[Noisebridge-discuss] New furniture

[Tony Longshanks LeTigre]

I had one more thing to add, after reading more of this thread:

*Are you kidding? I love bitches!* One of my personalities is a total Joan
Crawford, ice-cold bitch on rollerblades. My other personalities hate her.

It's a good thing I'll never have children.

On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 1:58 AM, Tony Longshanks LeTigre <
anthonyletigre at gmail.com> wrote:

> I had not seen or read the apology message before I posted my message.
> I've been too busy to read most of the posts lately, but I skim them to
> keep a handle on what's going on at least. I saw something that made me
> react & didn't have or take the time to read exhaustively through the
> thread. I apologize if my response seemed "aggro," it was intended as
> criticism but not a full-frontal attack & certainly not a troll post;
> actually I made an effort to end it on a positive, forward-moving note. I
> will try to be more exhaustive in reading before responding in future.
>
> +11+
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Brian Cloutier <
> briancloutier2010 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> >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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *You should read my diaries after I die—I talk about you a lot in there.*
>



-- 
*You should read my diaries after I die—I talk about you a lot in there.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20121206/72b022e1/attachment-0003.html>