of playing it straight (nobody likes being ignored, especially not when you're telling them "this is not cool"), and finally pulls an assertive power move on you, attacking your reputation and trying to make you backtrack or apologize
Think about that:
TPM wants to hatch eagles.
You can't have turkey behavior ravishing that nest.
It is personal when someone is harming your community.
It probably feels even more personal to me as the founder, but I think it's a great mindset to be annoyed by poor behavior in any community you belong to.
For example, I deeply disliked my poor bosses in my life because they impacted my teams, my workdays, my colleagues, and my friends when I made friends with colleagues.
When my friend/colleague was fired in the worst way possible, to me that was also personal -in the sense of "how dare you do that to my colleague, you POS".
And that last assertive power move hoping I'd backtrack or something, that was to me, and for sure there was also an element of personal there.
You bet my initial reaction was very personal, in the line of "how the fuck dare you pull that shit on me".
And I also think it's a fair reaction, and even good: anger can be a great asset for self-defense, assertiveness, and making your way into life -as long as you don't give in completely and rage out of control at the wrong time, in the wrong places if course-.
But I'd like to end this saying that albeit "personal" was part of it, it wasn't personal that originated or lead to this conclusion -and I think you get that from your message, plus it's quite obvious to any power aware person who's followed these dynamics-.
And I agree with you: moderation intervention should be a lot less about personal, and a lot more about facts.
To go strong and add some jokes also serves to surface the dynamics
Take the joke:
"maybe you wanna say you didn't know because it's not on Wikipedia".
Something like that sub-communicates to the reader: 1) "oh right, so now he can't play dumb", and b) "the original Wikipedia reference was a power move".
But you do that in a shorter format, and maybe while some reader also laughs along, which is also more persuasive as they laugh with you.
Growfast also used something to great effect.
The benefit of the doubt extinguishes and turns into a "right to infer second motives"
You're absolutely right:
A moderator intervention probably should grant more benefits of the doubt.
On the other hand, in real life, you don't wanna extend too much of that: that's exactly how some takers (keep on) prey on giid people.
Because some people are too lenient with their benefit of the doubt.
Quoting from my own post:
When you spot a trend of "not-so-cool" behavior over time, the "thinking bad" angle becomes more and more justified.
And I leave it at that.
Overall, fantastic feedback Mats, thank you so much for it really.

@mats-g

What an awesome, awesome post, man, thank you so much!

I agree with you that a) some parts of it felt personal, b) some parts of it "went strong" and c) some parts of it didn't grant the benefit of the doubt.

It's because:

There's an element of "personal" when one's behavior is harming your community, ignores all your chances of playing it straight (nobody likes being ignored, especially not when you're telling them "this is not cool"), and finally pulls an assertive power move on you, attacking your reputation and trying to make you backtrack or apologize

Think about that:

TPM wants to hatch eagles.

You can't have turkey behavior ravishing that nest.

It is personal when someone is harming your community.

It probably feels even more personal to me as the founder, but I think it's a great mindset to be annoyed by poor behavior in any community you belong to.

For example, I deeply disliked my poor bosses in my life because they impacted my teams, my workdays, my colleagues, and my friends when I made friends with colleagues.

When my friend/colleague was fired in the worst way possible, to me that was also personal -in the sense of "how dare you do that to my colleague, you POS".

And that last assertive power move hoping I'd backtrack or something, that was to me, and for sure there was also an element of personal there.
You bet my initial reaction was very personal, in the line of "how the fuck dare you pull that shit on me".

And I also think it's a fair reaction, and even good: anger can be a great asset for self-defense, assertiveness, and making your way into life -as long as you don't give in completely and rage out of control at the wrong time, in the wrong places if course-.

But I'd like to end this saying that albeit "personal" was part of it, it wasn't personal that originated or lead to this conclusion -and I think you get that from your message, plus it's quite obvious to any power aware person who's followed these dynamics-.

And I agree with you: moderation intervention should be a lot less about personal, and a lot more about facts.

To go strong and add some jokes also serves to surface the dynamics

Take the joke:

"maybe you wanna say you didn't know because it's not on Wikipedia".

Something like that sub-communicates to the reader: 1) "oh right, so now he can't play dumb", and b) "the original Wikipedia reference was a power move".

But you do that in a shorter format, and maybe while some reader also laughs along, which is also more persuasive as they laugh with you.

Growfast also used something to great effect.

