PDA

View Full Version : How to solve bickering



cosmicexplosion
19-Dec-2012, 22:28
There is a famous book in the u.s
Called getting to yes and another called crucial conversations.
Both expand on the idea of bring hard on the problem and soft on the person.

What is happening on this forum is either a lot of people arnt getting the attention they need from woman or art
Or they are just text book case scenarios.
I run with the later.
So when some one says something disagreeable slam that not the fragile egos of the individual.
You then give no cause for defence
Or offence.
You don't call a child an idiot for spilling milk you laugh and offer help.
So what I think has to happen is the forum must become a safe haven for people to be some what human and that means vulnerable, in order to get back an atmosphere of community and support. And flowers in our hair.
It can't happen with overt personal criticism.
I for one was attacked when I first joined
ANd i have dished it out and am definitely a work in progress
But being tough on the problem and soft on the person is really the only way forward. IMO

Tim Meisburger
20-Dec-2012, 00:13
good on ya mate!

vinny
20-Dec-2012, 06:23
yeah, it has been kinda nasty around here lately. Many of the same offenders, over and over. I wish there was an ignore button that would remove them completely (including username and posts) from my view. The "why did the moderators" threads, especially.

welly
20-Dec-2012, 06:27
It's only been nasty in "The lounge". Everywhere else is good. Don't worry about it too much.

jp
20-Dec-2012, 07:33
I very much agree with cosmicexplosion here but aren't as serious about it. The "dishing it out" language here is key. We're not nasty, but just "rough and tumble" like old guys being goofy at a bar or party without women around. Not young guys trying to get remembered by women, but older guys enjoying some freedom. For example, in mostly male company (such as commonly the case here), we'd really dish out the opinions about Cindy Sherman, and in mostly woman or well mixed company, we'd probably keep our mouth shut about what we think of Cindy Sherman. But being so forthright is very apt to fail in the electronic medium. It could make for good company in real life, but divide and upset us online.

rdenney
20-Dec-2012, 07:59
Here are some other principles to live by:

1. Do not say anything you would consider dangerous to say within arm's length of the hearer's balled fist.

2. Do not make any unqualified factual statement unless you personally know it to be true. If you are repeating what has been reported by others, then say so, etc.

3. Do not depend on professional credentials for credibility. Explain statements so that their validity stands on its own.

4. Enjoy humor, but remember that jokes at the expense of others cause damage.

5. Do not come to place you like and then try to change it to be more like the place you left because of its flaws.

6. The character flaws of people are never on-topic, but

7. The flaws of posts may be.

8. If someone complains about something you said, don't take it personally.

9. If you defend what you said or challenge what someone else said, don't make it personal.

10. What you say defines who you are in a text-based forum. Are you who your posts make you out to be?

Edit: 10 Corollary: Write posts that would not embarass you if persons you admired and respected, or to whom you must be answerable, read them every day.

11. When the zombie invasion comes, friendships will have value. Hortatorical opinions will not.

12. Moderators are the same flawed individuals as the rest of a forum, except that someone has to hold the gavel, however imperfectly wielded.

Rick "respectfully submitted" Denney

Winger
20-Dec-2012, 08:15
I agree with Rick (especially #11).


I very much agree with cosmicexplosion here but aren't as serious about it. The "dishing it out" language here is key. We're not nasty, but just "rough and tumble" like old guys being goofy at a bar or party without women around. Not young guys trying to get remembered by women, but older guys enjoying some freedom. For example, in mostly male company (such as commonly the case here), we'd really dish out the opinions about Cindy Sherman, and in mostly woman or well mixed company, we'd probably keep our mouth shut about what we think of Cindy Sherman. But being so forthright is very apt to fail in the electronic medium. It could make for good company in real life, but divide and upset us online.

But remember that while not that many women post in these threads, there are at least a few of us reading them. And likely rolling their eyes.

dwross
20-Dec-2012, 08:59
I agree with Rick (especially #11).
But remember that while not that many women post in these threads, there are at least a few of us reading them. And likely rolling their eyes.

+1.

I'm not in general an 'eye roller', but I can get sad/aggravated at the gender bias here. There may be as many women as men interested in LF these days. LF is for the patient, and if I can be excused my own gender bias, ...

That said, blessings on all the great guys here who don't have a misogynous bone in their bodies, and +infinity for all attempts to keep this a civil place, rich in real photography -- both the art and the science.

a female LF photographer

Kevin J. Kolosky
20-Dec-2012, 09:05
yeah, it has been kinda nasty around here lately. Many of the same offenders, over and over. I wish there was an ignore button that would remove them completely (including username and posts) from my view. The "why did the moderators" threads, especially.

