Right Speech: Getting Personal

[SDC]

What are you referring to by "public displays such as this"? I created a Topic. This is a forum. I am not following what you are trying to say to me. Can you be explicit?

It is so funny that every time someone makes their intentions clear through consistencies in their speech, they act so surprised that the reader takes notice. You think each one of your posts is in a vacuum? My goodness, you're either 17, trying to be clever or completely oblivious. That is a private matter between you and you.

You want me to be explicit? Your shtick on DW in recent weeks is unoriginal and I've seen it many times before. People like you come and go like clockwork. You put in very little time but are then somehow qualified to pass judgment on the community, eventually get frustrated and then leave - all that yammering in vain.

However, if you would ever be interested in a lesson on how to influence this community I will gladly give you one. Just ask. But I'll leave you with this for now: if the attention is giving you a rush, then it is 90% about you. Take it from someone who used to talk a bunch of smack on here.

Yes, I know, you have no idea what I'm talking about.

[L.N.]

Greetings,

You do realise the post you're fretting over is over seven years old, and in a closed topic don't you?

Shall we pull down the statues too?

Metta,
Paul.

Are you referring to the post about urinating on the founder of a major world religion? I don't see why that should remain visible here on a forum devoted to discussion of Dhamma, but it's your call, not mine.

As to the statues, are you referring to the statues honoring Confederate leaders which were raised in the United States as part of the backlash against the Civil Rights movement and equal voting rights for African Americans? I guess you agree with the Trump supporters that these statues should have remained standing as a monument to state's rights? Personally, I think the statues were highly offensive to many African Americans, and it is good for society to remove these objects which have come to represent symbols of hatred to many who live in these communities. You are free to disagree.

Can we get back on Topic at some point?

[L.N.]

It is so funny that every time someone makes their intentions clear through consistencies in their speech, they act so surprised that the reader takes notice. You think each one of your posts is in a vacuum? My goodness, you're either 17, trying to be clever or completely oblivious. That is a private matter between you and you.

What are you talking about? Please be explicit.

You want me to be explicit? Your shtick on DW in recent weeks is unoriginal and I've seen it many times before. People like you come and go like clockwork. You put in very little time but are then somehow qualified to pass judgment on the community, eventually get frustrated and then leave - all that yammering in vain.

People like me? How are you the judge of me?

However, if you would ever be interested in a lesson on how to influence this community I will gladly give you one. Just ask. But I'll leave you with this for now: if the attention is giving you a rush, then it is 90% about you. Take it from someone who used to talk a bunch of smack on here.

I don't like "talking a bunch of smack." I like civility and friendliness. The attention doesn't give me a rush. It is unwanted. I had hoped to focus on the Topic, not on me. A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.

Yes, I know, you have no idea what I'm talking about.

Actually, I still don't know what you're talking about. Except that apparently you have a lot of opinions about me as a person. Whatever.

[Goofaholix]

I believe I am the only Member who has said anything nice or positive about other people here in this Topic. My efforts have been to respond in a measured, respectful way to the personalized comments, and to give praise where it is due. Do you think that any response other than non-response or bending over is a form of escalation? How would you respond if you created a Topic intended as a serious discussion about Right Speech etc. and were met with a slew of personalized comments addressing your prissiness, your confusion, your hauteur, your hypocrisy, why you are not to be taken seriously, etc. Honestly, this all adds to the discussion for anyone outside looking in. I have never been outraged or bothered. I thought this was a good opportunity to discuss why personalized comments can lend themselves to issues and are an opportunity for all of us to be more mindful and take personal responsibility.

Life is really tough when you're right and everyone else is wrong.

How is that escalation?

This whole thread is escalation, if you can't see that I don't know what to tell you.

Anybody who has been on the internet forums or social media for more that a short while has no doubt noticed that a lot of people don't hold to the same standard of politeness that they would face to face. It's an unfortunate fact of life, Dhammawheel is really quite well behaved on the whole.

[L.N.]

Actually, I don't need an answer to the above. It doesn't matter.

Any way, the topic is supposed to be:

Personalized comments, we all make them, and sometimes they have a surprising effect on others. Sometimes we make them because we want to provoke or demean, or because we want to praise. Sometimes we don't realize our comments are personalized.

When we make a personalized comment, we have an opportunity to be aware that it may have an effect on the person to whom the personal comment is directed. We also have an opportunity to recognize the kernel of truth in that person's response to our comment, even if we think the person is wrong. The kernel of truth may be, I have made a personalized comment which has resulted in this misunderstanding.

