New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
Let me say that what you propose is great. But let me illustrate how you broke your own rule already. ducksafloat said: If you don't like a poster, don't read their thread.
So you should not be reading the threads that upset you but obviously you did or you wouldn't have posted.
Don't everyone jump on me for being negative. I only pointed out how nearly impossible it is to live in never-never-land. This is my only comment to this thread - and I will restate what I said right at the beginning, what ducksafloat proposes would be great.
With all due respsect truecritic, I think that there is a big difference in not liking a poster and not reading their threads and not liking what a poster said.
It is impossible to know when a poster you like (and you usually read their threads) is going to say something that will rub you the wrong way until you read their post. On the other hand there may be theads that one may want to totally avoid because of who the poster is, which I believe is the point Patrice was making reference to.
In my opinion, these are two totally different instances... I agree, the purpose of the post is great AND is possible.
Not reading what a person posts might be the result of a lot of factors having nothing to do with liking, or disliking a poster.
Not reading what a poster says has the potential consequence of not learning something worthwhile from that person. Anytime a person chooses not to read what a poster says, it's a risk weighed against the odds. Same as buying a lottery ticket.
If there's a strong chance the poster will provide something a person will find helpful, probably the person will be more open to reading the posts despite other factors.
But if the odds are comparable to MM or PB in favor of nothing of substance or worth coming from a poster, the common denominator is lowered in terms of what's required as a motive for not reading the posts.
You and truecritic don't appear to be communicating from similar platforms of perspective and understanding.
United States
Member #14
November 9, 2001
31,614 Posts
Offline
What is a Family?
Families are who you love. Our families all "look" different and it's always been so. A family caregiving unit might consist of a couple; a mother, father and children; a single parent and child; grandparent and grandchildren; a sibling group; a circle of friends (LPMs); or however that family defines itself.
Families are the foundation of society. It's where we come into the world, are nurtured and given the tools to go out into the world, capable and healthy — or we aren't. While families have the greatest potential for raising healthy individuals, they can also wound their members in places that will never heal. When families break down and fail to provide the healthy nurturing we need, the effects impact not only our own lives, but also our communities (LP).
In other words, we all pay for unhealthy families. If we ignore the suffering, we suffer the consequences.
Loving and caring in families involves much more than the feeling of love. It involves loving actions even at times when we don't feel especially loving.
Studies affirm the importance of love and caring in families. Research shows that expressions of affection towards other family members reduces problem behavior and enhances the family member's development. Love is the single most important principle of family living. If family members do not feel cherished and loved, little else that families do will have its maximum influence. Expressions of kindness increase family life satisfaction.
Strong families notice and share positive aspects of each other. For example: they pay attention to another person's polite behavior or something nice he or she did or said. They notice the talents, skills and achievements, special qualities, and characteristics that make the other person unique. They find ways to be positive even when another family member makes a mistake. They make a conscious effort to develop closeness and show love.
Kindling Kindness. Treat family members as good friends. Ask family members to do things rather than demand that they do them. Compliment good behavior. Thank family members for their efforts. Ask for opinions. Listen to comments. Avoid saying anything that is unkind or sarcastic.
Members of strong families feel they really belong in their family. Family members feel accepted for what they are and promote one another's self-esteem. They celebrate each other's successes and help each other learn from mistakes.
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
"Members of strong families feel they really belong in their family. Family members feel accepted for what they are and promote one another's self-esteem. They celebrate each other's successes and help each other learn from mistakes." Raven
Very nicely said. I agree. In fact, anyone want to adopt me? Seriously, who wouldn't wish for a loving family that is supportive and caring? I've been trying to run away from mine since I was 14. Anyone who says "sticks and stones...but names will never hurt me" didn't grow up in my home! When you're told repeatedly that you're no good and you shouldn't have been born, you begin to believe it, and those scars never heal. The long-term effects can be more crippling than the physical abuse.
That being said, we're not children any more, and if someone started a club for people for "normal" families, there wouldn't be enough members to fill a room. I'm not justifying cruel, insulting name-calling, but I personally enjoy a good debate and reading different points of view. If I see a battle going on between 2 members, I usually skip over the posts. As a whole I find this board has a nice balance of humor and drama, spirituality and irreverance. If everybody agreed and held virtual hands, it would probably be boring.
United States
Member #14
November 9, 2001
31,614 Posts
Offline
"Members of strong families feel they really belong in their family. Family members feel accepted for what they are and promote one another's self-esteem. They celebrate each other's successes and help each other learn from mistakes." Raven
Very nicely said. I agree. In fact, anyone want to adopt me? Seriously, who wouldn't wish for a loving family that is supportive and caring? I've been trying to run away from mine since I was 14. Anyone who says "sticks and stones...but names will never hurt me" didn't grow up in my home! When you're told repeatedly that you're no good and you shouldn't have been born, you begin to believe it, and those scars never heal. The long-term effects can be more crippling than the physical abuse.
That being said, if someone started a club for people from "normal" families, there wouldn't be enough members to fill a room. I'm not justifying cruel, insulting name-calling, but I personally enjoy a good debate and reading different points of view. If I see a battle going on between 2 members, I usually skip over the posts. As a whole I find this board has a nice balance of humor and drama, spirituality and irreverance. If everybody agreed and held virtual hands, it would probably be boring.
