Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Willow

      Welcome to the forum!   09/17/2017

      Please come in from the rain and sit by the fire! We're happy you found us and hope you will feel at home here.  
collectingrocks

Why is there so much negativity shown on the forum?

Recommended Posts

collectingrocks

Having been quite active lately and following on from the "dislike button" thread, why can't people be more appreciative and respectful of one another? I know we all have diverse views but whatever happened to values and philanthrophy? 

Aren't we all in the same boat so to speak?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Peridot

I haven't seen that much negativity myself. There used to be quite some bickering and raging. Nowadays it's way more mellow.

I don't dislike the dislike button, by the way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone home
11 minutes ago, collectingrocks said:

Aren't we all in the same boat so to speak?

I suspect that in our private lives we are all in very different boats with different demands and stresses which are rarely public knowledge.

 

5 minutes ago, Peridot said:

I haven't seen that much negativity myself. There used to be quite some bickering and raging. Nowadays it's way more mellow.

I tend to agree with that

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
collectingrocks
2 minutes ago, Gone home said:

I suspect that in our private lives we are all in very different boats with different demands and stresses which are rarely public knowledge.

 

 

Just to clarify: what I mean about being in the same boat is that we are all on the spectrum in some way or another and therefore should value one another more.

But yes, we all have different sets of difficulties, stresses etc in the same way as NT people. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

I don't see the point of likes and dislikes. It's ridiculous. It's what I call emotional thinking as opposed to rational logic. If we really based decisions on likes and popularity, then the John Lennons of the world would be more isolated from mainstream. Imagine if Lennons remarks that upset people in the sixties were to be judged purely emotionally? Would Lennon indeed have been bothered people didn't like his remarks about Christianity? I get a bit rattled by the way Americanised social media is pushing conformity (it has roots in Facebook).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone home
32 minutes ago, Dr-David-Banner said:

I don't see the point of likes and dislikes. It's ridiculous.

I agree.
Imagine if in real life people had their thumbs either up or down during a conversation ... its a form of distracting peer pressure ...

Edited by Gone home
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

"Just to clarify: what I mean about being in the same boat is that we are all on the spectrum in some way or another and therefore should value one another more."

It's a good point but tricky to answer. At the moment I feel something is missing although part of this feeling may be connected to my mood swings, as well.
I agree with you the diverse ranges of people on the spectrum ought to respect each other due to having the same thing in common. It's a fair point.
Trying to pinpoint how I perceive things lately is maybe I just outgrew much of it. It's as if the AS community scenario is wrapped up in stuff like how to socialise better, how to be as normal as possible, how to fit in and so on. Whereas, the John Lennon mentality that I came to appreciate is about being different, period. Not conforming and not being normal. I don't think Lennon was autistic per se but he did once state he felt he was very different from school (he was dyslexic too).
The "likes" and "dislikes" was a good point. Sometimes you may like what you read. I mean, I read a few of Sanctuary's posts and I liked his clarity and insight so it seems fair to be able to click "like". Even so, on some forums "like" = "reputation". It's the same principle but I noticed it was used to denote status. Yet status is never reliably evaluated via emotion. As Nesf probably knows, the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates was not popular yet the sophists were - the sophists claimed to teach virtue and practical philosophy. Meantime Socrates was an annoyance who probably had zero reputation (in a society without a virtual forum).
John Lennon was the least popular Beatle but I figure the most creative.
The song Imagine was censored in the US as negative towards religion.
Personally I'd be more inspired by a more "alternative" AS community to the social value system of the US with the Facebook and Twitter scene and "normality" as the status quo. However, this is just the vibes I now feel at present and may even be connected partly to other frustrations and mood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sanctuary

I do feel a "like" button can be helpful. It's certainly true that it has the potential to create confusion or sometimes to be used excessively or inconsistently but on the whole it can have a useful function. It can be a way of showing appreciation for what someone has written and it's always rewarding to receive such recognition. Maybe in an ideal world we would always reply to a post we liked with an explanation of why we like it but that's not always practical and it can also clog up a thread with successive messages saying "I agree with X" and so on. I do think someone should write a brief message if it's possible their reasons for liking a post might be misinterpreted. I tend to use the "like" button for posts that strike me as very perceptive or which give very good advice but other members may give them for other reasons and even if we had set criteria members might interpret them differently. Perhaps it's best not to read too much into the number of "likes" but I know that isn't easy.