The benefit of the doubt extinguishes and turns into a "right to infer second motives"

You're absolutely right:

A moderator intervention probably should grant more benefits of the doubt.

On the other hand, in real life, you don't wanna extend too much of that: that's exactly how some takers (keep on) prey on giid people.
Because some people are too lenient with their benefit of the doubt.

Quoting from my own post:

When you spot a trend of "not-so-cool" behavior over time, the "thinking bad" angle becomes more and more justified.

And I leave it at that.

Overall, fantastic feedback Mats, thank you so much for it really.

Ali Scarlett, Kavalier and Mats G have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#562 · January 5, 2023, 2:29 am

@kavalier

BOOM!

What a cracking post man, fantastic analysis.

You went to the core of the issue.

This one:

Quote from Kavalier on January 4, 2023, 8:16 pm
It's a tricky situation to be in. Checking power moves in the forum is tiresome. And power moves done by power aware super sharks in a power forum tend to be very low profile, so checking them (especially in a crystal clear manner) often looks thin-skinned. If the power mover refuses to own it and reacts with defiance, then we can only escalate or leave him to get away with it (and then lose control), but then we'll get drawn to a long series of back and forth (all the while having lots of real trouble to deal with in our real lives). That's why I wanted to take a break from the forum after flagging the initial power moves months ago. But, then, Lucio is right: it drives away potential new posters. TPM grows everyday, but only a minority of the new users use the forum – I myself was just starting to do that. So, crafting a power moves free environment in the forum is a necessity, because we should be concentrating our efforts in helping each other address power moves in the real world, not between ourselves. Some friction is still bound to happen no matter what, but it can be minimized by raising the bar.

Perfectly said.

And it's not only about driving new posters away, it's also about what people -and we all- learn from what we live.
If you see covert power moves and sneakiness go unchecked -or even "wining" in someone's mind-, you'll never realize it's not cool behavior that you should root out from yourself.
And you may even be encouraged to take it up.

As you said, with very covert behavior the tendency is often to "let it get away with it".

But then the environment dies through "death by a thousand cuts".

Now it was time to draw a stronger line and accept no more cuts.

Ali Scarlett, Kavalier and Mats G have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#563 · January 5, 2023, 5:09 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 5, 2023, 5:09 am
John,
In the spirit of keeping this brief:
I must agree with Growfast here.
There is some ownership, but I still see a lot of resistance to own it clearly -there still feels to be much "dilution" and "excus-plaining" (that type of explaining that just leaves you with a taste of "why so much explaining, feels off and somewhat suspicious, especially without an apology to the individual(s)")-
And still no apology.
This previous post, that was ignored, still stands:
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 2, 2023, 1:26 pm
Bel still hasn't been told "sorry for misrepresenting your message", for example.
How should he feel towards you reading that line?
If it were me, I'd feel like it was a PR move without really owning it and re-empowering him (Bel can agree or disagree with this).
And also: where was that placed?
To me, it feels off to say that in another thread when the main exchange happened here.
If one wanted to own and take responsiblity, the best way to do it was here because here the exchange mostly took place.
The solution proposed also still stands.
This one for Growfast:
(quotes a relevant post from Growfast, or simply the latest)
(make your point, but keep it extra brief. Or better yet, at this point, skip that part or it feels again like excus-plaining)
@Growfast, it was not cool of you to get aggressvie that early on and grant no benefit of the doubt based on, as far as I'm aware, a single post.
And that stands.
At the same time, I recognize there was a power move in the first place towards the readers, and that my message felt like power moves on my friends.
And I recognize I probably dragged the conversation for too long without clear ownership, and without apologies.
I apologize for that, sorry, my bad.
And this one for Bel:
Bel, sorry for misinterpreting your message along the way.
It may have been a honest mistake, but the effect was still not cool for you.
I now see that and recognize it: my bad.
Then, move on.
Drop the subject, and put more good behavior between the event, and the new improving you -not more explanations-.
As I said, I saw improvements.
And it's not as bad as "the other case", so to speak :).
Also, everyone is free to do as they please, so if you don't want to apologize, up to you.
However, there are consequences for what we choose.
So I'll say something very similar to what I told LoF back then:
It's up to you of course, but you should be aware of the consequences: it doesn't look good when several people -including, in part, yourself- agree there were some "not-so-cool" behavior, but still without an apology directed to the people involved (as opposed to general ownership and apologies to the community)

John,

In the spirit of keeping this brief:

I must agree with Growfast here.

