Acrimoniousness


5038 Acrimoniousness	ARTICLE INDEX
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:45:21 -0700 From: m i l e s <miles@tangobliss.com> Subject: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness To: tango-l@mit.edu All, I wonder if its that difficult for this group to actually have a discussion that isn't acrimonious ? In my 15 years online in every forum I've either managed or been party to there has always been a level of common human decency in email communications. And at the very least, the flame wars were eventually taken offline and conversation resumed in a civilized and humane manner. This list is the exception to that rule. This list not only needs to be moderated or at the very least some level of control and inhibition needs to be put in place, it further needs to get a grip on how to treat one another. I have been party to and co-created that level acrimoniousness in the last 6 months (giving as good as I've gotten, and I despised and chided myself for doing just that!), but this stuff is just heartbreaking and a pain to have to deal with on a regular basis. I can easily see why so many people leave. I know of a half dozen alone this week from the bay area. You'd think we were all squabbling children with the way that we speak to each other online. I can imagine this same conversations in an actual room, and I can virtually guarantee that a.) they it'd never happen, and b.) there'd be a level of civil discourse that resembled a tea party of the 18th century, where politeness and civility were the norm, and nary a harsh word was spoken or even whispered. Is that possible ? M i l e s. Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:22:41 -0700 From: flame@2xtreme.net Subject: [Tango-L] Miles re; Tango Acrimoniousness To: tango-l@mit.edu > From: m i l e s <miles@tangobliss.com> > > I wonder if its that difficult for this group to actually have a > discussion that isn't acrimonious ? Obviously, it's too difficult. > In my 15 years online in every forum I've either managed or been > party to there has always been a level of common human decency in > email communications. And at the very least, the flame wars were > eventually taken offline and conversation resumed in a civilized and > humane manner. This list is the exception to that rule. This list > not only needs to be moderated or at the very least some level of > control and inhibition needs to be put in place, it further needs to > get a grip on how to treat one another. That's odd. Every on-line forum I've seen in ends up like this. The "know it all's" always start to duke it out. And moderators? Please. That's the best way to really kill a group. > I have been party to and co-created that level acrimoniousness in the > last 6 months (giving as good as I've gotten, and I despised and > chided myself for doing just that!), but this stuff is just > heartbreaking and a pain to have to deal with on a regular basis. I > can easily see why so many people leave. I know of a half dozen > alone this week from the bay area. You'd think we were all > squabbling children with the way that we speak to each other online. Heartbreaking? Despising & chiding yourself? Miles, get a grip! It's more funny than anything else. How can anyone read some of this stuff and not laugh out loud? > I can imagine this same conversations in an actual room, and I can > virtually guarantee that a.) they it'd never happen, and b.) there'd > be a level of civil discourse that resembled a tea party of the 18th > century, where politeness and civility were the norm, and nary a > harsh word was spoken or even whispered. > > Is that possible ? Nah, no way. > M i l e s. > Flame Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:03:14 -0400 From: "WHITE 95 R" <white95r@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness To: miles@tangobliss.com, tango-l@mit.edu No Miles, this list does not need to be moderated. It was moderated at one time and it was the worst situation imaginable. We had a petty tyrant and chief censor who ran roughshod over anyone he decided to target. Also, this forum is far more funny and hilarious than mean and offensive, Where else can I get the recommended daily minimum allowance of driverl and foolishnes? At the very least some of these threads exist so we can all remember that utter silliness and foolishness are everywhere and reminds us to laugh. If you are so distressed by the antics of our fellow listeros and listeras, you might want to just take a break for a while and just go dancing. It will do you a world of good ;-) Cheers, Manuel visit our webpage www.tango-rio.com >From: m i l e s <miles@tangobliss.com> >To: tango-l@mit.edu >Subject: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness >Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:45:21 -0700 > >All, > >I wonder if its that difficult for this group to actually have a >discussion that isn't acrimonious ? > >In my 15 years online in every forum I've either managed or been >party to there has always been a level of common human decency in >email communications. And at the very least, the flame wars were >eventually taken offline and conversation resumed in a civilized and >humane manner. This list is the exception to that rule. This list >not only needs to be moderated or at the very