I would definitely say that any sort of "dislike" needs to be have a justifying explanation. This is good practice as someone needs to know why their post is disliked, e.g. because of problems with its tone or inaccurate or unhelpful advice. It may be something they can put right or the dislike might be inaccurate and can be politely challenged. Many feedback systems have a policy where negative feedback can only be given with an explanation and this would be beneficial everywhere. Even if we do disagree with what someone says it's important to make our response accurate, measured and constructive. I think most people do this on Asperclick but there are occasions where escalation occurs when it need not have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

I think I was just indicating where things can go wrong because the "like" button on some sites evolved to "reputation". On the electronics forum I gladly left, I did finally notice how "reputation" was used as a kind of false friend, if you like. Let me give an example: The guy on that forum who used to complain a lot had a very high reputation score. He complained about tiny details like American terminology. He wanted me off the forum for using terms like "degeneration" or "regeneration" - That is,Ham-speak for negative or positive feedback. "We're a British forum!", he would type. Thus, if you wanted to be technical we could have regenerative and degenerative click options. Anyway, my point there is this: That guy could have simply learned the terms. I myself took a little time to learn German terms where it was necessary and I didn't see it as an issue. I disliked the way those members would post their membership credentials and recoil in shock if their advice wasn't followed to the letter.
So, I half agree.
Remember the old Ali vs Foreman legend. At the time, everybody "liked" George Foreman and most Americans "disliked" Ali (for refusing to fight in Vietnam). Everybody said Foreman would knock Ali out within 2 rounds. They said Foreman was younger, stronger, unbeatable and had flattened Frazier and Norton. Foreman then bought into all the public approval and it was his undoing. Ali knocked out Foreman instead. Evidently all the underdogs in the USA went wild and partied but it took Foreman years to recover his composure.
At least in regard to learning, reputation at least can be misleading. In big companies the guys with the suits and briefcases draw big salaries on "reputation" and recoil if challenged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gone home
13 minutes ago, Dr-David-Banner said:

At least in regard to learning, reputation at least can be misleading

Well reputation is historical and no guarantee of current or future performance.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiRi
On 9/27/2017 at 1:50 PM, collectingrocks said:

Having been quite active lately and following on from the "dislike button" thread, why can't people be more appreciative and respectful of one another? I know we all have diverse views but whatever happened to values and philanthrophy? 

Aren't we all in the same boat so to speak?

I agree. I do get what you're trying to say about having the same condition and thus being more appreciative and respectful of one another because we should understand each other better. Maybe one issue is the difficulties in communication which can come at any time in the communication process. For instance, when trying to express ourselves, we might struggle with explaining what's in our mind. Then there's a misinterpretation of what was said and then in turn, an off response.

Another issue could be the lack of empathy/theory of mind. Often times on this same forum, I've read that it's good to be different, that same would be boring. But, often times, it seems that people rather others be the same as them. I've observed that when some people have thoughts/ways of thinkings that differs from theirs, they try to change the other person's ways of thinking or something along the lines of frowning upon them. 

Having the same condition doesn't guarantee that people will be understanding of each other, but I do wish people were nicer in general. I wish that before someone did any kind of damage to another that they saw a red light and a sign in bold letters that said, "Hey stop, this person's a living entity, like you." So that people wouldn't intentionally or unintentionally hurt others. Although, if someone intentionally physically or emotionally hurts someone else, I'm pretty sure they know, but they still carry on with it.  