There is some ownership, but I still see a lot of resistance to own it clearly -there still feels to be much "dilution" and "excus-plaining" (that type of explaining that just leaves you with a taste of "why so much explaining, feels off and somewhat suspicious, especially without an apology to the individual(s)")-

And still no apology.

This previous post, that was ignored, still stands:

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 2, 2023, 1:26 pm
Bel still hasn't been told "sorry for misrepresenting your message", for example.
How should he feel towards you reading that line?
If it were me, I'd feel like it was a PR move without really owning it and re-empowering him (Bel can agree or disagree with this).
And also: where was that placed?
To me, it feels off to say that in another thread when the main exchange happened here.
If one wanted to own and take responsiblity, the best way to do it was here because here the exchange mostly took place.

The solution proposed also still stands.

This one for Growfast:

(quotes a relevant post from Growfast, or simply the latest)
(make your point, but keep it extra brief. Or better yet, at this point, skip that part or it feels again like excus-plaining)
@Growfast, it was not cool of you to get aggressvie that early on and grant no benefit of the doubt based on, as far as I'm aware, a single post.
And that stands.
At the same time, I recognize there was a power move in the first place towards the readers, and that my message felt like power moves on my friends.
And I recognize I probably dragged the conversation for too long without clear ownership, and without apologies.
I apologize for that, sorry, my bad.

And this one for Bel:

Bel, sorry for misinterpreting your message along the way.
It may have been a honest mistake, but the effect was still not cool for you.
I now see that and recognize it: my bad.

Then, move on.

Drop the subject, and put more good behavior between the event, and the new improving you -not more explanations-.

As I said, I saw improvements.

And it's not as bad as "the other case", so to speak :).

Also, everyone is free to do as they please, so if you don't want to apologize, up to you.
However, there are consequences for what we choose.

So I'll say something very similar to what I told LoF back then:

It's up to you of course, but you should be aware of the consequences: it doesn't look good when several people -including, in part, yourself- agree there were some "not-so-cool" behavior, but still without an apology directed to the people involved (as opposed to general ownership and apologies to the community)

Ali Scarlett and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#564 · January 5, 2023, 5:24 am

Hello Lucio,

Thank you for your answer and the templates it's helpful. I'm still a bit confused though I sincerely feel I apologised. And to clarify: no post was ignored, I already wrote most of it. Almost done.

I get the no more explanation part and moving on. The part that's sincerely still not clear to me is why I wrote are not apologies? It's in the upcoming post anyway.

