Posted by Kali Munro on August 6, 2004, at 12:42:19
In reply to Re: Chuckle » Kali Munro, posted by Dinah on August 6, 2004, at 11:44:12
>>>>The last two would probably get Toph a PBC. We're not allowed to negatively characterize a post or poster. Only to make "I" statements. :)<<<<
PBC? I take it that is some kind of reprimand, oops. :) If that's the case, Bob, please forgive me! ;)
*I* think that the following are "I" statements unless "I" statements are meant only to be "I feel" statements.
>>>>>*"I think so and so's post is provocative, argumentative, or uncivil (you might want to say why, or not)..."
*I find your remark:...to be sarcastic, could you say it in a different way please?" <<<<<<
I think if the above was stated as "YOU are..." or even "I THINK you are provocative, argumentative, uncivil, or sarcastic" then they would not be "I" statements because they are about the person rather than the content of the post.
The person on the receiving end has the option of disagreeing and saying, "I don't think it was a sarcastic remark and I don't want to change it."
So, does that mean in the context of something warranting an intervention from Bob (which was how I read the original question), members are not allowed to say that they think the content of the post (I agree it's about the content of the post, not the person) is uncivil?