least some level of >control and inhibition needs to be put in place, it further needs to >get a grip on how to treat one another. > >I have been party to and co-created that level acrimoniousness in the >last 6 months (giving as good as I've gotten, and I despised and >chided myself for doing just that!), but this stuff is just >heartbreaking and a pain to have to deal with on a regular basis. I >can easily see why so many people leave. I know of a half dozen >alone this week from the bay area. You'd think we were all >squabbling children with the way that we speak to each other online. > >I can imagine this same conversations in an actual room, and I can >virtually guarantee that a.) they it'd never happen, and b.) there'd >be a level of civil discourse that resembled a tea party of the 18th >century, where politeness and civility were the norm, and nary a >harsh word was spoken or even whispered. > >Is that possible ? > >M i l e s. > > Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 01:32:11 -0400 From: Keith <keith@tangohk.com> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness To: tango-l@mit.edu Miles, You must have led a very sheltered life if you think the antics on this forum are acrimonious. Try telling a 6ft Irish foreman that he doesn't have enough cement in his concrete and you'll learn the meaning of acrimonious :-). And lets use the real word, shall we - moderator is just a fancy name for censor. And that would be the worst possible thing for this list. Just take it easy - it's only words. And, all the recent talk about beer reminded me of something I heard years ago, but can't remember where. It was along the lines of ... "Dancing Tango is like a feeling of wearing a tuxedo and drinking fine wine, whereas dancing Milonga is more a feeling of wearing jeans and drinking beer with your buddies". Anybody know where that came from? Keith, HK On Wed Jul 18 7:45 , m i l e s sent: >All, > >I wonder if its that difficult for this group to actually have a >discussion that isn't acrimonious ? > >In my 15 years online in every forum I've either managed or been >party to there has always been a level of common human decency in >email communications. And at the very least, the flame wars were >eventually taken offline and conversation resumed in a civilized and >humane manner. This list is the exception to that rule. This list >not only needs to be moderated or at the very least some level of >control and inhibition needs to be put in place, it further needs to >get a grip on how to treat one another. > >I have been party to and co-created that level acrimoniousness in the >last 6 months (giving as good as I've gotten, and I despised and >chided myself for doing just that!), but this stuff is just >heartbreaking and a pain to have to deal with on a regular basis. I >can easily see why so many people leave. I know of a half dozen >alone this week from the bay area. You'd think we were all >squabbling children with the way that we speak to each other online. > >I can imagine this same conversations in an actual room, and I can >virtually guarantee that a.) they it'd never happen, and b.) there'd >be a level of civil discourse that resembled a tea party of the 18th >century, where politeness and civility were the norm, and nary a >harsh word was spoken or even whispered. > >Is that possible ? > >M i l e s. > > Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 03:26:46 -0400 From: "Michael" <tangomaniac@cavtel.net> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness To: "WHITE 95 R" <white95r@hotmail.com>, <miles@tangobliss.com>, <tango-l@mit.edu> Cc: Michael <tangomaniac@cavtel.net> Miles: If you want to see the effect of moderation, join the Argentine Tango Open Forum on yahoo groups. If the moderator doesn't like what you write, you will be abused for his personal pleasure. If he agrees with you, you're his friend, and if not, look out. He never apologizes and is always right. I "mysteriously" got dropped and he didn't accept my request to rejoin the list. Michael I'd rather be dancing Argentine Tango ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 1:03 AM Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness No Miles, this list does not need to be moderated. It was moderated at one time and it was the worst situation imaginable. We had a petty tyrant and chief censor who ran roughshod over anyone he decided to target. Cheers, Manuel Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 07:12:11 -0500 From: "Tango Society of Central Illinois" <tango.society@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness To: keith@tangohk.com Cc: tango-l@mit.edu <cff24c340707180512tfabb4bke0fddadaaa0664ca@mail.gmail.com> On 7/18/07, Keith <keith@tangohk.com> wrote: > > > > And, all the recent talk about beer reminded me of something I heard years > ago, but can't remember where. It was along the > lines of ... "Dancing Tango is like a feeling of wearing a tuxedo and > drinking fine wine, whereas dancing Milonga is more a > feeling of wearing jeans and drinking beer with your buddies". Anybody > know where that came from? > > Keith, HK > > > One source is Pablo Pugliese (translated by David Trenner) in a Bridge to the Tango instructional video [Pablo & Ester Pugliese - 'Milonga'] Ron Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 12:11:19 -0700 From: m i l e s <miles@tangobliss.com> Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was: Acrimoniousness) To: tango-l@mit.edu Hi, After reading everyones responses my post about Acrimoniousness... "You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it may not change anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to be". - Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5. Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list moderator in my estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list moderation if they're acting like that. A good list moderator, shepherds the conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare skill and not everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting a list to pick someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list. Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the better portion of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on the one thing that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a friend of mine once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do, and you can't change that. But you can influence them by how you carry yourself." M i l e s. Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:12:02 -0400 From: Carol Shepherd <arborlaw@comcast.net> Subject: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation To: "'Mash" <mashdot@toshine.net> Cc: "\[Tango-L\]" <tango-l@mit.edu> Apparently the answer to Miles' query is that for some reason, in the online tango community, the dominant players generate and consume poison and unpleasantness as a form of entertainment. They expect others to be wired the same way. They feed on provocation and conflict and if it is not there in sufficient quantity, they will stir the pot. They engage in display behavior by acting out their dominance and they award themselves self esteem points through bullying. These self-esteem points are very easily obtained because everyone is remote and there are no social consequences to bullying or other bad behavior. Accordingly, on tango-l there is no consensus (as there is generally in polite society) that to be acrimonious and impose your unpleasantness on others is morally wrong or stressful on a community, or even bad for your karma or your blood pressure. To the contrary, it is celebrated. The community does not want a moderator because the community does not want to lose its primary form of entertainment. It is unfortunate that the highest and most intellectual discussion of a particular human endeavor (tango) to be found, as on this list, requires subjecting oneself to the petty amusements of others who take their entertainment primarily in the form of bullying others, and who justify their mean and uncivilized behavior by claiming that it is actually a necessary expression of "passion and intensity." When in Rome, be aware that Romans are going to continue being Romans. This does not mean that you must be a Roman. 'Mash wrote: > I look forward to the day that we can use "flame wars" as a sustainable energy source. > > 'Mash > London,UK > > "May we be cautious in our perfection lest we lose the ability to dance." > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 02:28:11PM -0600, Nina Pesochinsky wrote: > >>Amaury, >> >>On the tango lists, there are only two choices - you either die or be >>killed, or grow thick skin. Welcome to the list1 >> >>Nina >> >> >> >> >> >> >>At 02:16 PM 7/18/2007, Amaury de Siqueira wrote: >> >>>My first experience with list moderation date as far >>>back as 1993-4 with the >>>KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the >>>day moderation was as >>>detrimental to the list as non-moderation. >>> >>>One of the rationales behind list moderation is >>>sustenance of an online >>>community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that >>>constant disruption >>>and flame war is likely to push certain members to >>>leave the community thus >>>eroding the quality of membership and content of >>>postings. >>> >>>The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That >>>is, an old established >>>list with strong membership and displaying high >>>quality posting may not be >>>susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and >>>disruption. It seems to me >>>that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a >>>while virulent posting of >>>some listeras. ;) >>> >>>Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying >>>exchanges. Nina's >>>abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned >>>as a result of an >>>initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to >>>Konstantin, Huck, and all >>>others) >>> >>>A censored list may strip the list of its richness of >>>expression. Granted >>>we should all try to display certain level of >>>civility. However, I must >>>say that the entertainment value of some postings >>>bring a smile to my face. >>>That alone makes it all worthwhile. >>> >>>Cheers, >>>Amaury >>> >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: tango-l-bounces@mit.edu >>>[mailto:tango-l-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of >>>m i l e s >>>Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:11 PM >>>To: tango-l@mit.edu >>>Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was: >>>Acrimoniousness) >>> >>>Hi, >>> >>>After reading everyones responses my post about >>>Acrimoniousness... >>> >>>"You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it >>>may not change >>>anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to >>>be". - Kosh, >>>Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5. >>> >>>Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list >>>moderator in my >>>estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list >>>moderation if >>>they're acting like that. A good list moderator, >>>shepherds the >>>conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare >>>skill and not >>>everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting >>>a list to pick >>>someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list. >>> >>>Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the >>>better portion >>>of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on >>>the one thing >>>that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a >>>friend of mine >>>once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do, >>>and you can't >>>change that. But you can influence them by how you >>>carry yourself." >>> >>>M i l e s. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. >> >> >> > > -- Carol Ruth Shepherd Arborlaw PLC Ann Arbor MI USA 734 668 4646 v 734 786 1241 f https://arborlaw.com "legal solutions for 21st century businesses" Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:12:11 +0000 From: Jay Rabe <jayrabe@hotmail.com> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation To: <shepherd@arborlaw.com> Cc: "\[Tango-L\]" <tango-l@mit.edu> Carol, Excellent insight and summary. Only one point I might disagree on. I believe there is wide consensus on the list about flame behavior being judged wrong or inappropriate or unproductive. But in "polite society," when a person is obnoxious or boorish, people roll their eyes and turn away and ignore or shun them. In electronic society, the analogue is to not respond - "don't feed the trolls", or delete un-read any posts from repeat offenders. But those responses are invisible to the offender. It's easy enough to assume people aren't responding because of inability to come up with a good retort. J TangoMoments.com > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:12:02 -0400> From: arborlaw@comcast.net> To: mashdot@toshine.net> CC: tango-l@mit.edu> Subject: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation> > Apparently the answer to Miles' query is that for some reason, in the > online tango community, the dominant players generate and consume poison > and unpleasantness as a form of entertainment.> > They expect others to be wired the same way. They feed on provocation > and conflict and if it is not there in sufficient quantity, they will > stir the pot. They engage in display behavior by acting out their > dominance and they award themselves self esteem points through bullying. > These self-esteem points are very easily obtained because everyone is > remote and there are no social consequences to bullying or other bad > behavior.> > Accordingly, on tango-l there is no consensus (as there is generally in > polite society) that to be acrimonious and impose your unpleasantness on > others is mor! /mailman/listinfo/tango-l Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play Chicktionary!?? https://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlmailtextlink Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:45:54 -0600 From: Nina Pesochinsky <nina@earthnet.net> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation To: <tango-l@mit.edu> Carol, Mash and everyone, Perhaps some of you have not been on this list very long. This list has not seen a single flame in YEARS. There is a little poking and teasing, but no flaming. Criticism or disagreement is not flaming. If you want to read real flaming on this list, then go back to the archives of 1997 or so. This list is gentle and polite by comparison to what it used to be. Not only did it have real flames, but there was a much worse kind of flaming - in private e-mails. That is why should this list ever see any flaming in the future, I encourage people to let others know that if they welcome their flames, they all have to be in the public forum and not via private communication. On another note, if you think that you can be bullied on Internet, then how do you survive in your real life? Does whining and complaining about the behavior of others without naming them gets you the results that you want? Carols points demonstrate clearly a difference between direct aggression and passive aggression. On this list, it appears that people accused of flaming are being directly aggressive towards other people and/or their ideas. Passive aggression is expressed by others as hints and abstract ideas without ever naming anyone, but implying their identity. I believe that this difference is cultural. Even though both forms of aggression exist in all cultures, some cultures prefer the direct approach while others avoid direct confrontation without giving up their own aggression. To me passive aggression is cowardly, so I probably would be more direct if flame wars ever returned to this list. It is an issue of integrity - if I am willing to put my ideas forward, then I have to