#565 · January 5, 2023, 6:04 am

Quote from John Freeman on January 5, 2023, 6:04 am
Finally, here is my answer, took me some time:
Hello Lucio,
thank you very much for your feed-back!
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 2, 2023, 1:26 pm
John,
I'm quoting from this other thread:
Quote from John Freeman on January 1, 2023, 10:47 am
Again, I'm taking responsibility for my recent mistake as you guys read. This post is not here to make excuses nor to evade anything (that would take the cake ("être le comble" in French, "il colmo di qc" in Italian).
I haven't seen that very clearly.
I think I now did it in my last post, it took me some time to think and write a proper answer, excuse me. Please let me know if there is something missing in the content or if the tone is not appropriate. I'm happy to correct it as needed.
Bel still hasn't been told "sorry for misrepresenting your message", for example.
How should he feel towards you reading that line?
If it were me, I'd feel like it was a PR move without really owning it and re-empowering him (Bel can agree or disagree with this).
I thought that my answer below was fine and I was 100% sincere. Is there something in the content or is the tone not appropriate? I'm happy to correct it as well.
But I totally see, re-reading the sentence again, that it can be understood this way as well, so fair enough! It does sound a little bit passive aggressive, not my intention, it comes out like that but that's not what I meant. Unintended PM here, so my apologies!
And also: where was that placed?
To me, it feels off to say that in another thread when the main exchange happened here -Growfast and Bel that were involved can agree or disagree with that-.
If one wanted to own and take responsiblity, the best way to do it was here because here the exchange mostly took place.
Alright, my mistake. My intention: to recall some context not to divert or gain brownie points. I totally agree.
To do it another thread feels like ignoring/spurning the original feedback and wanting to... Not sure what, but it does feel suspiciously off that the frame is, once gain, "need to learn, it was a mistake, not a power move" -it's always suspicious when the explanation is the best one to exculpate ourselves-.
Yes I agree, I'm working on that. I will write a thread about rebuilding trust/communicating trustworthiness (mostly questions as I see I'm not that good at it). To be clear, I'm not trying to exculpate myself.
Most of all, it CAN be a mistake and that one needs to learn, but again, to do so in another thread is not the "straight" way of dealing with it.
Right!
It's as if in real life one slights someone and then he says "I own (but it was a mistake, really)" but... Says in another place and time, and to some other people.
Yes, makes sense.
Thhe straight way of dealing with it:
(quotes original feedback)
Thank you for this, it helps to better understand and I must recognize that there were some power moves.
(disagree with whatever you disagree with, give solid reasons, but keep it brief)
@Growfast, it was not cool of you to get aggressvie so early and so soon, and that stands.
At the same time, I recognize that it was a power move in the first place, and that there a few more along the way.
I am sorry for that (then: monitor if Growfast does the same which, I'm confident, he would have. If he does, quote his message, and say "thank you for this, I'm good now and I look forward to more fruitful exchanges)
Thank you very much for this blueprint, I'll definitely use this.
@Bel, sorry for misinterpreting your message along the way.
It was a honest mistake, but the effect was still not cool for you.
I know see that and recognize it: my bad.
Then MOVE ON.
No more threads on the issue, no more references to what happened here in another thread.
Yes, I understand I totally get that it feels like I'm harping on it. My issue is that this opened several questions for me hence the threads. I want to learn from this experience. So shall I forfeit the learning in order to improve relationships?
The best way to improve reputation and rebuild social capital is not with more explaining -often a strategic mistake because it thread-expands on the issue- but with more straight behavior, win-win, and value-adding.
I totally understand and agree.
As said in my post above, I sincerely don't understand why these two are not apologies:
To Bel:
But I totally see, re-reading the sentence again, that it can be understood this way as well, so fair enough! It does sound a little bit passive aggressive, not my intention, it comes out like that but that's not what I meant. Unintended PM here, so my apologies!
To All:
I understand. So to make things clear once and for all: I fucked up guys, my bad: I'll be more watchful and careful next time!
What I understood from Growfast, is it because it does not contain the word "sorry"? For me "my apologies" and "my bad" are equivalent. Looking at your template: is it because it does not contain the specific mention of the initial injury?
In doubt, I checked the Oxford dictionary, and to me what I wrote above seems to fit, I might be wrong though:
Apology: a regretful acknowledgement of an offence or failure. Example: we owe you an apology
I'll apologise again, I'm totally ok with that. I just need to know what's wrong in order to correct it. Not beating around the bush here, just confused.
Regarding Growfast, I don't mind so much the aggressive tone, it's more about the provocations, insinuations, sarcasms and personal attacks. So the best way to deal with it is also to move on with this? Doesn't it set a precedent then? Like I allow someone to talk like that to me here? In real life I don't. I understand I made a mistake: in my mind it does not justify this though. So what I'm currently understanding is that the most socially savvy way to deal with it is to take it on me and move on. However, on my side some things said towards me were not ok. So I'm supposed to let them go since I was in the wrong in the beginning and kept doing the same mistakes, which made me look suspicious? Does it mean that in social exchanges, when you're in the wrong, the longer you fail to recognize it, the more you cement the frame of you having had bad intentions and therefore in terms of social exchanges how people treat you during this situation is on you?
I'm totally open to that being the case. It is surprising and new to me if that's the case though.
In the past, I did this: "I took it on me" or "I let it go" but then got resentment and bitterness towards the person because I got hurt and was not assertive about it. So I basically accepted win-lose in the past to keep the peace/make people happy or because people had power over me. So I'm afraid this would be one more occurrence of this. The problem is that to be vulnerable with someone who's being aggressive invites more aggression in my real life experience (more flaws to attack are exposed). About the relationship I do feel like the direction it's taking I will take (again) the weak/submissive spot in order to appease people (not talking about the apology here but about me if I would not mention what was not cool for me in order to keep the peace). And then what? I decided to put my self-respect at the top of my values and stand up for myself so I feel like I would be failing here. There might lie a lesson for me there though. Not trying to side-track, no PR.
So to me there's the episode and the lessons from the episodes which are 2 different things of course. I understand the episode is not over and it might be premature to try to learn lessons from it and would be thread expanding. So I'm a bit in a catch-22: if I ask questions I'm thread expanding and people feel like I'm being dishonest and if I don't ask questions, I don't learn and if I don't learn I'll make the same mistakes again.
Edit: I'll give an example. For instance I would sincerely like to know what is the difference between this:
If you have more ideas, you are more than welcome!
And this:
Feedback or opinions welcome
And planned to ask it later, no matter who wrote what and not wanting to go over the whole episode again or pretend it did not happen. I want to understand the principle and general use case scenario.
Is asking the question socially ok? If I do I'm thread expanding. If I don't, I don't understand and then I can use the "Happy to read your thought" of course but I won't understand the underlying principle. Also if I ask the question it might look as if I'm trying to social climb, to minimize or to dilute since you're the author of the second one. So that's the catch-22 I'm talking about. I agree with you about prioritising relationships over power. For me I prioritise growth above power as well. So I care less about the power dynamics than the lessons. Writing this I see that maybe sometimes one has to forego the growth for the relationships. And that might be wise. If that's the case, this is frustrating for me. Going back: let's say I'm allowed to ask the question: is there a timing? Like I should wait sometime. I also understood that in the hypothetical case that asking the question is socially ok it must be done here and not in another thread as it looks dishonest.
I'll answer to you Growfast as soon as I can.
Edit: I think I found a solution, I'll write to you later Bel and Growfast.
Edit2: aaah ok, just got it now. So I understand there is an apology expected from me specifically to Growfast, alright. For the subsequent power moves, right. Not for the original one. And that is why my apology to all was not considered an apology for you and for him. Alright this confusion is gone, my bad. As said just above I'll answer to you both, Bel and Growfast. I still leave the text above as originally before this edit for comprehension's sake.

