The Shame Game

[tangent]

@Pandora You told someone to kill themselves? Classy. Could've just stopped talking to them beforehand. PEMDAS. Order of operations, man.

[Groth]

@Kanye-Qwest said in The Shame Game:

@Pandora I mean I think you were also telling people to kill themselves in that thread. Which, yes, could count as a differing opinion but let's not be DISINGENUOUS now.

I told someone to kill herself about a year or so ago outside of MSB and then stopped speaking to her entirely. She sent a half-assed apology note a year ago, I didn't accept her apology & then suddenly she was on here bitching about me like I'd done something to her in recent history. Yeah, telling her to kill herself was mean and bad and whatnot, but dredging up ancient history because you want pity from internet strangers is BS.

So this http://musoapbox.net/topic/737/havenrpg-real-talk/442 was a year ago?

[Pandora]

@Groth
No, that was a drunken rant I'd forgotten about. Shame on me. Except I don't remember it, so the shame is cake for all intents and purposes.

[Thenomain]

@Pandora

Inappropriate use of a meme on the defense. Five yard penalty. Second down.

[Pandora]

@Thenomain
Well I never played Portal, so I'll take that penalty.

[ThatGuyThere]

@Kestrel said in The Shame Game:
angry? Say and feel things because you actually feel and care about them. That, I think, is worth a lot more respect, and will make you feel better to boot.

Who says that does not go along with bitching. When I complain about something it is because that is how I think and feel I don't randomly put thing on here to be negative, in fact in the very thread you pulled my this place is for bitching post, I have also said positive things. Including that i thought staff was handling themselves mostly well in that thread.
@surreality summed up the reasons for this place a lot better then i did, but yeah it is a place that is open air discussion sometimes that discussion is course. That is hardly unique to this place or MU * ing, I have watched chaired professors swearing at each other over cocktail discussion that got heated at a department Halloween party.
I would say everyone on this board cares about MU * ing, or did at one point, when you discuss things you care about sometimes things get heated, that is human nature.
Do I char about the reputation number, no not in the least, do I care about the discussions that take place here, yes otherwise I would not take part in them.

[Ghost]

@Cupcake said

Recently I've been reading the works of Brene Brown, a professor and author who researches the nature of shame, in an effort to improve my mental health. One of my takeaways from this was that one of the results of her research was the discovery that by and large, shaming people is not an effective tactic to get the result of permanently altering someone's behavior. It may cause a large swing to the opposite for a brief period, but eventually it will return to the previous pattern of bad behavior.

So what is the purpose of public shaming in our community? Are we invested in the idea of helping problem players to improve? Are we knuckling up to the idea that we do it simply for our own visceral enjoyment?

Honestly, since you're big time name-dropping an author and already have decided that shaming doesn't work, why bother asking what our opinion is on the matter? Cut the foreplay and just release a statement on your feelings on shaming type behavior on MSB, or don't?

[Cupcake]

@Ghost said in The Shame Game:

Honestly, since you're big time name-dropping an author and already have decided that shaming doesn't work, why bother asking what our opinion is on the matter? Cut the foreplay and just release a statement on your feelings on shaming type behavior on MSB, or don't?

...or I'm referencing the source from which I got the notion in the first place as a point of reference and validity? And already mentioned that I understand the general opinion is different and acknowledged correction of my impression?

[Ghost]

Sorry, whenever people go "I've read a book about so and so that explains that THIS is THIS, so....what do YOU think it is....?"

Just say whatcha wanna say

[mietze]

It's not okay that someone would like a source for why they were thinking about the subject? I realize hardly anyone does that and it's mostly "I feel" but I don't understand why it isn't okay to explain the source of where the thought came from.

I thought name-dropping was more about inserting a famous figure into a conversation and relating one's personal relationship with them to show off? Possibly I am not up to date with the current definition.

[Cupcake]

@Ghost said in The Shame Game:

Just say whatcha wanna say

I actually did. I wanted to prompt a discussion about shame based on the research I've recently read about and how I thought it seemed to be applied in this aspect of the mush community (being WORA/SWOFA/MSB etc). No horrible secret sidelong passive aggressive agenda here.

[Lithium]

Reading a book doesn't make anyones opinion any more or less valid than anyone else's.

All opinions are worth exactly as much as anyone is willing to give them worth.