accept the risk that they will be unpopular. I believe that other people have a right to express their disagreement with my ideas however it feels right to them, as long as it is legal. My responsibility is to choose my own response. Trying to control others usually does nor work very well. While the integrity is required, suffering, feeling bullied and offended is optional. As far as tango goes, it really works well to become more Argentine than the Argentines are. :) Best, Nina At 03:12 AM 7/19/2007, Carol Shepherd wrote: >Apparently the answer to Miles' query is that for some reason, in the >online tango community, the dominant players generate and consume poison >and unpleasantness as a form of entertainment. > >They expect others to be wired the same way. They feed on provocation >and conflict and if it is not there in sufficient quantity, they will >stir the pot. They engage in display behavior by acting out their >dominance and they award themselves self esteem points through bullying. > These self-esteem points are very easily obtained because everyone is >remote and there are no social consequences to bullying or other bad >behavior. > >Accordingly, on tango-l there is no consensus (as there is generally in >polite society) that to be acrimonious and impose your unpleasantness on >others is morally wrong or stressful on a community, or even bad for >your karma or your blood pressure. To the contrary, it is celebrated. >The community does not want a moderator because the community does not >want to lose its primary form of entertainment. > >It is unfortunate that the highest and most intellectual discussion of a >particular human endeavor (tango) to be found, as on this list, requires >subjecting oneself to the petty amusements of others who take their >entertainment primarily in the form of bullying others, and who justify >their mean and uncivilized behavior by claiming that it is actually a >necessary expression of "passion and intensity." > >When in Rome, be aware that Romans are going to continue being Romans. > >This does not mean that you must be a Roman. > >'Mash wrote: > > I look forward to the day that we can use "flame wars" as a > sustainable energy source. > > > > 'Mash > > London,UK > > > > "May we be cautious in our perfection lest we lose the ability to dance." > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 02:28:11PM -0600, Nina Pesochinsky wrote: > > > >>Amaury, > >> > >>On the tango lists, there are only two choices - you either die or be > >>killed, or grow thick skin. Welcome to the list1 > >> > >>Nina > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>At 02:16 PM 7/18/2007, Amaury de Siqueira wrote: > >> > >>>My first experience with list moderation date as far > >>>back as 1993-4 with the > >>>KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the > >>>day moderation was as > >>>detrimental to the list as non-moderation. > >>> > >>>One of the rationales behind list moderation is > >>>sustenance of an online > >>>community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that > >>>constant disruption > >>>and flame war is likely to push certain members to > >>>leave the community thus > >>>eroding the quality of membership and content of > >>>postings. > >>> > >>>The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That > >>>is, an old established > >>>list with strong membership and displaying high > >>>quality posting may not be > >>>susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and > >>>disruption. It seems to me > >>>that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a > >>>while virulent posting of > >>>some listeras. ;) > >>> > >>>Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying > >>>exchanges. Nina's > >>>abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned > >>>as a result of an > >>>initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to > >>>Konstantin, Huck, and all > >>>others) > >>> > >>>A censored list may strip the list of its richness of > >>>expression. Granted > >>>we should all try to display certain level of > >>>civility. However, I must > >>>say that the entertainment value of some postings > >>>bring a smile to my face. > >>>That alone makes it all worthwhile. > >>> > >>>Cheers, > >>>Amaury > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: tango-l-bounces@mit.edu > >>>[mailto:tango-l-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of > >>>m i l e s > >>>Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:11 PM > >>>To: tango-l@mit.edu > >>>Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was: > >>>Acrimoniousness) > >>> > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>After reading everyones responses my post about > >>>Acrimoniousness... > >>> > >>>"You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it > >>>may not change > >>>anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to > >>>be". - Kosh, > >>>Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5. > >>> > >>>Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list > >>>moderator in my > >>>estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list > >>>moderation if > >>>they're acting like that. A good list moderator, > >>>shepherds the > >>>conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare > >>>skill and not > >>>everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting > >>>a list to pick > >>>someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list. > >>> > >>>Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the > >>>better portion > >>>of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on > >>>the one thing > >>>that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a > >>>friend of mine > >>>once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do, > >>>and you can't > >>>change that. But you can influence them by how you > >>>carry yourself." > >>> > >>>M i l e s. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > ___________________ > >>>Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >-- >Carol Ruth Shepherd >Arborlaw PLC >Ann Arbor MI USA >734 668 4646 v 734 786 1241 f >https://arborlaw.com > >"legal solutions for 21st century businesses" Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:11:50 +0100 From: "'Mash" <mashdot@toshine.net> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation To: "[Tango-L]" <tango-l@mit.edu> Just for the record I have no problem with the flamming or what ever you want to call a heated discussion on a message list. It was what the internet was created for in my opinion. Also I am totally against moderation. I share a desk with our Marketing guys and really do enjoy reading snippets of the weekly threads out aloud over coffee. I just am intrigued if any of this passion actually gets translated onto the dance floor? Maybe we should all plan Tango-L milonga... 'Mash London,UK "May we be cautious in our perfection lest we lose the ability to dance. On Thu, Jul 19, 2007 at 08:45:54AM -0600, Nina Pesochinsky wrote: > Carol, Mash and everyone, > > Perhaps some of you have not been on this list very long. This list > has not seen a single flame in YEARS. There is a little poking and > teasing, but no flaming. Criticism or disagreement is not > flaming. If you want to read real flaming on this list, then go back > to the archives of 1997 or so. Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 08:54:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Amaury de Siqueira <amaurycdsf@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation To: "'Nina Pesochinsky'" <nina@earthnet.net>, tango-l@mit.edu Nina, I completely agree with you. I was going to reply to Carol's postings but you put it better than I could. Thank you for saying what you did. By the way Carol.... I truly enjoyed Nina's posting although not agreeing with most of it. I can honestly say that I would enjoy meeting her face-to-face. :) Nina is also right that these perceptions (that we are discussing here) are a matter of cultural difference (and definitely gender). Cheers, Amaury -----Original Message----- Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 10:46 AM To: tango-l@mit.edu Subject: Re: [Tango-L] Acrimoniousness and the red herring of moderation Carol, Mash and everyone, Perhaps some of you have not been on this list very long. This list has not seen a single flame in YEARS. There is a little poking and teasing, but no flaming. Criticism or disagreement is not flaming. If you want to read real flaming on this list, then go back to the archives of 1997 or so. This list is gentle and polite by comparison to what it used to be. Not only did it have real flames, but there was a much worse kind of flaming - in private e-mails. That is why should this list ever see any flaming in the future, I encourage people to let others know that if they welcome their flames, they all have to be in the public forum and not via private communication. On another note, if you think that you can be bullied on Internet, then how do you survive in your real life? Does whining and complaining about the behavior of others without naming them gets you the results that you want? Carols points demonstrate clearly a difference between direct aggression and passive aggression. On this list, it appears that people accused of flaming are being directly aggressive towards other people and/or their ideas. Passive aggression is expressed by others as hints and abstract ideas without ever naming anyone, but implying their identity. I believe that this difference is cultural. Even though both forms of aggression exist in all cultures, some cultures prefer the direct approach while others avoid direct confrontation without giving up their own aggression. To me passive aggression is cowardly, so I probably would be more direct if flame wars ever returned to this list. It is an issue of integrity - if I am willing to put my ideas forward, then I have to accept the risk that they will be unpopular. I believe that other people have a right to express their disagreement with my ideas however it feels right to them, as long as it is legal. My responsibility is to choose my own response. Trying to control others usually does nor work very well. While the integrity is required, suffering, feeling bullied and offended is optional. As far as tango goes, it really works well to become more Argentine than the Argentines are. :) Best, Nina At 03:12 AM 7/19/2007, Carol Shepherd wrote: >Apparently the answer to Miles' query is that for some reason, in the >online tango community, the dominant players generate and consume poison >and unpleasantness as a form of entertainment. > >They expect