this:

Someone who posts in a rude and inflammatory matter, is (at least when making that post), a rude and inflammatory person.

and this:

I know this because if someone called any one of my posts, over my 5+ years here, rude and inflammatory I would take it very personally.

are two different concepts.

And, with no judgment on this particular situation, one thoughtless or inadvertent comment does not change that person's personality. If that were the case, everyone who ever did a ((hug)) would be immediately classified as a warm fuzzy person. A post that someone perceived as rude does not necessarily make the poster a rude person, especially if there is difference as to whether the post was rude at all.

Why do we keep calling them the "perceived" hurt feelings?

Well, I would say perceived because I don't know if Laga's feelings were hurt or not. But you perceived that her feelings might be.

When Laga wrote

I'm irritated because the majority of posts in lightbulbs are about the proliferation argument. I feel there are no new points to be made in that regard but if I want to read the posts specifically about the thread being proposed I have to comb through the broader argument to find them. Also I do get a sense of a lot of hurt feelings and it makes me uncomfortable knowing that people feel hurt. One of the main reasons I love it here is because people are compassionate and I hate to watch that break down.

she wrote her about her irritation at the redundancy of the arguments and her own sense of other's hurt.

Which is why I asked if people's feelings HAD been hurt.

I'm irritated by the proliferation discussion. But I'm never hurt by it.

it turns out I still find it pretty offensive

Jessica states clearly she is offended by Laga's remark. And I am too. But I'm not hurt by it.

Hurt over a contentious disagreement isn't something I experience a lot. People are talking about hurt feelings. But what if, when we really examine it, it's not about being hurt, but about being offended or irritated. Which we have things in place to deal with already (offended is resolved, ideally, the way Jessica did and irritated? MARCIE or don't read the thread).

And, if we are really talking about worrying about OTHERS getting their feelings hurt? I mean, Wolfram, you kindly tried to ameliorate someone's hurt feelings when she herself never claimed such. Based on your understanding, you assumed she would be hurt and asked Jessica to defend her point of view and then disagreed with it. Is that part of the problem? People worried about others being hurt and trying to stop that from happening? When the other person might not be hurt at all?

One thoughtless or inadvertent comment does not change that person's personality. If that were the case, everyone who ever did a ((hug)) would be immediately classified as a warm fuzzy person. A post that someone perceived as rude does not necessarily make the poster a rude person, especially if there is difference as to whether the post was rude at all.

Yet I would call someone who hugged me a warm person. And I would call someone who insulted me a rude person. Their actual personality may have little to do with it. It becomes all about how I perceive them. And I perceive posters here by their posts. As I assume I am perceived.

Note: I actually find this discussion fascinating, even though I don't expect to change any minds. If my continued posts in this matter are grating, I'm sorry and I will stop.

I perceive posters here by their posts.

I perceive posters here by what I know of them, which is far more than just one post whose content may be rude.

For instance, as unfathomable as it is, if Nilly were to post something that was snippy or even rude, I would never think that she, herself, was a rude person, based on what I know of her. I "know" her through *all* of her posts, over the past X number of years, in addition to being lucky enough to have met her in person. One rude post weighed against all that is never going to make me think, "Damn, Nilly is a BITCH!" (Which is one of the most improbable statements anyone has ever typed, I'll wager.)

Does that make sense?

And, if we are really talking about worrying about OTHERS getting their feelings hurt? I mean, Wolfram, you kindly tried to ameliorate someone's hurt feelings when she herself never claimed such. Based on your understanding, you assumed she would be hurt and asked Jessica to defend her point of view and then disagreed with it. Is that part of the problem? People worried about others being hurt and trying to stop that from happening? When the other person might not be hurt at all?

Kat, you're right. I may have gotten overzealous in defending her because Laga's relatively new, and her comment pinged me as completely innocent. I challenged Jessica, and as she was not the only one who read offense, I stand corrected there too.

Does that make sense?

Sure. Things like getting to know a poster's style, and getting to know them in person, all contribute to a little more understanding of each post. So long-time posters, and those who you know or who've F2Fed with you would get more of a pass. And that's totally appropriate.

Also, taking Vortex's example, if someone you know is rude gave you a hug, you'd probably still think of them as rude. And maybe a little creepy. And if your BFF said something rude to you, he'd probably still be your BFF. But you may have earned a free slap.

t Still catching-up

I'm sorry that I offended anyone. I am very sorry that I chose my words poorly.

I hope it's not stepping-on-toes of me, because I didn't take part in the conversation and your words were not meant to me, and of course I can speak only for myself, as a trying-to-catch-up coming-lately, but still, thank you, Laga, for posting that.

I'm so sorry Jessica. I'm sorry that I offended anyone. I am very sorry that I chose my words poorly.

Thank you, I really appreciate that.

[eta: And sorry it took me so long to respond - I just got out of an hourlong conference call.]

I respect Jessica's right to ask for an apology, and I am glad that Laga made one so quickly and sincerely.

For instance, as unfathomable as it is, if Nilly were to post something that was snippy or even rude, I would never think that she, herself, was a rude person, based on what I know of her.

Yes, this. Fwiw, I've known Laga for two years, and though she chose her words poorly in this case, I can avow that she did not intend to be offensive and probably feels terrible about the unintended result of her statement. I'm very glad that the apology has been made and accepted so graciously by Jessica.

I don't think I've actually seen anyone say, "I felt hurt" over something another poster wrote. I think that I have been equating irritated and offended with hurt when really they're not the same thing at all. I'm starting to realize that even b.org is not utopia. Why can't we all get along? Because in a sufficiently large community that's just not possible, at least not all the time.

I have been having trouble making lightbulbs work the way I want it to work but I'm so glad we've had this discussion because now I see that it probably works as well as it can.

I don't recall who posted that she tends to read the initial few posts in lightbulbs to get an idea of the issue at hand and then waits until the last day of voting to read the summary arguments but I think I will try that next time. It's certainly not fair to ask people not to argue from their own frame of reference which I now understand is exactly what I was asking.