Our next words after realizing this can be an opportunity to make things better, or make things worse.

This topic goes to the heart of Right Speech and addresses a common feature of human conversation. When we make a personalized comment, we are "playing the person, not the ball." As the poll illustrates, even innocuous comments may reasonably be taken personally.

That's a high-level summary of the Topic. I don't think there has been much discussion here about the nature of personalized comments, how they can come across, and one's accompanying personal responsibility for words spoke, notwithstanding that the person spoken to might have taken it the wrong way and is himself/herself responsible for his/her reaction.

If no interest in discussing, no worries.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings L.N.,

Some of the choices in the poll are personalized comments, some are not. It may be worth asking, which of the comments would you direct at Bhante Dhammanando or another venerable monk?

All of those which happened to be true. Which, incidentally, happens to be none of them in the case of venerable Dhammanando.

Your classification scheme of personalized and non-personalized comments is totally inconsequential to me. Truth is truth. If feelings cannot handle truth, does the fault lie with the truth or the feelings?

I wish we would all treat one another with the courtesy and respect we show to these Venerables.

Yes. I will speak the truth to both layfolk and bhikkhus... at this point, I cannot imagine it being any other way.

Metta,
Paul.

[binocular]

My efforts have been to respond in a measured, respectful way to the personalized comments,

You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?

The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.

People like me?

People who say such things as you do. Every now and then, an idealistic poster (saying things like you do) rocks up here and wants to make a difference.

A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.

Communication rule #1: Know your audience.

[L.N.]

Your classification scheme of personalized and non-personalized comments is totally inconsequential to me. Truth is truth. If feelings cannot handle truth, does the fault lie with the truth or the feelings?

When one expresses the truth about one's views of another persons personal characteristics or state of mind, it may be the truth about the views one holds, but it may not be the truth about the person to whom the comments are directed.

"Play the ball, not the person" sums up one valid response when someone makes personalized comments.

[L.N.]

You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?

No, I was not aware. Not sure what would have been perceived as personal attacks. How is it that you seem to have more information about private reporting of posts than I do? The whole "reporting post" thing here is pretty bizarre. I didn't realize it was so public.

The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.

That is clear.

People like me?

People who say such things as you do. Every now and then, an idealistic poster (saying things like you do) rocks up here and wants to make a difference.

A lot of the discussion above makes no sense to me.

Communication rule #1: Know your audience.

I am getting to know my audience. As stated, lowering expectations accordingly. Thanks.

[L.N.]

Looking at your poll 17% of respondents find the most offensive of the comments you listed as being "personal", this suggests to me that most people don't think this is the big deal that it's being made out to be.

Actually it's not 17% of respondents. There are 10 comments, and each is allocated a percentage of the total vote. The total percent is 100%. If a comment gets 17%, then that indicates it is more commonly viewed as a comment which could reasonably be taken personally. It does not mean 17% of respondents think the comment is "personal."

The point being that a reasonable person could take any one of these comments personally, even the non-personal ones. So when we make a comment which clearly is a personalized comment, so much more the chances for "playing the person, not the ball."

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

When one expresses the truth about one's views of another persons personal characteristics or state of mind, it may be the truth about the views one holds, but it may not be the truth about the person to whom the comments are directed.

State of mind cannot be known directly, but speech can be heard and actions/behaviours can be observed. Speech and actions both spawn from mind.

Thus, actions and speech can be known, and mindstate can be inferred. That said, inference is just inference and is fallible.

None of that is reason though for such realms of discussion to be in any way off-limits, especially when it is behaviours, attitude, speech etc. which need to be discussed... and sometimes they do.

Metta,
Paul.

[Spiny Norman]

What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

[binocular]

What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Yes ... It feels like many of us have simply taken the bait!



I agree that the topic of personal attacks in discussion is relevant, but I think it would be more productive if some other poster would start it and anchor it, someone who is not so enmeshed with it, someone who wouldn't be making it so personally about themselves through using mostly examples of (perceived) personal attacks on themselves.

[Aloka]

What a strange thread. For some reason it brought this to mind: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Yes, good point, Spiny!


.

[Mr Man]

You do realize, though, that people have reported your posts for repeated personal attack?

Hi binocular
How do you know this?

The perception that you say you have of yourself and the perception that many posters here have of you, differ greatly.

I imagine that would apply to most people in this forum & out.

P.S thanks for your reply yesterday