sqbr: She's getting existential again. It's ok I have a super soaker. (existentialism)
Sophie ([personal profile] sqbr) wrote 2010-02-08 07:21 am (UTC)

Re: We really need to talk about Poster 4

They definitely do not need to share their reasons with me, and that "might" was not meant as a passive aggressive way of saying "definitely". I really meant "might". And yes, they may have perfectly good reasons for not engaging, and if they have gotten something useful out of the conversation they can apply to their own lives good for them.

I definitely do not mean to guilt them into shutting up. If I saw such a post on my flist I would not think badly of the poster! But if I wanted to make such a post myself I would stop for a moment (and only a moment) and question my motives. That's all I meant.

One of the flaws with my old example was I conflated "posting under lock" and "Going on a non social justice related tangent but pretending it's related to social justice". I have separated them out. Also I was defining "derailing" WAY too broadly, the meaning I was using had no resemblance to the one anyone else is using which made it useless and confusing.

EDIT: Looking back over my post you're right, it really did come down way too hard on Poster 4. I think because that's the situation I most often find myself in, and I like to remind myself to question myself about why I'm doing things.

Post a comment in response:

From:
Anonymous (will be screened)
OpenID (will be screened if not on Access List)
Identity URL: 
User (will be screened if not on Access List)
Account name:
Password:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
Subject:
HTML doesn't work in the subject.

Message:

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org


 
Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.