· No harassing, intimidating, stalking, or threatening other community members.
The terms of use are quite specific in their listings. They do not prohibit disagreement, passionate debate, sarcasm, doubt, confrontation, rhetorical questions, irony, scorn, disdain, cynicism, speculation, incredulous-ness, exasperation, or irritation.
There is no “be nice” clause. There is no “act like a lady” clause. There is no requirement that all commentary be kind, gentle and compassionate. Ideally the world would all be that way, but the Knot, and Second Weddings as a subset of that world, are far from ideal.
Written word loses tone, inflection and body language, and is therefore inherently edgier. When one seeks feedback on an anonymous message board, one risks that those edges will inflict discomfort, most often unintended, but quite real. That is the consequence of one’s choice to seek feedback in that type of setting. If one does not wish to risk such a consequence, seeking feedback in a more directly interactional setting is advisable.
How is it that the questioner is absolved of the consequences of their choice, and all of the responsibility falls to stranger who goes out of their way to provide a straightforward, direct and to the point answer?
I am an executive, an adult and a leader. I comport myself in my life much the same way that I do here. With honesty, integrity, and direct confrontation of not only the problem stated, but the underlying implied issues as well. I am not cruel, I am not mean, I am not malicious. The reader, however, may not like what I have to say. The reader may far prefer a different answer. The reader may resent the illumination of the more unsavory interpretation or aspects of the problem or question they have put forth. That is beyond my control, and solely in the control of the reader.
There is satisfaction in the response of the reader when critique or directness challenges their thoughts, their decisions or their assumptions. Perhaps they will rethink their original decisions, or perhaps they will be strengthened in their resolve, and will defend them. Being asked to support one’s position is not bullying, it is not harassment, it is not intimidation. The questioner invariably had underlying doubts about that choice, or they would not ask the question.
All of that is simply preamble to this. I fully resent being told by the moderator of this board to “simmer down” or some other admonishment. If specific behavior is a violation of the terms of use, the offender(s) need to be addressed directly, their specific violations outlined, so that they have the opportunity to rebut the accusation, and/or change & modify their actions. Beyond violations of the terms of use, the role of moderator has no reach, and none should be extended. It is even more infuriating when the one doing the admonishing then proceeds to summarize the points being made by those to whom the admonishment is addressed. Just because the moderator prefers her own tone & approach does not mean that it is the only acceptable option.
I appreciate the role of the moderator in keeping the board as free of illicit uses as possible. I do not expect nor do I expect others to be rebuked unless the terms of use are violated.
ETA: paragraphs