Rejecting my overt statement regarding my tone was a pretty darn good example of what I was arguing in the first place - that a few posters are becoming very aggressive, and effectively bullying other posters - newbies, soft-spoken posters, and oldbies alike.

I bolded the parts of that sentence that seem to draw a conclusion -- please tell me if I'm misinterpreting your words, Rafmun -- that rejecting your statement (abut your tone) was an example of a few posters aggressively bullying other posters.

I, in no way, re-worded or re-ordered that statement -- I quoted your actual words. And what they say is that rejecting your statement is an example of bullying.

That is a mistaken assumption. Rejecting anyone's statements (opinions, declarations, screeds) is not bullying. It is merely not agreeing with that person's statement.

A failure to agree with you does not constitute bullying.

Rejecting my overt statement regarding my tone was a pretty darn good example of what I was arguing in the first place - that a few posters are becoming very aggressive, and effectively bullying other posters - newbies, soft-spoken posters, and oldbies alike.

You know what? You can't convey tone by an overt statement indicating that is the tone in which your words should be understood.

This is very true. There is no way I could preface a post with "Please know my intended tone is welcoming and friendly," and follow it up with insults and threats.

there still remain more than a few long-termers who stood up and said 'me too' to at least some of what I observed, and others who added much of their own concerns and observations. What of them? Surely they're not arrogant and patronizing too for feeling similarly, are they?

Well, this goes back to tone. The content isn't arrogant and rude; it's the manner in which it's written. The "long-termers" who agreed with you did not express themselves with the same condescending, lecturing attitude you did, and therefore did not come across as patronizing.

Rafmun, you make me feel pretty unwelcome. What should we do about you?

Perhaps you could start by addressing these repeat offenders by name, it appears cowardly that you don't.

Yes, this. I don't doubt for a second I'm in the Evil Mean Cabal(TM) (say my name! say it! say my name, bitch!), and I wish you'd just come out with it and say who exactly is being so bullying towards others.

And if not, you could cite some examples (i.e., "in the F2F thread, many people expressed a preference for a hotel with a pool, but Steph was so insistent that we choose one without a pool that eventually everyone gave up and capitulated to her") so we get an idea of what you mean.

Because what seems "bullying" to one person might not seem so to another. And it isn't surprising in a board this size that there would be differing perceptions of such.

and went, for lack of a more clinical term - starkers.

You got naked?

(Big spicy brains are expensive. If they're not pulling their weight, then they're just zombie magnets.)

I think this is my new motto for life.

And thanks for pulling me up on the less-evolved thing. I know better, and I went for the cheap joke -- to make up for it, I can only offer these less-intelligent-than-monkeys cute-heads.

You got naked?

BWAH! Thanks, Steph, I needed that laugh. Now to clean the tea from my keyboard.

And thanks for pulling me up on the less-evolved thing. I know better, and I went for the cheap joke -- to make up for it, I can only offer these less-intelligent-than-monkeys cute-heads.

Seriously, it wasn't my intent to pull you up. Light-hearted comments are just that. I was just soapboxing on a pet issue. (Have you ever tried boxing soap? It's trickier than it looks, they're slippery bastards.)

Meanwhile, your link is making me laugh. There's a picture of an aye-aye with a maniacal stare (as do all aye-ayes) and a sign saying "Adopt Me". It cracks me up.

Jeez, you guys -- when I got off-line, you were all supposed to, too!

Anyway. The thing about overtly stating your tone? The most common real-life equivalents are "No offense, but..." and "With all due respect..." The speaker is obviously trying to disguise the mean thing they are about to say with an overt statement that they aren't being mean. It doesn't work in real life, and it doesn't work online.

NOT that I think Rafmun was neccessarily being obnoxious on purpose, but many of his posts did come across that way, to several people. And this kind of ties back to our Action procedure, in a way. Note that I am NOT AT ALL saying Rafmun's post are inappropriate in any way. This is just a comment on the group dynamics of offense. We agreed (or at least the majority of people stating an opinion agreed) that only a few (10) people had to be offended for something to be deemed officially offensive. The bar is set pretty low, which I think is a good thing. It's not a popularity contest, it's not about the lurkers supporting you in email. If 10 people are upset enough to say so, that's enough. If several people interpret your posts the same way (even wrongly), it's on you to reconsider the way you're posting.