I think too many folks that post assume that they are not one of the "offenders".

jp
20-Dec-2012, 10:23
+1.
There may be as many women as men interested in LF these days.

a female LF photographer

Indeed. I was at a LF-oriented workshop last year and it was about half women. Local DSLR photography is very much the realm of women.

Bill Burk
20-Dec-2012, 10:27
This morning I was a few minutes late getting the teenager on the way to school (late for being early, mind you, we were not late)...

In the middle of a squabble

Me: "I'm going to start moderating the conversation... From now on don't talk about bad feelings"

Teenager: "What, you're going to censor us?"

Me: "Yes"...

It only took a few seconds for the situation to degrade from bad to worse and the next thing I heard was...

Teenager: "Look what you've done now"

BrianShaw
20-Dec-2012, 10:36
... female LF photographer

Feel free to bring more into the fold (forum)... I'm quite sure that they will be welcomed and maybe then there won't be such a "gender bias". The influence of you and your fellow gender-mates might be good for all of us.

ROL
20-Dec-2012, 11:12
You don't call a child an idiot for spilling milk you laugh and offer help.


No?!? That was a corporal offence in my house. I was SPANKED!

cosmicexplosion
20-Dec-2012, 14:14
I think r Denny weighed in to much and to early on this one
It's a bit patronising

welly
20-Dec-2012, 16:04
I think r Denny weighed in to much and to early on this one
It's a bit patronising

What? Rubbish. Clearly, some people here need to have a read of Rick's list.

ericpmoss
20-Dec-2012, 20:06
[...]
6. The character flaws of people are never on-topic, but
[...]

Well, *my* character flaws are never on-topic....

Eric "I may be missing the point" Moss

paulr
20-Dec-2012, 22:22
Rick, point taken about the zombie apocalypse.

rdenney
21-Dec-2012, 05:50
Rick, point taken about the zombie apocalypse.

I just wanted to cover all the bases, now that we know the world is not ending.

Rick "you never know" Denney

ataim
21-Dec-2012, 07:04
Stolen from another forum...

We have a rule at work:
If I say or do something that offends you, you have to tell me so I will know.

I like one of my coworker's attitude about that. "I'm going to tell you what I think. I'm going to say it plainly. If you don't like what I said, either change or don't worry about it."

He recently got in trouble for saying that a practice at a certain location was dumb. He was right, but one of the supervisors took it personally. When called on the carpet by our EVP, he defended himself. He was told he had to be more sensitive to the feelings of others. He explained that THAT was what was wrong with our organization: everybody is too sensitive. When the EVP asked how he would feel if someone was insensitive to his feelings and made him mad, his answer was very to the point. "This is where I provide for my family and that is very important to me, so I don't let myself get mad. Besides, there's nobody in this company that is smart enough to make me mad!"

This forum is kind of like going to a football game. You are here because you choose to be. My Uncle Jack used to get so upset at football games that he'd eat a whole pack of antacids! Finally, he just stopped going to football games.

IMHO, neither football games or forums are worth excess stomach acid Yall have fun and don't take this stuff too seriously

dwross
21-Dec-2012, 07:16
:)
Feel free to bring more into the fold (forum)... I'm quite sure that they will be welcomed and maybe then there won't be such a "gender bias". The influence of you and your fellow gender-mates might be good for all of us.

Ah, but that I possessed such a super-power:). Unfortunately, "jp498"'s take on the issue is probably predominate. I feel it, and I suspect most other women feel it. Believe it or not, I even understand it. Everyone needs a safe space.

But, here's the thing: Not liking Cindy Sherman shouldn't be seen as a gender slur. (I don't particularly "like" her work, but I respect its impact as art.) All I can suggest is that if someone really, honestly doesn't like Cindy Sherman's work, or any other female photographer's work, that the reasons be stated rationally, without veiled hints about the quality being related to gender. If that were the case, I don't think the poster would need worry about speaking in mixed company.

BrianShaw
21-Dec-2012, 07:31
I must be missing something -- an undercurrent that is just too subtle for me (or, I have not been paying attention). When did Cindy Sherman's art/gender become an issue as a broad-based male opinion? I don't know much about Sherman. I'm sure she is a swell person. I don't particularly like her work; it just isn't my style. But so what... I don't like the work of many men. I don't think this has anything to do with genitalia... from most people's perspective.

Brian Ellis
21-Dec-2012, 08:06
+1.

I'm not in general an 'eye roller', but I can get sad/aggravated at the gender bias here. There may be as many women as men interested in LF these days. LF is for the patient, and if I can be excused my own gender bias, ...