Recently, with the natural disasters and catastrophes going on around the world, it seems like people only help each other in extreme conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

I decided to dig this out and forward it here. The guy who wrote this has about 15 or so "reputation" and I had zero. It was addressed to me and I didn't retaliate in similar tones out of consideration for other members.. Notice he dismisses the American amateur radio scene that, at the time, had a fair few NASA members (who were Hams). Notice also that rather than simply memorise the American term "C battery", the poster moans and groans to the effect we should all use pre WW2 terminology. You may also observe our esteemed friend accuses me of attention issues (ironic), American Hams as "Yankees" and seems to feel members of their site should be allocated reading material.
By the way had that been my site that poster would have had the riot act read oout. On the Russian site I'm on now rudeness to members isn't tolerated that much.
I just wanted to share how the "reputation" buttons can get the wrong angle on NT sites. And maybe it will be understood why I tend to be so anti hierarchy these days. QUOTE:

"That sentence is American from start to finish.

Will you ever take any notice of anything that anybody else says to you? In the UK we have LT (Low tension), HT (High Tension) and GB (Grid Bias)- and the HT provides the supply to the anodes  of the valves.Despite all the exhortations and warnings you've been given, you've still got your nose buried in that damned Yankee book, haven't you?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

Just to add the US uses 115 volts house supply. I did actually take trouble to learn the American transformer data. Some of the best tube radios I know of were the American AA5 series made of bakeliite. Design-wise, America was ahead of us in the sixties with Japan closing in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
collectingrocks

ahem, any chance of staying on topic pleease...🙄

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

I'll requote this from above;
"I don't dislike the dislike button, by the way"
So, I was discussing connections between "likes", "dislikes" and "reputation". I was basically saying that "reputation" comes very close to "likes". .
From there, I wanted to point out there's a difference between emotional and analytical judgement. I tend to view emotional judgement (and emotions generally) as socially based and cohesive. It sort of leads to empathy as people try to please each other by expressing the same line of thought. People will dislike hearing opposite views to the norm.
I kind of admire Mr Spock who was apparently based on extreme aspergerism. Spock just reacted very "logically" to information and judged it purely on logical perspective.
Maybe a "logical" or "illogical" button would be "more logical".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dr-David-Banner

Question worth pondering. If Mr Spock was based an idealised state of Aspergers, was his lack of emotions a plus?
What do emotions do?
What does liking or disliking do in terms of actual sifting of information?
Why do discussions so often fall apart when emotions begin to dominate?
Could it be emotions are simply an evolutionary social intelligence that connect people together on the same level? I mean, disregard of commonly accepted truths and values is a threat to cohesion. Todays society prioritises social norms above analytical (you can't get a good job if you say and do the wrong things).
Put another way: What would happen if we all thought like Spock, I wonder? Any emotions are just ditched in favour of rational, logical solutions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RiRi
3 hours ago, Dr-David-Banner said:

Question worth pondering. If Mr Spock was based an idealised state of Aspergers, was his lack of emotions a plus?
What do emotions do?
What does liking or disliking do in terms of actual sifting of information?
Why do discussions so often fall apart when emotions begin to dominate?
Could it be emotions are simply an evolutionary social intelligence that connect people together on the same level? I mean, disregard of commonly accepted truths and values is a threat to cohesion. Todays society prioritises social norms above analytical (you can't get a good job if you say and do the wrong things).
Put another way: What would happen if we all thought like Spock, I wonder? Any emotions are just ditched in favour of rational, logical solutions.

Well, I don't know who is Mr. Spock, but am able to answer your question which I believe is fairly on topic, at least I think this post above I've read is. As the topic at hand could be interpreted as how come there is negativity on the forum which an explanation could be this, the triggers. Happiness is an emotion so I don't think it would be a good idea that emotions in general would be obliterated, but I do believe it'd be best if people didn't have triggers. I believe that what you have mentioned regarding discussions falling apart due to emotions holds true. Such that sometimes people are triggered by something someone else said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×