Finally, here is my answer, took me some time:

Hello Lucio,

thank you very much for your feed-back!

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 2, 2023, 1:26 pm
John,
I'm quoting from this other thread:
Quote from John Freeman on January 1, 2023, 10:47 am
Again, I'm taking responsibility for my recent mistake as you guys read. This post is not here to make excuses nor to evade anything (that would take the cake ("être le comble" in French, "il colmo di qc" in Italian).

I haven't seen that very clearly.

I think I now did it in my last post, it took me some time to think and write a proper answer, excuse me. Please let me know if there is something missing in the content or if the tone is not appropriate. I'm happy to correct it as needed.

Bel still hasn't been told "sorry for misrepresenting your message", for example.
How should he feel towards you reading that line?
If it were me, I'd feel like it was a PR move without really owning it and re-empowering him (Bel can agree or disagree with this).

I thought that my answer below was fine and I was 100% sincere. Is there something in the content or is the tone not appropriate? I'm happy to correct it as well.

But I totally see, re-reading the sentence again, that it can be understood this way as well, so fair enough! It does sound a little bit passive aggressive, not my intention, it comes out like that but that's not what I meant. Unintended PM here, so my apologies!

And also: where was that placed?
To me, it feels off to say that in another thread when the main exchange happened here -Growfast and Bel that were involved can agree or disagree with that-.
If one wanted to own and take responsiblity, the best way to do it was here because here the exchange mostly took place.

Alright, my mistake. My intention: to recall some context not to divert or gain brownie points. I totally agree.

To do it another thread feels like ignoring/spurning the original feedback and wanting to... Not sure what, but it does feel suspiciously off that the frame is, once gain, "need to learn, it was a mistake, not a power move" -it's always suspicious when the explanation is the best one to exculpate ourselves-.

Yes I agree, I'm working on that. I will write a thread about rebuilding trust/communicating trustworthiness (mostly questions as I see I'm not that good at it). To be clear, I'm not trying to exculpate myself.

Most of all, it CAN be a mistake and that one needs to learn, but again, to do so in another thread is not the "straight" way of dealing with it.

Right!

It's as if in real life one slights someone and then he says "I own (but it was a mistake, really)" but... Says in another place and time, and to some other people.

Yes, makes sense.

Thhe straight way of dealing with it:
(quotes original feedback)
Thank you for this, it helps to better understand and I must recognize that there were some power moves.
(disagree with whatever you disagree with, give solid reasons, but keep it brief)
@Growfast, it was not cool of you to get aggressvie so early and so soon, and that stands.
At the same time, I recognize that it was a power move in the first place, and that there a few more along the way.
I am sorry for that (then: monitor if Growfast does the same which, I'm confident, he would have. If he does, quote his message, and say "thank you for this, I'm good now and I look forward to more fruitful exchanges)

Thank you very much for this blueprint, I'll definitely use this.

@Bel, sorry for misinterpreting your message along the way.
It was a honest mistake, but the effect was still not cool for you.
I know see that and recognize it: my bad.
Then MOVE ON.
No more threads on the issue, no more references to what happened here in another thread.

Yes, I understand I totally get that it feels like I'm harping on it. My issue is that this opened several questions for me hence the threads. I want to learn from this experience. So shall I forfeit the learning in order to improve relationships?

The best way to improve reputation and rebuild social capital is not with more explaining -often a strategic mistake because it thread-expands on the issue- but with more straight behavior, win-win, and value-adding.

I totally understand and agree.

As said in my post above, I sincerely don't understand why these two are not apologies:

To Bel:
But I totally see, re-reading the sentence again, that it can be understood this way as well, so fair enough! It does sound a little bit passive aggressive, not my intention, it comes out like that but that's not what I meant. Unintended PM here, so my apologies!

To All:
I understand. So to make things clear once and for all: I fucked up guys, my bad: I'll be more watchful and careful next time!

What I understood from Growfast, is it because it does not contain the word "sorry"? For me "my apologies" and "my bad" are equivalent. Looking at your template: is it because it does not contain the specific mention of the initial injury?

In doubt, I checked the Oxford dictionary, and to me what I wrote above seems to fit, I might be wrong though:

Apology: a regretful acknowledgement of an offence or failure. Example: we owe you an apology

I'll apologise again, I'm totally ok with that. I just need to know what's wrong in order to correct it. Not beating around the bush here, just confused.

Regarding Growfast, I don't mind so much the aggressive tone, it's more about the provocations, insinuations, sarcasms and personal attacks. So the best way to deal with it is also to move on with this? Doesn't it set a precedent then? Like I allow someone to talk like that to me here? In real life I don't. I understand I made a mistake: in my mind it does not justify this though. So what I'm currently understanding is that the most socially savvy way to deal with it is to take it on me and move on. However, on my side some things said towards me were not ok. So I'm supposed to let them go since I was in the wrong in the beginning and kept doing the same mistakes, which made me look suspicious? Does it mean that in social exchanges, when you're in the wrong, the longer you fail to recognize it, the more you cement the frame of you having had bad intentions and therefore in terms of social exchanges how people treat you during this situation is on you?

I'm totally open to that being the case. It is surprising and new to me if that's the case though.

In the past, I did this: "I took it on me" or "I let it go" but then got resentment and bitterness towards the person because I got hurt and was not assertive about it. So I basically accepted win-lose in the past to keep the peace/make people happy or because people had power over me. So I'm afraid this would be one more occurrence of this. The problem is that to be vulnerable with someone who's being aggressive invites more aggression in my real life experience (more flaws to attack are exposed). About the relationship I do feel like the direction it's taking I will take (again) the weak/submissive spot in order to appease people (not talking about the apology here but about me if I would not mention what was not cool for me in order to keep the peace). And then what? I decided to put my self-respect at the top of my values and stand up for myself so I feel like I would be failing here. There might lie a lesson for me there though. Not trying to side-track, no PR.

So to me there's the episode and the lessons from the episodes which are 2 different things of course. I understand the episode is not over and it might be premature to try to learn lessons from it and would be thread expanding. So I'm a bit in a catch-22: if I ask questions I'm thread expanding and people feel like I'm being dishonest and if I don't ask questions, I don't learn and if I don't learn I'll make the same mistakes again.

Edit: I'll give an example. For instance I would sincerely like to know what is the difference between this:

If you have more ideas, you are more than welcome!

And this:

Feedback or opinions welcome

And planned to ask it later, no matter who wrote what and not wanting to go over the whole episode again or pretend it did not happen. I want to understand the principle and general use case scenario.

Is asking the question socially ok? If I do I'm thread expanding. If I don't, I don't understand and then I can use the "Happy to read your thought" of course but I won't understand the underlying principle. Also if I ask the question it might look as if I'm trying to social climb, to minimize or to dilute since you're the author of the second one. So that's the catch-22 I'm talking about. I agree with you about prioritising relationships over power. For me I prioritise growth above power as well. So I care less about the power dynamics than the lessons. Writing this I see that maybe sometimes one has to forego the growth for the relationships. And that might be wise. If that's the case, this is frustrating for me. Going back: let's say I'm allowed to ask the question: is there a timing? Like I should wait sometime. I also understood that in the hypothetical case that asking the question is socially ok it must be done here and not in another thread as it looks dishonest.