That said, blessings on all the great guys here who don't have a misogynous bone in their bodies, and +infinity for all attempts to keep this a civil place, rich in real photography -- both the art and the science.

a female LF photographer

One small thing that might help with the gender bias you perceive here is for female participants to use their first names or a female "alias" instead of their initials or some non-gender-specific screen name. That way we'd at least be consistently (MOL) made aware of the fact that this isn't an almost-all-male group (which it appears to me to be).

Until you mentioned that you were a female I could offhand only think of two regular female participants and a third who was active for a short time but hasn't been around for a couple years. I'm sure there have been others that don't immediately come to mind (and perhaps there also are others like you who don't indicate by their screen names that they're female) but not many.

Speaking of screen names and reducing bickering, one thing that would help a lot IMHO is to require the use of real names instead of fake screen names. It's far too easy to be rude and obnoxious when hiding behind an anonymous screen name. I don't know how it would be enforced, maybe just on the honor system, but at least it would reduce the present ease with which one can be a jerk when posting as "anseladams" or "jmn" or whatever.

Preston
21-Dec-2012, 08:48
speaking of screen names and reducing bickering, one thing that would help a lot imho is to require the use of real names instead of fake screen names.

+1

--p

Greg Davis
21-Dec-2012, 08:53
I have tried to get my user name changed to my full name, but it never seems to work. I just put it in the signature portion of the posts.

As for a means to stop the bickering, eliminate the Lounge. It serves no purpose for large format photography and nearly always ends in headaches.

Winger
21-Dec-2012, 09:24
He recently got in trouble for saying that a practice at a certain location was dumb. He was right, but one of the supervisors took it personally. When called on the carpet by our EVP, he defended himself. He was told he had to be more sensitive to the feelings of others. He explained that THAT was what was wrong with our organization: everybody is too sensitive. When the EVP asked how he would feel if someone was insensitive to his feelings and made him mad, his answer was very to the point. "This is where I provide for my family and that is very important to me, so I don't let myself get mad. Besides, there's nobody in this company that is smart enough to make me mad!"
Especially that last line sounds like something my husband would say.
I use my handle at all photo sites; it actually is based on my middle name. When I was first online it was not considered safe to use your own name, especially for women. And at the time I was working in law enforcement and didn't want to make it easier for people involved in cases to find me. I like my screen name.

Winger
21-Dec-2012, 09:26
I must be missing something -- an undercurrent that is just too subtle for me (or, I have not been paying attention). When did Cindy Sherman's art/gender become an issue as a broad-based male opinion? I don't know much about Sherman. I'm sure she is a swell person. I don't particularly like her work; it just isn't my style. But so what... I don't like the work of many men. I don't think this has anything to do with genitalia... from most people's perspective.

I agree with this, too. I didn't think Cindy Sherman was that big of an influence overall that she was such an issue. I think she shows a little more creativity than the endless "here's a house repossessed and empty" portfolios I seem to have seen in the last few years.

dwross
21-Dec-2012, 09:33
Real names is definitely an idea whose time has come, despite the drawbacks. I've signed my name as "d" since I was a kid, well before internet forums. I've had many opportunities to be thankful for that habit, but times change -- or at least they do with good will and honest effort. I'm adding my full name to a signature.

d

coisasdavida
17-Jan-2013, 23:57
11. When the zombie invasion comes, friendships will have value. Hortatorical opinions will not.



Rick, would you allow me to use this as my signature?

rdenney
18-Jan-2013, 00:10
Rick, would you allow me to use this as my signature?

Only if you don't attribute it to me, heh.

Rick "gladly giving this one to the public domain" Denney

cosmicexplosion
18-Jan-2013, 01:06
it should definitly be attributed to you, why on earth not, its the seed ofr immortaliy!

gary mulder
18-Jan-2013, 04:38
Most people have the experience once in a while. You're taking pictures in a small town and getting tired you stumble into the local pub. Man are standing at the counter. You know instantly all attempt to start a conversation will be futile. You will dink your coffee end leave.

Jody_S
18-Jan-2013, 08:36
As for a means to stop the bickering, eliminate the Lounge. It serves no purpose for large format photography and nearly always ends in headaches.

The Lounge, or it's equivalent, serves and important purpose in online message boards. It fosters a sense of community, friendship, as an area where posters can express their personalities and talk about other interests, as they might with friends. And through this interaction, people do indeed become friends. The problems arise on mature boards where friends have formed cliques or groups, and develop rivalries with other groups; plus there are antisocial or negative persons who will put down others and of course feel more free to do so in the more informal setting of The Lounge. But I don't think the solution is eliminating The Lounge, because that sense of community and friendship is what keeps many posters coming back long after they've answered whatever technical question brought them to a place like LFPF.

