At CatHerder's request, I am starting this thread to discuss the other thread where I criticized Cat for criticizing Melissa who protested that Cat called some woman on a plane an idiot because she declined to use a blanket while breastfeeding. Melissa apparently has abandoned that discussion after recieving a private message from Cat.
I recieved a private message from Cat today. Apparently he is upset that I disagreed with him, specifically in his response to Melissa's response to his OP. Apparently, he feels that I attacked him personally in that thread. Rather that private message back and forth, I have decided to bring it here.
Since he would rather not discuss it in public there, we can discuss it in public here... if there is anything to discuss.
Frankly, I am less frustrated about the thread in question than I am about being private messaged to tell me I misbehaved in my disagreements with him.
Opening statement: From my perspective, both Melissa and bokbadok felt it necessary to take offense at what I stated. Right, wrong, or indifferent, certain aspects of their posted response could be interpreted as a variety of things. I do not begrudge them their responses, though I do believe the responses were unwarranted. The comments in question that I made exist in the thread, as do their responses. I submit copies of the private messages I sent to Melissa and to bokbadok here. I encourage bokbadok to voluntarily submit a copy of her private message response back me. Note, there has been no response by Melissa to my private message directed to me.
From: Cat Herder Subject: Concerning my comments
Melissa, this is not Nauvoo. Everyone is welcome to express their opinions here. But, we do not feel opinion is the same thing as emotional response and condemnation of another person's expressed opinion, particularly when there is no ad hominem attack on another member. If you feel I was out of line and offensive in what I said, you are welcome and encouraged to request a review of my comments by the other moderators in the moderation discussion section.
My use of the verbage "ya idiot" was simply to point out that the lady's decision to refuse the order of the flight attendant was not very smart and perhaps rash. The reason she and her family were asked to disembark the plane was not because she was breast feeding, but because she refused the order of a member of the flight crew.
Best Regards, Cat Herder
From: Cat Herder Subject: righteous indignation
bok,
If you have a problem with anything I said or how I said it in my opening post, or subsequent to that, as I privately invited and encouraged Melissa to do, request a review of it in the moderation discussions forum. We're supposed to be setting the example of avoiding ad hominem attacks on fellow forum members. My initial post and the follow up to it were not an ad hominem attack on any person in the forum.
For the record, I called no one in the forum an idiot. I called no one in the forum irrational. I indicated that I felt the individual in the article was an idiot. I also indicated that the thread was not started for irrational emotional response.
Maybe I'll request a review of it myself, since those who seem to be so upset by aren't doing it.
Cat Herder
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
Private Messages exchanged between Cat Herder and Bokbadok on the present matter:
Cat Herder wrote:
bok,
If you have a problem with anything I said or how I said it in my opening post, or subsequent to that, as I privately invited and encouraged Melissa to do, request a review of it in the moderation discussions forum. We're supposed to be setting the example of avoiding ad hominem attacks on fellow forum members. My initial post and the follow up to it were not an ad hominem attack on any person in the forum.
For the record, I called no one in the forum an idiot. I called no one in the forum irrational. I indicated that I felt the individual in the article was an idiot. I also indicated that the thread was not started for irrational emotional response.
Maybe I'll request a review of it myself, since those who seem to be so upset by aren't doing it.
Cat Herder
bokbadok wrote:
Oh for Pete's sake.
I wasn't upset until I got this little note from you.
You get your wish - let's discuss the whole thing in public.
Breastfeeding is a sensitive issue for many women, and so it's all so easy to internalize any critical words in such a thread as being a personal attack. I feel that way when someone is critical of something done by a homeschooler. It's hard for me not to take that as an attack on homeschooling. I have to try hard to realize that it's not.
Personally, I think you might have avoided criticism if you had specified exactly what action you thought was idiotic, and specified that the action was idiotic, and not the person. It would have been much harder to misunderstand that way.
I don't want anyone to think that they have to walk on eggshells. But I think it's also a good idea to consider that we have widely varying backgrounds, and it is easy to misunderstand in a forum like this, even if we think we have been crystal clear.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
I had several visceral reactions to Cat's posts on that thread, the least of which was the "ya idiot" comment about the woman on the plane.