May peace be with all of you.
it's quite possible that boring is much better than mean.
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
Sorry that I was editing while you were posting Emily. I make a lot of typos at 2:30 in the morning! I also added that "we're not children any more."
I think I've been a little misunderstood, since I don't think anybody should be mean. That little 4 letter word to me is more powerful than some multisyllabic ones. I remember when in "Good Morning Viet Nam" the General says to the Major (?) "I thought you were a little crazy, but you're not crazy, you're mean."
United States
Member #14
November 9, 2001
31,614 Posts
Offline
Sorry that I was editing while you were posting Emily. I make a lot of typos at 2:30 in the morning! I also added that "we're not children any more."
I think I've been a little misunderstood, since I don't think anybody should be mean. That little 4 letter word to me is more powerful than some multisyllabic ones. I remember when in "Good Morning Viet Nam" the General says to the Major (?) "I thought you were a little crazy, but you're not crazy, you're mean."
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
"that was a great movie. Happy and safe 4th!"
Same to you. Are you an indoor or outdoor cat? I think it's going to be very wet here in FL. I stayed in most of Sunday because of the lightning. Looking to pack up and leave for good, but I don't have the nerve.
New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
They are so right. I sometimes forget that it is a priveledge to be here. And yes we are a family.
"In a way, the stock market, and taxes are a form of lottery...."
If a person's willing to stretch the meaning of the word, 'family', enough, we certainly are. In theory we all come from a single gene pool. Our family, in that sense, includes Adolph Hitler and Joe Stalin as well as Saint Francis and Mahatma Ghandi.
It's a fortunate thing LP is here to remind us of this fact.
United States
Member #14
November 9, 2001
31,614 Posts
Offline
"that was a great movie. Happy and safe 4th!"
Same to you. Are you an indoor or outdoor cat? I think it's going to be very wet here in FL. I stayed in most of Sunday because of the lightning. Looking to pack up and leave for good, but I don't have the nerve.
mostly indoor in the summer heat. when the time is right - you will.
Wandering Aimlessly United States
Member #25,359
November 5, 2005
4,461 Posts
Offline
If a person's willing to stretch the meaning of the word, 'family', enough, we certainly are. In theory we all come from a single gene pool. Our family, in that sense, includes Adolph Hitler and Joe Stalin as well as Saint Francis and Mahatma Ghandi.
New Mexico United States
Member #12,305
March 10, 2005
2,984 Posts
Offline
If a person's willing to stretch the meaning of the word, 'family', enough, we certainly are. In theory we all come from a single gene pool. Our family, in that sense, includes Adolph Hitler and Joe Stalin as well as Saint Francis and Mahatma Ghandi.
Fughedaboutit (NY) United States
Member #8,160
October 26, 2004
6,776 Posts
Offline
Let me say that what you propose is great. But let me illustrate how you broke your own rule already. ducksafloat said: If you don't like a poster, don't read their thread.
So you should not be reading the threads that upset you but obviously you did or you wouldn't have posted.
Don't everyone jump on me for being negative. I only pointed out how nearly impossible it is to live in never-never-land. This is my only comment to this thread - and I will restate what I said right at the beginning, what ducksafloat proposes would be great.
With all due respsect truecritic, I think that there is a big difference in not liking a poster and not reading their threads and not liking what a poster said.
It is impossible to know when a poster you like (and you usually read their threads) is going to say something that will rub you the wrong way until you read their post. On the other hand there may be theads that one may want to totally avoid because of who the poster is, which I believe is the point Patrice was making reference to.
In my opinion, these are two totally different instances... I agree, the purpose of the post is great AND is possible.
Not reading what a person posts might be the result of a lot of factors having nothing to do with liking, or disliking a poster.
Not reading what a poster says has the potential consequence of not learning something worthwhile from that person. Anytime a person chooses not to read what a poster says, it's a risk weighed against the odds. Same as buying a lottery ticket.
If there's a strong chance the poster will provide something a person will find helpful, probably the person will be more open to reading the posts despite other factors.
But if the odds are comparable to MM or PB in favor of nothing of substance or worth coming from a poster, the common denominator is lowered in terms of what's required as a motive for not reading the posts.
You and truecritic don't appear to be communicating from similar platforms of perspective and understanding.
J
Not reading what a person posts might be the result of a lot of factors having nothing to do with liking, or disliking a poster.
I agree there very well may be other factors in addition to like/dislike for a poster. That's why I read them all, take what I can use and leave the rest. Again we are talking about a choice, to read or not to read for whatever reason.
Not reading what a poster says has the potential consequence of not learning something worthwhile from that person. Anytime a person chooses not to read what a poster says, it's a risk weighed against the odds. Same as buying a lottery ticket.
If there's a strong chance the poster will provide something a person will find helpful, probably the person will be more open to reading the posts despite other factors.
But if the odds are comparable to MM or PB in favor of nothing of substance or worth coming from a poster, the common denominator is lowered in terms of what's required as a motive for not reading the posts.
Again, I agree. It's sort of like cutting off your nose to spite your face; not seeing the forest for the trees, yada yada yada... From my perspective, there is always something to learn no matter the source.
You and truecritic don't appear to be communicating from similar platforms of perspective and understanding.
Guess what? I agree once again, truecritic and I had differing opinions on this.