[Noisebridge-discuss] Rachel's language
johnyradio at gmail.com
Sun Mar 30 02:33:29 UTC 2014
------ Original Message ------
From: "Alcides Gutierrez" <alcides888 at gmail.com>
>I think C. W. has written a very thoughtful and balanced treatment of
>how to approach violations of boundaries.
>Whether or not a boundary is (made explicitly ) known BEFORE it has
>been crossed is irrelevant if honest reconciliation is the goal.
>When someone has stated AFTERWARDS that a boundary has been crossed,
>acknowledgement of the event is a fantastic first step to honest
>To be fair, name calling or similar negative tones in explaining a
>crossing of boundaries is not the most excellent way of approaching
"not the most excellent" implies that it's somewhat excellent, but not
the "most" excellent. False, her words were the opposite of excellent,
and I'm finished being on the defensive about this. No one has taken
Rachel to task about her words (except Al).
>I personally try to refrain from judging people's choice of socializing
Rachel was not "socializing", she was "abusing". I can take affectionate
ribbing from a friend. This does not qualify.
It's pretty amazing, and unacceptible, to me that being an apologist for
someone's blatant abusiveness, and criticizing the target of the abuse.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss