Posted by gardenergirl on November 21, 2007, at 13:38:06 [reposted on November 21, 2007, at 13:56:04 | original URL]
In reply to Re: please be sensitive » ClearSkies, posted by Dr. Bob on November 21, 2007, at 1:04:24
> > Why not start your own thread
>
> There can be advantages to starting a new thread, but please be sensitive to the feelings of others.
>I still don't understand the problem with "why not?". I read this as clearskies suggesting the poster consider starting a new thread. Asking someone "why not X?" is asking for X to be considered if it hasn't already, and then asking the reason the possibility was rejected. What if clearskies had said something like: "Poster Doe, what if you started your own thread? Have you considered that? If so, what contributed to your decision not to?" Would that be acceptable? Isn't that a really long, clunky, and rather impersonal way of asking the same as "why not"?
When I used "why not" in a post in the past, you communicated to me something along the lines of how a poster might feel put down for not choosing that alternative or suggestion if asked "why not". At that time, I asked the question, "Why not X?" because I, -----wait for it,----- didn't know and wanted to know the answer. But then I'm a curious gal. I even like to think about new things I learn, such as why folks do a certain thing I've not ever thought of doing, because maybe I might benefit from doing it, too. Or maybe I'll just "get it" in the future. I like it when I "get it." Still working on this one.
Still, It seems that you include a negative assessment of an action (or inaction) as integral to the expression "Why not". "Why not" is short for "Why do you not", aka "Why don't you". If I said, "Why don't you take your lunch break now?", is that insensitive? It's a suggestion. Does it also mean that there's something wrong with you for not thinking of it? No. Does it also mean that you must do what I suggest or something BAD will happen? No. Does it mean that I don't think you could have any valid reasons for taking lunch at a different time or not at all? No. (Am I in danger of getting hooked on Donald Rumsfeld's speech style again? ;) Yes.)
Where is the line between something inferred or projected and what's expressed when assessing civility and sensitivity? Are we responsible for behaving in a manner which is sensitive to the mean or modal level of sensitivity in the population? And would that be a general population or Babble population? Is the 1% doctrine at work here?
How are we to know when you are more likely to take action on a post based on what you infer, despite your statements about the reliability of inferences about someone's intent? How are we to improve identifying and owning what's our own "stuff" and not owning what's not ours when we can be "handed" responsibility for someone else's stuff perhaps at a one percent likelihood level?
I really ought to be at the grocery store right now. sigh.
gg
poster:gardenergirl
thread:796381
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20071106/msgs/796381.html