Posted by Lou Pilder on March 20, 2014, at 21:06:49 [reposted on March 20, 2014, at 23:06:30 | original URL]
In reply to Lou's response- -shuddahnoenbedder?, posted by Lou Pilder on March 20, 2014, at 18:15:01
> > Dr. Bob, in my last post I spoke from my mind.
> >
> > Now I'll speak from my heart.
> >
> > Do you realize that you blocked Twinleaf on a post, and series of posts, where she is being fearlessly authentic and trying to tell you of the distress and feelings of rejection she has had in her dealings with you? And that in blocking her, she could see your actions as validating those feelings of rejection?
> >
> > I agree with 10der that I understand why, under the Babble rules I knew, *some* of her words might be considered uncivil. I can understand your feeling frustrated as to the best way to stop the behavior. But couldn't you reach out to the underlying pain and feelings of rejection, the sense that you don't value her, instead of blocking her? Can you understand why someone who sees some people posting what they post to others and get met by amusement and kind words from you, and yet who repeatedly is blocked for far less than calling someone a prick, might be hurt and feel rejected? Do you think blocking someone for words that arise from that sense of hurt is the most productive response? I'd likely just come back feeling even more alienated and unvalued by you. (I hope she knows she's very much valued by fellow posters.) This might well lead to further expressions of feelings in a way you might not like. Might it not be more productive to address the underlying feelings?
> >
> > And, if you actually feel pain from her words, perhaps you could express the fact that her words affect you. Because I often think, and others might think, that you're well enough shielded to not much care what we say.
> >
> > You've been thoughtful enough to sense that my interactions with you, and your restructuring of Babble, have cost me a fair amount of pain, and not inconsiderable feelings of abandonment and loss. I do feel that I'm not particularly welcome here because I really can't embrace your new vision. Had I stayed, I'd have likely ended up being repeatedly blocked myself. I figured you would prefer I left with no fuss or bother. If I feel that bad just from your turning Babble into a place where I can't be, try to imagine how Twinleaf feels.
> >
> > Not that I can speak for Twinleaf. But that's how I'd feel if I were in her position.
>
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...that in blocking her, she could see your actions as validating those feelings of rejections...].
> The {action} by Mr. Hsiung is that he posted a block to the poster for not being in accordance with the rule to not post anything that could lead one to feel put down/accused.
> The question that I want to address here is if or if not that action by Mr. Hsiung {validates}{feelings of rejection} to the poster that posted what is not in accordance with the rule here.
> I say not. For to validate something generally means to make a formal approval of something that {ratifies} what is in question. In the case at hand, what is supposed to be validated is a {feeling of rejection that the poster has}. If you consider that in order for Mr. Hsiung to not be validating the feeling of rejection, would he have to not sanction the poster for the accusation posted toward himself? That could then mean that there could be {extortion} by the poster in that the poster could be saying that unless she is allowed to post what is accusative toward Mr. Hsiung, he could be deemed as validating the poster's feelings of rejection if he did not allow it? Then could not the poster have to be allowed to post whatever they wanted to with impunity or Mr. Hsiung could be faced with the accusation that he is validating her feelings of rejection? Rejection of what?
> She couldah known bedder with a site like this?
> Lou
>
> Friends,
It is written here,[...the sense that you don't value her...].
I never realized a lot of things before. And as I read I see more.
The aspect of if Mr. Hsiung {values} a person based upon sanctioning an accusation could be what a subset of readers could think that the poster is referring to here. If that was the case, then could all parents that chasten their children, not value their child? And does it also mean that all teachers that scold students doing what could be harmful to them also be guilty of devaluing the student? And what about a mechanic that says to a person bringing in a car for repair that says to the person that it was their fault that the motor is ruined because they were negligent in not changing the oil. Does the mechanic devalue the customer?
It is the devaluing that I question as a result of the sanction. I say not. I say to those that want to inflict any guilt upon Mr. Hsiung for sanctioning an accusation, that {gas lighting} could be fostered here. And I think that is a terrible thing to do.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1062899
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140304/msgs/1062908.html