RESOLVED: that all Buffistas shall forthwith, unto the ending of the world, (1) strive to speak and listen with a minimum of obnoxiousness, and with a maximum of empathy; (2) consider before posting anything, and double on anything composed under circumstances of high emotion; (3) acknowledge that word choice, phrasing, amount and extent of quoted material, and even those stupid emoticons constitute "tone" as practiced in an online environment, and that the sum definition of "tone" as set forth herein matters; (4) speak outright and specifically any resentments, dislikes, grudges and feelings, or not speak about them at all, an honest debate being greatly preferred to a veiled one; and (5) strive ceaselessly to groom one another verily like unto monkeys, preferably the nice soft giggly kind and not the kind that throws its shit at people in the zoo.

Yes. This.

You can't mandate the board into a place I'm always happy in without driving someone else away. People, new or old, will leave.

Also this. I appreciated Matt's post a lot. This is not a place for everyone, and it shouldn't be. I may be sad when someone I like leaves, but life goes on. If this becomes a place that isn't for me, I'll go. It's not the end of the world. I promise. Like msbelle said earlier, it really is possible to leave an internet community and not die.

I don't want to get into listing people's names, because you know I'll forget someone, and they'll think I hate them, but there were many excellent posts last night.

I've been following this discussion since last night, off and on. Some of it drove me nuts, other parts had me nodding along in agreement. I think that Juliana wound up coming closest to summarizing my opinion:

I would like to reiterate a position that a lot of people have taken: that we do not slap down newbies willy-nilly. A lot of people have delurked and fit in just fine without a belly-flop in the guac. Some people have delurked straight into the guac, some people have hung about for a bit and tripped over the guac, and some people have set up the damned party and still managed to get guac all over their dress recently.

I also came to the realization that not everyone here is necessarily going to like me, or agree with me. There are people on this board I feel closer to than others. Some of these people have been here since TT, others have only come to my attention in the past couple of months.

Also, there are times when I will feel like everyone is ignoring me. Conversely, there are plenty of times when Buffista A's posts will set my teeth on edge through no intent of his or her own. Assuming I normally like this person, I might just skip/skim A's posts until the tooth-grindy subject goes away. If I think that A has said something out of line, I would point out what I thought was out of line, and why. Whether I do this on-board or through back-channel would depend on a number of things--was the statement obviously offensive? was it a matter of 'tone'? what is my history with this person? what is my history with this segment of the board?

I probably get on some people's nerves from time to time, and I'm pretty sure I've said things that have offended people on occasion.

All I would ask is that if I have managed to trail my lacy sleeve in the guac, that someone would point it out to me so that I can clean up the mess before the stain sets. I'd rather have my feelings slightly bruised than find out later that everyone was letting their anger at my lack of guac-skillz fester and build into grudges.

Because what seems "bullying" to one person might not seem so to another. And it isn't surprising in a board this size that there would be differing perceptions of such.

I'm moving past debate on this issue, Steph.

I posted my observations above, and people responded in various ways. Fair enough. I Got drawn into a debate on the minutiae even after stating upfront that I thought such misdirection was part of the problem.

I should have simply let the original observation post stand for what it was intended - just my $0.02 - take it or leave it, and allow the thread to evolve such that it proved or disproved the points asserted. I think that's what happened, though I fear that the soft-voices are again being overlooked. I acknowledge that by being drawn into the tangential, off-topic issues, I contributed to clouding the results, and inadvertently played into the drowing out of the voices I most wished heard.

So what I'm going to try to do now, lest a moot debate is prolonged unnecessarily, is move onward, go have fun and lemur groom.

I should have simply let the original observation post stand for what it was intended - just my $0.02 - take it or leave it, and allow the thread to evolve such that it proved or disproved the points asserted. I think that's what happened, though I fear that the soft-voices are again being overlooked. I acknowledge that by being drawn into the tangential, off-topic issues, I contributed to clouding the results, and inadvertently played into the drowing out of the voices I most wished heard.

I guess I'm misunderstanding you. What exactly was your main point? Because, from my perspective, we've spent the past several hundred posts discussing your post. What were we supposed to have been discussing from it that we weren't?

I'm moving past debate on this issue, Steph.

Conveniently allowing you to not address my comments. Very nice.

And by the way, the tone on "very nice" was acidic.

I fear that the soft-voices are again being overlooked.

You -- and everyone else -- have no way of knowing this.

Shit, I knew I'd forget something: I do think there's a significant number of "I'm sorry, could you clarify?" posts, and I really don't think the "smackdown" is a regular part of our discourse. Granted, it could be going on in threads I don't read, but that's not my impression of Buffistas.org in general AT ALL.