All opinions matter more, or less, than someone else's depending on who is hearing the opinion and who is saying the opinion.

Just have your opinion.

There is zero need for justification.

Your opinion will be judged on a person by person basis, possibly with up or down votes or replies.

If you're afraid of your opinion being judged, don't voice it.

[mietze]

I don't think there's been any implied opinion is better, just "hey I read this, here's what I read, here's my opinion, what do you think of this subject". NOT ZOMG U CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT THIS BOOK or whatever. I guess I don't understand why it is weird to reference something one read/experienced or whatever vs not at all and just give your opinion with no context. You could do both, does it matter? Why is it bad to reference a book (or life experience, or whatever) while giving your opinion? I'm not being snarky here, I just don't understand the hostility to it?

There have been linked articles and such posted as part of a discussion generator here before. I didn't see them getting this reaction (though often times the articles were disagreed with or whatever), so I just don't get why this time it's a problem. It's just a way to open a discussion, right? And the discussion is happening with little reference to the book beyond the opener.

[surreality]

@mietze I think, to some extent, it comes off a little bit like this: "This hugely important person who has done real studies and stuff says this is pointless."

I don't actually think that's the intention, but I had to read a couple of times to get around that impression, since I don't think that's what the intention was at all.

(I think the intention was, "Hey, I just read this thing, and it makes me wonder how it relates to what goes on here. What do y'all think?")

[mietze]

That's weird. I don't know who that person is, so I guess that's why I did not get "hugely important person" so much as "author of the thing I'm going to reference" I still don't understand why it is "name dropping" or why it's not okay for this person to reference a 3rd party source, when it's done quite a few times by others with no issue, but..eh. Not important.

I am curious what the "correct" method of bringing up an external thing that one read that has influenced you to bring up the topic is. Don't mention the name at all but say "I read something that talked about X, I mostly agree but think Y"? I think that would be fine too, but I don't understand why it's preferable. Need for a link to a short article or synopsis without identification? C&P relevant things without source naming (or is source naming if providing specific quotes)?

[surreality]

@mietze She's a popular TV talking head, kinda like Dr. Phil if he had a soul.

[mietze]

Oh okay. I don't watch TV other than series that my hubby wants to watch on netflix or Honey Boo Boo and Hoarders stuff on youtube/amazon. Am I allowed to say that because it means I'm low class? Or is it pretentious to claim ignorance of a fame 5 figure because I'm a vampire who doesn't keep up with pop culture?

[surreality]

@mietze I actually only know of her through too many quote memes on pinterest, if it makes you feel any better. They do tend to be pretty good quotes, though!

[Cupcake]

@surreality said in The Shame Game:

(I think the intention was, "Hey, I just read this thing, and it makes me wonder how it relates to what goes on here. What do y'all think?")

Thank you. That is what I was going for. I didn't realize it was poorly phrased - obviously if I did, I would have structured the original post differently. I will go so far as to say that the beyond citing my source, the only reason to possibly "name drop" would be so any interested party could look up her work because it's done a lot for me personally and might help someone else. If so, that's wonderful, but I'm also not sitting here telling everyone to go read her stuff. At best, it's a "shout out" more than a "name drop".

[surreality]

@Cupcake I think the broader idea of shaming, ultimately, isn't so much what this place is about. It is a factor -- or it is in the cases of people capable of experiencing it, but as mentioned... that's not really everybody, so it's not terribly effective.

Generally, just telling someone 'hey, you're doing a crappy thing, here's why' is going to work just as well if someone is the kind of someone disinclined to doing crappy things.

More often, people just justify it, try to turn things around into 'look at how I am being victimized oh noes handwring (sometimes out of an attempt to dodge blame, and sometimes because they have the self-awareness of the average turnip and zero desire to examine their own behavior ever or question their rightness)', or already know they're doing something crappy and don't care. Totally useless in such cases.

The only time traditional shaming works in these cases is if they're trying to keep it a secret -- and that's ultimately more a case of exposing the truth in most cases I've seen rather than trying to humiliate someone.

In that last case, I think the boards have traditionally been useful. There are a lot of people who will talk a good game, and are charismatic enough to play spin doctor or manipulate any given situation enough to get away with murder for ages -- until someone posts a log, or enough people who have encountered the same thing in multiple places all come forward at once and a fuller picture can be seen.

That experience may humiliate someone in the process -- but it doesn't tend to be the real goal.