others to be wired the same way. They feed on provocation >and conflict and if it is not there in sufficient quantity, they will >stir the pot. They engage in display behavior by acting out their >dominance and they award themselves self esteem points through bullying. > These self-esteem points are very easily obtained because everyone is >remote and there are no social consequences to bullying or other bad >behavior. > >Accordingly, on tango-l there is no consensus (as there is generally in >polite society) that to be acrimonious and impose your unpleasantness on >others is morally wrong or stressful on a community, or even bad for >your karma or your blood pressure. To the contrary, it is celebrated. >The community does not want a moderator because the community does not >want to lose its primary form of entertainment. > >It is unfortunate that the highest and most intellectual discussion of a >particular human endeavor (tango) to be found, as on this list, requires >subjecting oneself to the petty amusements of others who take their >entertainment primarily in the form of bullying others, and who justify >their mean and uncivilized behavior by claiming that it is actually a >necessary expression of "passion and intensity." > >When in Rome, be aware that Romans are going to continue being Romans. > >This does not mean that you must be a Roman. > >'Mash wrote: > > I look forward to the day that we can use "flame wars" as a > sustainable energy source. > > > > 'Mash > > London,UK > > > > "May we be cautious in our perfection lest we lose the ability to dance." > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 02:28:11PM -0600, Nina Pesochinsky wrote: > > > >>Amaury, > >> > >>On the tango lists, there are only two choices - you either die or be > >>killed, or grow thick skin. Welcome to the list1 > >> > >>Nina > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>At 02:16 PM 7/18/2007, Amaury de Siqueira wrote: > >> > >>>My first experience with list moderation date as far > >>>back as 1993-4 with the > >>>KMUG (Kansai Mac Users Group) list. At the end of the > >>>day moderation was as > >>>detrimental to the list as non-moderation. > >>> > >>>One of the rationales behind list moderation is > >>>sustenance of an online > >>>community. Implicit in this argument is the idea that > >>>constant disruption > >>>and flame war is likely to push certain members to > >>>leave the community thus > >>>eroding the quality of membership and content of > >>>postings. > >>> > >>>The bottom line for me is the 'age' of a list. That > >>>is, an old established > >>>list with strong membership and displaying high > >>>quality posting may not be > >>>susceptible to the eroding effects of flame and > >>>disruption. It seems to me > >>>that this list's quality FAR exceed the once in a > >>>while virulent posting of > >>>some listeras. ;) > >>> > >>>Some flames evolve into rich discussion and edifying > >>>exchanges. Nina's > >>>abhorrent posting is a good case in point. I learned > >>>as a result of an > >>>initial nonsensical posting - (thank you to > >>>Konstantin, Huck, and all > >>>others) > >>> > >>>A censored list may strip the list of its richness of > >>>expression. Granted > >>>we should all try to display certain level of > >>>civility. However, I must > >>>say that the entertainment value of some postings > >>>bring a smile to my face. > >>>That alone makes it all worthwhile. > >>> > >>>Cheers, > >>>Amaury > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: tango-l-bounces@mit.edu > >>>[mailto:tango-l-bounces@mit.edu] On Behalf Of > >>>m i l e s > >>>Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2007 3:11 PM > >>>To: tango-l@mit.edu > >>>Subject: [Tango-L] A Cautionary Phrase (was: > >>>Acrimoniousness) > >>> > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>After reading everyones responses my post about > >>>Acrimoniousness... > >>> > >>>"You can tell a fool he's doing a foolish thing, it > >>>may not change > >>>anything, but at least the truth is where it needs to > >>>be". - Kosh, > >>>Vorlon Ambassador, Babylon 5. > >>> > >>>Oh and one thing about list moderation, the list > >>>moderator in my > >>>estimation in question isn't doing a good job of list > >>>moderation if > >>>they're acting like that. A good list moderator, > >>>shepherds the > >>>conversation and doesn't stifle it! That's a rare > >>>skill and not > >>>everyone is cut out for it, so its wise when starting > >>>a list to pick > >>>someone ELSE other than yourself to moderate a list. > >>> > >>>Lastly, I find it interesting that you folks took the > >>>better portion > >>>of my note and discarded it in favor of focusing on > >>>the one thing > >>>that was an after thought, the list moderation. As a > >>>friend of mine > >>>once said, "People are gonna do what they're gonna do, > >>>and you can't > >>>change that. But you can influence them by how you > >>>carry yourself." > >>> > >>>M i l e s. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > ___________________ > >>>Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. > >> > >> > >> > > > > > >-- >Carol Ruth Shepherd >Arborlaw PLC >Ann Arbor MI USA >734 668 4646 v 734 786 1241 f >https://arborlaw.com > >"legal solutions for 21st century businesses" Continue to World Class tango dancers.... \| ARTICLE INDEX