First, when Melissa posted her feelings, Cat seemed to take it personally, pulled a knee-jerk defensive reaction, and jumped on her, with this:
[moderator hat] Don't get yer knickers in a knot, Melissa. The reason for my posting this was not to start an irrational emotional outrage response to this event, as seems to be common in other venues to this sort of topic. [/moderator hat]
I have two main problems with this response:
1. As the OP for the thread, Cat had no business putting his moderator hat on to rebuke Melissa. Doing so had the effect of elevating his opinion to law, and that was out of line. It was, imo, an abuse of his moderating powers. In addition, Cat doesn't even have moderating duties in the political forum. Yet.
2. The tone was condescending. The phrase "Knickers in a knot" is derogotory, and seems to dismiss her opinions as invalid. Using the words "irrational emotional outrage" to describe Melissa's response was, in my opinion, an ad hominem attack. I doubt he meant it as such, but at the very least, it was rude. Yes, she expressed emotion, but irrational?? She did no more speculating about the event in question than Cat did. Cat's comment seemed intended to discredit her opinion and shut her up. Again, I doubt that was his conscious intention, but that was how it appeared to me, another reader. That was a poor precedent to set for this supposed forum of the free, where we come to express our opinions without being censored.
I understand that Cat was unhappy to have emotion brought into the discussion. I understand that he may have felt defensive of his stated opinion. I understand that Cat was disappointed to see his thread take a turn in a direction that he did not wish it to go. But that's unavoidable in forums like this. No one can or should try to control what someone else thinks, feels, or says. Cat wants to be free to express his opinion, but so does Melissa. And imo, her opinion was disapproved of by the self-appointed 'dictator' of the thread, and she was 'encouraged' to stop participating: publicly on the thread, and privately in the PM posted above.
I think everyone on this forum is an idiot besides myself of course. Why don't we let this one go. I've been posting with Cat on another forum for quite a while and I don't think he meant anything bad in his post. It is hard sometimes to convey meaning in a post because we each bring our own emotional state, outlook, experiences and background into it when we are reading. Without tone, inflection, body language, etc something that the writer might want to come across as jest may actually be read as insulting. The way I read it was the same way I read all of Cat's posts. He tries to lighten things up with a little off beat humor and still make his points. That's the way I read the "knickers in a knot" and "Ya Idiot" parts. So on behalf of all of us who may come off as flippant, insensative, mean spirited, trukulent, carulent, and compactsedanulent, I apologize. We are men and we communicate like men in spastic starts and stops with a bit of off humor thrown in now and then. So please, lets just all unknot our own knickers unless you need help then please send your knickers to Tim Taylor care of Tooltime P O Box 545 Akron, Ohio.55546
Jason wrote: I've been posting with Cat on another forum for quite a while and I don't think he meant anything bad in his post. It is hard sometimes to convey meaning in a post because we each bring our own emotional state, outlook, experiences and background into it when we are reading. Without tone, inflection, body language, etc something that the writer might want to come across as jest may actually be read as insulting. The way I read it was the same way I read all of Cat's posts. He tries to lighten things up with a little off beat humor and still make his points.
I don't believe he meant anything bad in his posts either. I'm explaining how it appeared to me, and possibly others. He threw in enough of what you call off-beat humor in his posts on that thread that I wasn't sure what his points were, until he jettisoned the humor and just said it outright. Maybe that's a deficiency on my part. Or maybe he needs to work on communicating more clearly.
I don't think I should have to know someone really well to be able to understand what they really mean when they post. Off-beat humor can have the effect of an inside joke: nobody gets it except the good-ole boys. Maybe that's what happened here. Maybe it's a hint that I don't belong here and should just butt out of y'all's business. I'm considering it.
Without tone, inflection, body language, etc something that the writer might want to come across as jest may actually be read as insulting.
Exactly, Jason. And that is reason alone to make every attempt to make our posts as clear as possible. If tossing in tacky jokes muddies the water and contributes to misunderstandings, what should be done? Perhaps the audience should be considered more carefully.
Perhaps what Cat said wasn't insulting to you because a) you know him so well and understand his vague and humorous way of communicating better than I do; b) you weren't emotionally involved in the exchange; and/or c) because you agreed with his original post. That's fine. Obviously I misunderstood him. That's what I'm discussing.
Everybody fails at textual clarity sometimes. For example, Cat seemed to feel that I was upset when I made my posts in the other thread. I wasn't. But I didn't make that clear because it was obvious to me that I wasn't upset. When I'm upset you'll know it, because I'll use ALL CAPS AS IF I WAS YELLING, WITH MULTIPLE EXCLAMATION POINTS AFTER EACH SENTENCE!!!!
Ahem. To clarify, I wasn't upset just then... that was just an example of what it might look like if I was. I'm not upset even now. And I'm happy to let this topic go, and would have long ago except that Cat invited me to bring it here for discussion, and indicated that if I didn't, he probably would.
I don't think I should have to know someone really well to be able to understand what they really mean when they post. Off-beat humor can have the effect of an inside joke: nobody gets it except the good-ole boys. Maybe that's what happened here. Maybe it's a hint that I don't belong here and should just butt out of y'all's business. I'm considering it.
And Bok, is there any way you can get some more females to participate?
My participation at Nauvoo is limited, because the majority of topics and perspectives have become distinctily feminized. On the other hand, almost everything we discuss here is from a distinctly masculine point of view. My hope is that this forum will grow into its vision--to accept and encourage diverse perspectives. Our white, male, middle-class, conservative discussions are becoming, well, predictable.
__________________
The ability to qualify for, receive, and act on personal revelation is the single most important skill that can be acquired in this life. - Julie Beck
Note: I spent some time composing this, so if it seems a little disjointed in connection with the previous four comments, I apologize.
I concede I had no business putting on the moderator hat, since I am not an official moderator in that discussion area. But I am still one of Bountiful's moderators. Part of the job of a moderator, IMHO, is to try and keep a discussion on topic. Yeah, I know all four of us are hypocrites in this regards... As a moderator on Bountiful, and as the person who started the thread, I felt I was well within an acceptable degree of respectability for trying to redirect the conversation and remind others of what is considered generally acceptable behavior. I am sorry if it offended Melissa or Bok (or anyone else for that matter) that I said "this is not Nauvoo", but the reason I did so was because I thought we had all agreed in principle to not exhibit knee-jerk reaction here to things we do not agree with... something that in my opinion is rampant at Nauvoo.
Would the response have been any different had I tried to steer the discussion back to the topic as a non-moderator? I do not believe so, and while stating I was wearing the moderator hat at that moment was out of line, I do not feel it was an abuse of power as I had no inherent power to do anything in the discussion. Oh well, I did not realize that there was even a concern about abuse of power here. I'm sorry if there was anything close to it.
From my perspective, and as expressed on the thread, the discussion was derailed by the very first response in a rather confrontational manner. This made me wonder if the response was a reaction to the topic or simply to the situation and my use of one word. I had to assume the latter as I actually spent more time being sarcastic about the airline's reaction. The "eyeroll" wish was as a "You have got to be kidding" for the whole situation, not a "dismissmal" of the mother as some seem to have assumed. Honestly, I was not expecting the sort of hostile response that was presented.
Do I see how use of the word "idiot" could be misunderstood? Yes. Am I responsible for making sure everything I say is comfortable with every other person who may read it? I don't think that is fair to require of any poster. The onus for not taking offense lies with the individual.
According to Merriam Webster dictionary:
Idiot - 2: a foolish or stupid person.
Was use of the word not in the context of the behavior of the lady (and the couple) of being foolish for the given situation? Would it have been better to call them fools?
Irrational - (A) 1: not endowed with reason or understanding 2: lacking usual or normal mental clarity or coherence (B): not governed by or according to reason
Can those who had a knee-jerk reaction to my use of the word "idiot" honestly say they they had an understanding of what I was saying? Was the response using clarity of thought and reason? I chose the word "irrational" very carefully, because when someone responds about how they are now hot under the collar, I do have to wonder what the mix of emotion and rational thought was. It has nothing to do with if an individual is rational or not. One can be perfectly rational and still show emotion.
Can I see how some may not appreciate the humor in the use of "not getting knickers in a knot"? Yes, but again, am I responsible for another individual's reaction to a phrase that in all my experience has been heard in the context of a light-hearted call to remain calm? To any who found that offensive in any manner, I apologize. I can't promise you I will never use the phrase again, but with this apology you are given notice that I do not use it in a derogatory manner any more than if I were to say "lighten up" (of course some may find that offensive and derogatory in and of itself if they are weight challenged... it reminds them that they are overweight and need to be lighter to be acceptable...)