As for using real names: I personally choose not to do so, not because I want anonymity from other photography forum members, but because I don't want my crazy-ass fundamentalist cult-member family to be able to track me down online. As it is, a google search of my real name turns up nothing after 1995 or so, and I would like to keep it that way. They have already found photos of me that friends posted to their private Facebook accounts, so I know they're looking. For those who would say "So what?", all I have to say is this: you really don't know just how crazy they can be.

Brian C. Miller
18-Jan-2013, 09:30
There is never any true solution to stopping bickering. Seriously, if there was a way to do it, doesn't anybody think that a major religion would have solved the problem already? If people want to bait, bicker, and whatever, then they'll just go and do it. Would real names solve anything? Would real names and home phone numbers solve anything? Would real names, home phone numbers, and home addresses solve anything? (And how would you verify real names? Notarized copies of a person's driving license?) How about a cage match? "And in this corner with a pyro tweak is ----, and in this corner with a different pyro tweak is ----!"

"She's screaming words of wisdom,
Get a life.
Yes, there will be an answer,
Get a life."
And "Get a life" can be sung to the William Tell Oveture, too.
Life. Available now in six packs. Get yours today!

Bernice Loui
18-Jan-2013, 10:19
It may come down to fundamental differences between men -vs- women. There was a study done some time ago regarding how gender specific groups solve problems.

Given the same problem:

The group of men would "size each other up" and out of this could come battles over who would become the alpha male who then dictated how the problem would be solved and that solution would be it.

The group of women would spend time getting to know each other, then figure out who is best at doing any specific aspect of solving the problem. Once their individual strengths are known among the group the group as a whole would work together to arrive at the solution.

This said, the bickering could be more fundamental an basic to human nature... While the alpha male culture may be useful in hunter/gatherer societies and tribes, it may not be ideal once humanity has moved on from that and becomes "civilized".

Don't take this as criticism, this is a bit of scientific study on humanity, culture and society. It is part of the human condition.

In the larger picture, LFF is a good place to be. Even with the few who have their own self centered agenda.


From another female LF photographer..

Bernice




+1.

I'm not in general an 'eye roller', but I can get sad/aggravated at the gender bias here. There may be as many women as men interested in LF these days. LF is for the patient, and if I can be excused my own gender bias, ...

That said, blessings on all the great guys here who don't have a misogynous bone in their bodies, and +infinity for all attempts to keep this a civil place, rich in real photography -- both the art and the science.

a female LF photographer

BrianShaw
18-Jan-2013, 10:28
The group of women would spend time getting to know each other, then figure out who is best at doing any specific aspect of solving the problem. Once their individual strengths are known among the group the group as a whole would work together to arrive at the solution.



... or as some women who don't wear rose-colored glasses might add: then we would lie to each other to make them think whatever we want them to think, or start talking unrelated smack to confuse the situation so nobody know or cares what is really going on, or gossip behind their back to make them look bad and the the 'truth" will prevail. :o

Even with a citation, I suspect the conclusion presented in the prior post is idealistic to say the least. I surely couldn't validate that with my real-life experience.

BrianShaw
18-Jan-2013, 10:32
p.s The best way to stop the bickering is for one of the parties to stop talking. That takes courage and a willingness to let go with the knowledge that the other parties mouth/ego will eventually make them look like a complete @ss.

rdenney
18-Jan-2013, 10:44
p.s The best way to stop the bickering is for one of the parties to stop talking.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Rick "you get the prize" Denney

Preston
18-Jan-2013, 10:46
p.s The best way to stop the bickering is for one of the parties to stop talking.

This gets my vote. It's sort of like when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging.

I come here a lot. I like this place. I have learned a great deal, and believe I've been helpful along the way. It's been my observation that all the elements required for a fire may be present, but if there is no ignition...there's no fire.

Have great Friday, everyone!

--P

E. von Hoegh
18-Jan-2013, 10:53
Talking? Who's talking? I thought we were typing...

ROL
18-Jan-2013, 11:17
p.s The best way to stop the bickering is for one of the parties to stop talking. That takes courage and a willingness to let go with the knowledge that the other parties mouth/ego will eventually make them look like a complete @ss.

Why I bail early from nearly every thread I participate in (and have closed my PM's). Thusly, I can't say I have any evidence of your conclusion. :rolleyes:

Bernice Loui
18-Jan-2013, 11:35
Buddha, "Violence always leads to more violence."

"Violence begets violence", Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and others..


Bernice