On or about 12-14-05 09:42, Ardith Hinton did engage James Bradley

 JB>  how many times is a person likely to fess up to being
 JB>  the idiot in a quarrel?


 AH>           Probably not many.  While I often see merit on both sides of
 AH> a dispute I imagine there may be a bit of idiocy on both

What, are you trying to say? No one person is the devil, and maybe a saint
isn't walking the planet? Who do you think you are? 

 AH> sides too!  If you're waiting for somebody else to
 AH> apologize you may wait until hell freezes because they're
 AH> doing the same thing.  Apologies are risky, though.

...And someone may never admit fault? Say it aint so! 

 AH> Sometimes they make it easier for others to acknowledge
 AH> their own mistakes... in which case your relationship with
 AH> these individuals will be stronger.  Sometimes they make it
 AH> easier for others to hold onto feelings of righteous
 AH> indignation & moral superiority... in which case you may
 AH> rebel.  I think you're essentially on the right track if
 AH> you do....  :-)

The funnest can be disarming someone with an apology, a retraction, or
correction to your arguement, and their instincts are to never budge an inch,
regardless how wrong they may be. I tend to impart, "I was wrong to... But I
still think you are full of *it." This usually gives enough rope, and a quick
tug so I don't loose the fish. 

Now, maybe in a cut throat business environment, this is where I am out of my
element, but on an interpersonal level, I tend to gravitate to heated debaters,
that are not macho-encumbered. Now, if everyone was as perfect as me... 


 JB>  I try to time *myself* out, where I can take stock of
 JB>  the situation and garner if I have a leg to stand on.

 AH>           Makes sense to me!  What people say in the heat of the moment
 AH> & forget about immediately afterwards can go on hurting for a
 AH> long time.  I believe we're on the same wave length in this
 AH> regard.  Some folks like to have an answer right away.

Ya, but... I'm perfect! 

 AH> They tend to make "snap judgements" where you might process
 AH> the available information more slowly, but take more
 AH> details into account.  This difference in reasoning styles,
 AH> apparently, is the one most likely to lead to conflict
 AH> between individuals.  It may help if you can indicate you
 AH> need more time to think before others start feeling
 AH> ignored.  But it may not be easy to do when they're waiting
 AH> impatiently for closure because that's what makes them feel
 AH> good, and escalating the assault of pejorative adjectives
 AH> or what have you in the meantime... (sigh).

And this is likely why I admit to being a sub-par business negotiator. I can
tell a bunch of slouches to get off their carcasses well enough, but when it
comes time to blow my own horn, my modesty gets all up in my face. One thing I
first noticed before I realized I was living in pain, was a stammer. Oddly
enough, I was dealing with some VERY unsavoury business types (Actually just
underpaid peons.) with aplomb, but I couldn't string a sentence together when
approaching the opposite sex. Once I realized how depleted in body I was, did I
manage to make sense of the mental decline. Today, the stammer only shows up if
I have a crush on a female, AND I've run my body ragged in the days prior.

 JB>  Then I try to asses if a round-two is going to progress
 JB>  to a solution, or add gas to a flame.

 AH>           Uh-huh.  "Least said, soonest mended," or... what??

Again, I think of it as a cost-benefit. Maybe cold of me, but if the combatant
is not worth the time, who cares how dominant (s)he feels by me walking away?
If the person is someone I care about, I feel a need to coerce their opinion to
what I think is the proper way.

Fer instance, my sister is a product of the peace movement, where I tend toward
an enforcement bent. A sixteen year old coworker was camping out on the City
Hall steps protesting the first Gulf war. I could tell my sister was glossing
over when I was telling the story, until I got to the part of my opinion that I
expressed to my coworker.

"If someone killed my brother, tortured my father, raped my sisters, and
bludgeoned my mother, I too would be ticked enough to pick up arms, and I would
only hope others in a free world would join me."

She picked up on the killing and raping part, and was surprised that I would
want to do others harm. I know it's not very "Christian" of me,
but that's just
part of my character. Before she understood my early comments, her "Turn the
other cheek" peace-nick arguments came boiling to the surface. I then asked if
someone was keeping our sister as a love-slave, and not in a good way, killed
every male member of our family, and ate our last tin of tuna so she had
nothing left in the pantry, would she not wish for justice? If she didn't pick
up the nearest wepon to kick the next butt to walk in with the wrong coloured
uniform...