Honestly, sometimes I feel a certain number of you think I'm just a stuffed shirt who thinks he is more intelligent than the rest of you. Why? Because of my attempts to be as precise in my word choice as possible. And sometimes precision does not always equate to being succinct. I'm sorry if any individual feels that way towards me, but that is not my problem then.
I don't feel I was defensive of my stated opinion. I opened a thread up for discussion on a topic I thought a number of people would be interested in... namely an example of supposed "loss of liberty" that so many talk about but can't ever provide a concrete example of. The topic was immediately derailed as a slam against me for somehow implying nursing a child by a mother was stupid. I attempted to redirect the discussion back to what I wanted people to examine. But, no let's all hop on the bandwagon of badmouthing someone because of a misunderstanding.
So, no. I do not concede the allegation of trying to squelch Melissa or Bok from participating. My request to both of them was that if they felt my comment was inappropriate, to bring it here where, according to the forum rules, it could be discussed without increasing the level of consternation or derailment in the thread. Apparently that invitation, though clear, was viewed as inflammatory despite the remarks they had made in the thread. I did not ask either of them to not participate, only to take any complaint to the proper place in the forum rather than to initiate what I could just as easily view as attacks on me.
You know, we're all learning how to behave in what I personally would hope is a manner better than at other forums. Is it too much to ask and hope that people (even lurkers or those who are not regular posters) cut everyone else in the forum ample slack? Or would people really rather like to, as Arbilad put it, walk around on egg shells, waiting for someone to knock the chip off their shoulder or fearing they may inadvertantly knock the chip off someone else's shoulder?
Okay, after this long winded speech, what else is wanted and required of me to set things right? I have apologized for the use of a phrase that offended Bok. I have admitted that I was in the wrong for acting as a moderator outside of my "assigned" discussion area, but also stated my reason for so doing. And, I have attempted to explain the choice of words that I used that ostensibly upset Melissa and Bok.
What would I like? I would like an honest admittance, without any of the emotional aspect that was directed at me, that maybe some individuals' responses to my opening post were knee-jerk reactions as well. Nothing more.
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
My participation at Nauvoo is limited, because the majority of topics and perspectives have become distinctily feminized. On the other hand, almost everything we discuss here is from a distinctly masculine point of view.
I agree with you Roper. I don't fit in there... I don't fit in here.... maybe I'll just go putter in the garden or build some garage shelves or something.
Seriously though.... sometimes the climate here can seem distinctly chilly toward females and their "irrational emotional outrage responses." We have a fair number of women members... they just don't post much. I don't know how to change that.
I dunno. Perhaps a masculine retreat is what the creators of Bountiful had in mind.
Note: my last post as a reply to Roper was posted before I saw Cat's post.
Cat, you are right, you were jumped on by me because of a misunderstanding. I am sorry about that.
I do agree with your point about loss of freedoms. But I didn't perceive your point in your OP - I couldn't tell what your opinion was on the issue. After going back and re-reading the OP knowing what I know now, I can see that you were making fun of both sides. But I honestly couldn't see that before.
And yes, I was distracted by what seemed to be arrogance on your part. What is the solution for that, besides biting my tongue?
So. I guess the moral of this story for me is to stay out of threads I don't understand.
Wow, I'm pretty late in coming (back) to this discussion. I am a very occasional poster, and mostly a lurker. Though I posted more frequently during the early days of this forum, I have become less and less interested in topics here and usually only open a thread when it really catches my attention. The ACLU one did.
I haven't been avoiding this thread, or responding to messages. Because I haven't become a very active user of this forum, it was just today that I saw that I had two messages. One from CatHerder, that you can read above and the one from bokbadok inviting me to this thread which until a few minutes ago I didn't know existed.
I just don't even know where to begin with this. CatHerder, you read way too much into my posts in the original thread. If you read the post again, with a calm tone in mind, then you will get the flavor of what I was saying. It is hard online to understand tone, I think, CH, that because I addressed you as part of why this bothered me (got my blood boiling) you assumed all sorts of things on my part that simply weren't true. I was and am upset by the way this situation on the plane was handled. The story in the article is very bothersome to me and was most of my reaction. I included CH because I felt your comments were out of line.
