[Noisebridge-discuss] New furniture

[Brian Cloutier]

>I think you owe him (and Josh) an apology for the unqualified harshness

>You are overreacting.

You guys do realize she said sorry right?

> Maybe you will all love this, as I will now make an example of my own
cognitive fallacies, instead of someone else's. [...] I just reread my
exchange with josh and while I called him out for challenging my statements
rather than querying them, [...]. The wording is, in fact, a query.

"After some review, it turns out that I was wrong"

>  How much of that set of my assumptions come from my knowledge of josh
and past interactions with him? How much is rooted in other experiences I
have had?  In this case especially I am not really sure.

"We've been dicks to each other in the past, so I made a rash judgement and
assumed that pattern was continuing"

> We are a sort of organic computer that constructs algorithms based on
data of interactions. If everyone bases their reactions to each other on
past experiences then there is some necessary noise in the system.

"We are all human, and we all mistakes"

> but what about for all those crazy feminist bitches who flip out every
time you interrupt them?

"Again my bad, I overreacted."

> How do you deal with the ways that people act and react, especially when
they are different than what you might be wanting? I deal with it by trying
to imagine what their motivations are, [...]

"Usually I do try to be empathetic."

> Sometimes I make false conclusions based on my own preconceptions or
situation. [...]  One thing I like about the
metacognitive-neurolinguistic-social-interaction field of study is that it
begins by acknowledging this.

"However this time I really messed up, and I realize that"


This is actually a pretty damn good apology. Instead of just saying "I'm
sorry" Rachel is saying what went wrong, why it happened, and by
referencing science implicitly stating she'll try to do better in the
future.

So... can we back off?

- Brian


On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 2:04 PM, John Withers <jwithers at reddagger.org> wrote:

> I love how anytime anyone disagrees with you going off on people, you
> can never be wrong because anyone pointing out that you go over the top
> agro on people who intended no harm, they are evil oppressors.
>
> It's win win and possibly one of the most brilliant perma-troll tactics
> I have ever seen. Very nice work.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2012-12-04 at 15:03 -0500, rachel lyra hospodar wrote:
> >
> > I found this article by searching "calling out oppression" and
> > "over-reacting".
> > http://ab-wg.blogspot.com/2009/01/role-of-allies.html?m=1
> > Maybe I should make a chart of boringly predictable oblivous
> > responses, or a robot like lmgtfy that deflects blacklisted emails
> > using their adjectives as search terms.
> >
> > Because there are just so many goshdarned people playing out the same
> > predictable social dynamics that there are in fact rote predictable
> > responses to these discussions.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20121204/6640ccd1/attachment-0003.html>