She is someone who I feel needs to realize a nastiness that we as Canadians do
not see. If she was nothing more than an acquaintance, and she displayed a lack
of willingness to see another's point of view, I would just inform them that I
think they are being idealist, and I wish I too could live in the utopia they
reside in.


 AH>           Yes, that may be quite a challenge!  You're in double
 AH> jeopardy because so much depends on words.  You can't see the other
 AH> person's facial expressions & body language, or hear their
 AH> tone of voice, and the same applies in the opposite
 AH> direction.  You don't know what sort of mood they'll be in
 AH> when they receive the message either.  You can make
 AH> adjustments on the phone or in person....  :-)

Yup. <-;

 AH>           I suppose.  When your only contact is via FidoMail, however,
 AH> it may be particularly difficult to estimate the cost/benefit
 AH> ratio of further discussion. Some time ago we got a message
 AH> in SURVIVOR from a new writer claiming nobody had answered
 AH> previous messages, we were a bunch of snobs, etc.  I could
 AH> have ignored her concerns on the grounds that she didn't impress me as
 AH> the type of person I'd want to know better, but I decided not
 AH> to.  I listed the replies we'd seen here, including my own,
 AH> then told her what I thought of her behaviour.  She became
 AH> one of our most enthusiastic participants shortly
 AH> thereafter.  Okay... so what had I done right??  Perhaps I
 AH> shocked her into changing mental gears by citing facts &
 AH> figures.  In any case, I think it's very important that I
 AH> let her know we'd been paying attention before tearing a
 AH> strip off her.  She realized I wouldn't bother writing a
 AH> long diatribe in response if nobody, including me, cared
 AH> how she felt. Then she realized her SysOp had been deleting
 AH> messages after three days!  Others may react differently...
 AH> but I was glad I had taken the risk with this gal.  :-)

Cost: 
A bit of time explaining the sysop's roll, and how e-mail works or - as the
case may be - not work. You felt it a reasonable tax on you to point out some
facts on the matter, and I doubt it didn't do you some good too.

Benefit:
I'm sure the corespondent appreciated the education, and by not replying in
kind, you disarmed her quite effectively. The rest of the obviously rewarding
outcome are more obvious to the two subjects, or someone that witnessed the
exchange.

Maybe the sysop felt it best that he protect his board by a preemptive- strike,
and for whatever his justification, might have caused more trouble than it
alleviated. The net outcome is all that counts, and it sounds like it was very
rewarding to the both of you.

I had an experience when I was a new sysop, where a user was using *all* her
online time every day to compose replies without any quoting. After too much of
this, I suggested an OLMR, or at least a terminal program that would allow her
to quote the previous message.

"No, this works fine for me."

"Everyone else is being taxed to understand what you are talking about.
Besides, I really would prefer if you left the board available to other
callers, mainly me, instead of monopolizing it for your own incomprehensible
drivel. I'm not the only one getting more than frustrated." I'm paraphrasing
myself to be sure, but came a point when this caller was being totally self
centred, complaining about everything, then not taking the advice of the many
that were offering solutions - mostly being, "Have you ever tried an OLMR, or
at least a terminal program that will allow you to quote the message you are
replying to?" ... ... ...

Comes a point when the advice dries up, and nobody wants to offer anything to
make her experience better, because she won't take any of it.

I walked from the experience, knowing she would frequent another BBS, and
likely pester another sysop until their advice dries up. I took from the
experience realizing how I can be the same type of pesterer, and how I might
better be able to accept advice from well meaning strangers. 

I also realized to this day how imperfect *I* can be, so "If you see Buda
walking down the street shoot him." 


 JB>  Unlike Nash, I still have faith in a win-win situation. The
 JB>  tricky part is finding others who believe it is possible.


 AH>           Yes.  Okay, so I'm a cockeyed optimist.  Count me in....  ;-)

Well, the "real world" aint at *all* like fido. (sic.)


... "will end up with a server that is beyond the client's ability to be
served.
___ MultiMail/Linux v0.46

--- Maximus 3.01