Sam Vara wrote: ↑
Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:51 am
L.N. wrote: ↑
Sun Nov 19, 2017 7:16 pm
This is where you and I part ways.
Blimey, this thread has developed somewhat since I went to bed! In case anyone thinks that I have absented myself from a row which I helped to cause, I'll briefly summarise my position.
This appeared to begin when I said that you were confused over a post I had made; your response seemed to have so little to do with my point, that I thought and still think that you were confused as to my meaning when you responded. You objected to this, and despite my clarifications, you seemed to take enormous relish in taking offence where none was intended.
I took no relish whatever. I was surprised when you continued with your personalized commentary about me after I politely asked you to stop.
The Ven. Dhammanando outlines my original meaning better than I could, at this point above:
What followed was an appeal on another thread, and your starting this thread about Right Speech. I set out my views on Right Speech and its relationship to the TOS and people's feelings above. Those views may not be to everyone's taste, but they are what I sincerely believe, and they seem to work here on DW. They are of course a work in progress, and if you or anyone else can suggest improvements that make sense to me, then I'll happily modify them.
Well that is what this Topic was intended for, a kind suggestion not directed personally at you, but to all of us (myself included) that we can be more mindful of personalized comments, what they are, how they can be prone to misunderstanding, and why we should try to take personal responsibility when we speak such words which may have an unintended effect on another.
They are based on the principle that providing I keep within the TOS and am careful about my own intentions, then I won't bother too much about policing the thoughts and responses of others. I'll respond to them, of course, but that's all part of Right Intention. If people want to police my thoughts and language, then I'm perfectly OK with that but (subject to the above) they may get a robust response.
I am somewhat reluctant to say positive things, but I enjoy 99 percent of your posts and I was very surprised by your reaction when I asked you to please stop making personalized comments about me. I need to adjust my expectations. Honestly, I was not particularly outraged, just surprised, and it seemed to me that the broader issue would be worth fleshing out in a separate Topic. I had no idea the Topic would be so controversial.
I can't really take your position seriously, L.N., because of its self-contradictory nature. Were you merely delicate, thin-skinned, or paranoid, I would back off from someone who can't take normal debate. Similarly, if you were a bruising zealot who insisted that the world lives up to standards that you yourself embody, I would respect that. But the combination of the two merely results in a de haut en bas prissy self-aggrandisement, and hair-trigger offence-taking which leads to personal outbursts in ways that breach your own impossibly high standards.
I am sure you recognize that these are personalized comments. What you term "outbursts" have been, in each instance, measured responses. I understand you can't take my position seriously, but I think it may be because you have taken my position personally and not really examining it. My position has been that if I or anyone makes a personalized comment, we should be mindful that we have done so, and we should take personal responsibility for the effect our words might have on others. I apply this to myself. To the extent I have made personalized comments in an inappropriate manner, this also is something I should take personal responsibility for. The fact that I may be flawed does not obviate the general message. Turning the tables and making this about me (as has been done in this Topic) is a form of whataboutism.
I don't think it's possible that any ingenuous contributor who deserves to be taken seriously would post like that.
I don't know what you are referring to specifically.
The TOS would probably prevent me from saying what I think is really going on here, so, as the man said, "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".
So to keep on topic and not to wander too far into meta-discussion, I apply to your posts my personal standards which I have set out in this post and up-thread; how I negotiate Right Speech, your feelings, and the TOS here. I respect your right to say whatever you like about me, my posts, and your inferences regarding my personality or state of mind.
I have focused on your actions and words
, not on your personality, state of mind, or other personal characteristics
. There is a difference.
I won't acquiesce in them, though, and will point out their ridiculous aspects as I see fit. You might not like me not taking you seriously, but I'm just not capable of taking you seriously given what you post.
It doesn't matter to me whether you take me seriously. This Topic was supposed to be about Right Speech. It was never supposed to be about me, my judgments of others, or whether people take me seriously.
You can try to bludgeon me into taking you seriously, of course, but it's unlikely to happen when your weapon looks like a giant inflatable sense of personal resentment.
More personalized comments.
I'm sure this is likely to lead to another bout of incantatory denunciation, but I won't take that seriously, either...
Sam Vara, I respect you and each person who has posted here. I have not tried to judge you or make personalized comments about you. Rather, I have discussed your actions
. In response, I have been subject to an ongoing slew of personalized comments directed at me.
If we could get back on topic at some point, that would be great. The point being that (1) we all might make comments which could reasonably be taken personally by someone else
, and (2) when we do so, Dhamma teaches that we should take personal responsibility for the words we have spoken/written. That is all. I don't know why this is so controversial.