What followed in your responses felt very much like a personal attack of my response to the story. I'm sure you don't think you were attacking me, Cat, but look at some of the words you used that were directed toward me:
irrational emotional outrage
Heaven forbid I should take the name of the La Leche League in vain... (This one really got under my skin because you're dismissing me by lumping me into the whole of LLL, an organization to which I don't even belong.)
over the top
righteous indignation
jump down my throat
You really mischaracterized my responses and these comments, in addition to the whole "moderator hat" thing, which I also felt was inappropriate, really made me not want to communicate with you further. I was surprised to see a message from you, and even more surprised that it wasn't along the lines of, "Sorry if I stepped on your toes." but rather, in your own defense, talking about emotional response and condemnation of another person's opinion. Which to me pretty much describes your behavior on that thread.
Another problem I have, Cat, is that you started that thread with a specific topical direction in mind but you didn't indicate what specific aspect of the story you were hoping we would discuss. I had no way of knowing what your intentions were with your original post and I posted my reaction. Then you tell me I made the wrong post on your thread because that's not what you wanted to happen to it. It just seems like the opposite of encouraging discussion if you're limiting it to the kind of discussion you wanted to happen. If you had stated that in your original post, then maybe I'd feel differently.
I appreciate those on that thread who said they agreed with me, especially bokbadok for her defense of my comments and position.
I appreciate your cander and honesty. I am sorry that the things I said contributed to the feeling of being attacked, and I apologize.
Sometimes I just want discussion to occur on a topic, as I am seeking understanding of where others fall on a topic as I work to formulate my own stand. Be assured everyone, I never do this just so that I can later find what others think (without revealing my own position) so that I can spar with them backhandedly. Anyway, I just throw out the topic there with as little of my editorializing as possible so that others can hopefully feel free to talk about it without a preconceived notion of where they should lie on the topic. This was one of those topics, and I was mistaken in assuming that others would catch the jist of what I was referring to by way of an over the top sarcastic talking point.
I was trying to be objective and as matter of factual as possible in my responses, both private and public. As said earlier, we all have room to grow, and I am always one who acknowledges that for every finger pointed out at anyone else, there are four pointing back at me (or three depending on how you classify a thumb and it's positioning in the aspect of pointing ).
In the future, I will try to be less obtuse and provide a clearer framework for discussion when I start a thread. And, I'll bite my tongue and not put on the moderator's hat in areas I am not assigned without first consulting with the other moderators.
Shiz, are you raiding the popcorn stash again?
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
Hee hee... I just sat my son up in a chair next to mine facing the computer. Together we're reading Bountiful. He hasn't figured out how to hold up his head quite yet... so he just tipped over... Hee hee... it's sooooooo cute. Awwww... little guy's now laying down and getting a little frustrated. Hee hee...
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
Cat, I accept you apology. I think everyone is pretty clear on what things went wrong in that ill-fated thread, so we've all learned and can move on now. I just wish someone would answer my question on how to fix the huge spaces between paragraphs. I'm just putting in one "enter" in there. Well, now that I'm on my sister's computer it doesn't seem to have the same problem.
If you click on the <> button at the far end, you'll see that this text editor uses <p> and </p> to create its linespacing. This is the HTML hypertext tag signifying there's a new paragraph. Each newline is a paragraph. To really "fix" the issue, you have to redefine the whole paragraph attribute, which really isn't an easy thing to do. So I've really not bothered to look up how that's done, because you'd have to do this at the top of every post, and that'd be cumbersome and unfun.
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
First, I really think shiz should share his popcorn. Second, I really hope everyone sticks around and continues to contribute.
I have a habit of glossing over personality quirks (which I have my share of - also, quirks don't have to be negative, by the way) so sometimes I miss potential offenses and thus cruise along unawares. That is probably why it is good I'm not a moderator.
[/moderator hat]
Maybe it's a hint that I don't belong here and should just butt out of y'all's business. I'm considering it.
I do not believe so, and while stating I was wearing the moderator hat at that moment was out of line, I do not feel it was an abuse of power as I had no inherent power to do anything in the discussion. Oh well, I did not realize that there was even a concern about abuse of power here. I'm sorry if there was anything close to it.
(This one really got under my skin because you're dismissing me by lumping me into the whole of LLL, an organization to which I don't even belong.) 