I'll answer to you Growfast as soon as I can.

Edit: I think I found a solution, I'll write to you later Bel and Growfast.

Edit2: aaah ok, just got it now. So I understand there is an apology expected from me specifically to Growfast, alright. For the subsequent power moves, right. Not for the original one. And that is why my apology to all was not considered an apology for you and for him. Alright this confusion is gone, my bad. As said just above I'll answer to you both, Bel and Growfast. I still leave the text above as originally before this edit for comprehension's sake.

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#566 · January 5, 2023, 7:14 am

For transparency and communication, everything from “As said in my post above…” and below is written today. This is why the beginning of the post might sound a little strange. I left it as it is my original answer.

Edit: now it’s clear (at least for this part). I understand why you were not happy Growfast. I thought: “but I did not do anything to him personally, why is he is reacting like that?” Whereas I actually did. And each time I read that I did not apologize (whereas in my mind I did) from you or Lucio I got more confused. To be honest, at some point I even thought I was being gaslighted (as I thought: “it seems like everyone has the same perception and I don’t: what the f&$k is going on?”). I was re-reading what I wrote and could not understand what was wrong. I could not write it of course as it would have looked manipulative to the utmost. That’s what I thought at some point though. To be clear: I thought so and I was wrong.

Now everything is clear on this for me: there are different parts to this and I haven’t yet addressed all of them. It seemed I created quite a mess, huge lesson for me here: sorry guys! I understand everyone’s reaction now. I thought people were ganging up on me (to be clear: I was wrong). I now see what power moves (intended or not) can create: conflict and anger (as it can in me as well). Thanks for your patience with me, especially Lucio.

As written above I’ll address it as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

John

PS: I do hope there are no power moves in the post above! I’m open to feedback if that’s the case.

edit: multiple edits for clarity

#567 · January 5, 2023, 9:01 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on January 5, 2023, 9:01 am
John,
This is not something one can fix with more posts.
More posts only make worse.
I'd recommend indeed to stop any further explanation: it just feels like a word-salad after a certain point and it irritates people.
Speaking of lawyering:
Quote from John Freeman on January 5, 2023, 6:04 am
I thought that my answer below was fine and I was 100% sincere. Is there something in the content or is the tone not appropriate? I'm happy to correct it as well.
But I totally see, re-reading the sentence again, that it can be understood this way as well, so fair enough! It does sound a little bit passive aggressive, not my intention, it comes out like that but that's not what I meant. Unintended PM here, so my apologies!
Fair enough, there was some apology.
However...
It just didn't feel straight -not going into the details now-.
And to present it now as a "look there was an apology wasn't there?"
Well, that's what "lawyering" is: quoting specific parts -maybe with some online dictionary definition- instead of going for the general feel and the "sensible interpretation" of a straight-talking person.
One may even "win" at the "lawyering" level when people get tired, but it's a pyrrhic victory: they leave with a bad taste and social capital gets destroyed.
Lawyering irritates people because it's (partly) effective in the sense that they feel forced to respond.
Then they get dragged down into an endless stream of "I said, you said, but I mean" while, to them, it's clear what the problem is.
The issue are, again the basics:
There was a "not-so-cool" behavior
Behavior gets called out
Ownership, simple and brief was lacking
Apology, simple, brief, and ad-hominem, was lacking
Moving on without taking more of people's time and effort, was lacking
I wanna end it here.
I understand that apologizing now is not easy because you're being pressured into it, and that apologizing feels like an annoying act of submission and "giving in".
I empathize so, in a way, I can understand.
It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't -albeit I consider the costs of not doing it far higher-.
And that's another good reason to do the right thing, early and clearly.
Since the "higher bar" was implemented after this started and by now it's a long mess, no moderation here.
Up to you whether you wanna give a simple and brief -simple and brief!- "my bad" to Growfast and Bel -and if you do, I'd then expect both to extend their own hand for the handshake-.
Whatever you decide, I appreciate a speedy resolution.
And going forward we'll expect better -and intervene much sooner-.

John,

This is not something one can fix with more posts.