Tact...

[Roger Hicks]

...is something most of us need to work on sometimes, especially when someone says something really stupid. It's always tempting to point out how stupid they are, except that they may not be: there can be a big difference between being stupid, and saying something stupid.

It's also tempting to say, "Gosh, I'm an awful lot cleverer than you because..." when in fact we may be conflating experience (I've tried this, you haven't) and native intelligence. Or, for that matter, we may be failing to distinguish between their goals and our own.

Of course it's also possible to be misunderstood. Not only may we express ourselves imperfectly: there are always those who read what they want to read, not what we've actually said.

It is vexing when there are people who sometimes produce good and helpful replies, and almost equally often are boorish and arrogant. Increasingly, I suspect that the 'ignore' control is my friend. Formerly I regarded 'ignore' as weakness on my part. Now, I'm not so sure, though there are still only two or three people on my 'ignore' list. How do others treat 'ignore'? (Of course, I'll not hear from those who have placed me on their 'ignore' lists).

Cheers,

R.

[Leigh Youdale]

Not wanting to derail the thread, but could it be that "ignore" is similar to "selective hearing" in marriage (or other relationship), or simply biting one's tongue rather than utter the sharp response that instantly springs to mind?
I find that "Hmmmm" is often all the response I need to give and it neither confirms nor commits to anything.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Leigh Youdale

Not wanting to derail the thread, but could it be that "ignore" is similar to "selective hearing" in marriage (or other relationship), or simply biting one's tongue rather than utter the sharp response that instantly springs to mind?
I find that "Hmmmm" is often all the response I need to give and it neither confirms nor commits to anything.

Dear Leigh,

Your observations certainly do not constitute a derailment.

In fact, your reply brings up exactly why I regarded 'ignore' as a weakness in myself: why can't I just read something and ignore it, instead of feeling an urge to reply? But I just find 'ignore' easier, and as I get older, I find myself more and more in favour of that which makes life easier.

Cheers,

R.

[Keith]

I think sometimes we have to remember also that a lot of RFF contributors are not native english speakers. Sometimes dialogue that comes across as slightly boorish or arrogant is not so intentionally!

We Australians struggle with this you know!

[dee]

I think that just as often it is others who are tactful with ME !
Knowing that I don't do small talk or joining in , they allow me to remain on the periphery .
I am also slow in some ways , and get lost with the normal banter and chat , so am seen as odd / wierd / eccentric [ hopefully ] Maybe here too , I am tolerated by some . But that's jhow it works .

As a listener , it's often important to recogise why someone seems agressive / slow [ I won't use ' stupid ' heard that too often ] distanced , irritating . Often there is a reason - she may become calmer if this isn't made AN ISSUE , because it has in her past .

When presenting to clients an Interior Design Scheme , I would ask that they treat me as a 5 year old when explaining their business - 'cos they might know it all , but I know nothing .
This has a dual effect , in that the poor harresed Project Manager feels free to ask what some of my colleagues call ' stupid ' - obvious . basic questions .

This is my approach generallyand it seems to work with young designers , children etc .

However ,I will try and tolerate so much , however then HAVE to switch off / tune out .
It feels like familiar bullying to me and that I can longer take .
I think that this is a necessary survival tactic - to prevent overload .

If someone withdraws from [ ignores ] me , then that's OK too - why not ? I am a pain in b... all too often .

I don't think that there is a pat answer - but not feeling guilty of turning inward and protecting one's sense of self / being is essential [ in the old sense of the term ]
This is quite otherwise from before I was given permission to be me , and taught how real people think / resolve / communicate LOL .

[emraphoto]

Let's hear it for "ignore"!

[Leigh Youdale]

Now here's a fine (or not) distinction which might exercise Roger's fertile mind, or that of an expert in semantics - say, Bill Bryson.
What is the distinction in meaning and use of the words "ignore" and "ignorant"?

[Leigh Youdale]

Originally Posted by Keith

I think sometimes we have to remember also that a lot of RFF contributors are not native english speakers. Sometimes dialogue that comes across as slightly boorish or arrogant is not so intentionally!

We Australians struggle with this you know!

Keith, you know full well that we Australians are not lacking in tact - we just believe we are "blunt" and "honest". Also somewhat lacking in feeling at times.
Reminds me of the old story that to the Upper Class in England a ***** is not a *****, but and "agricultural implement". To Australians it's just a "bloody shovel".

[Leigh Youdale]

Oh dear! It seems that somewhere in the world a sp-de is not allowed to be called a sp-de! Not PC, it seems.

[Juan Valdenebro]

About tact:

Tact doesn't make better photographers.

Tact posts don't make photography forums better.

Ignoring arrogance don't make arrogant people better.

Just my opinion, and just because you're asking for it... Of course your opinion, if different, has exactly the same value as mine, or any other person's opinion.

By the way, I think this thread didn't start with tact, but for sure it gave you something... I mean, you were in the need of something not related to photography.

Honestly I don't understand what, and that curiosity made me get involved... If you allow me to make another statement lacking tact, I have often had the sensation, when reading you, that you don't get enough from your photography, and not even from your photographic coments, so you talk about other things... But I can be wrong, and as Keith said, could be just my little understanding of english what doesn't allow me to enjoy your humor, even when I know you are trying to be humoristic... I just perceive some agression and unsatisfaction, although by now I know you're not a bad person. Maybe you're just the king of tact, and as I lack it completely, I envy you... Only God knows!

Cheers,

Juan

[Leigh Youdale]

Originally Posted by Juan Valdenebro

About tact:

... Only God knows!

Juan

And she's not saying!

[Juan Valdenebro]

Originally Posted by Leigh Youdale

And she's not saying!

Leigh, what does that mean?

Thanks

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Juan Valdenebro

Tact posts don't make photography forums better.

However, lack of tact arguably makes them worse

Ignoring arrogance don't make arrogant people better.

Then again, not ignoring arrogance costs you a lot of time spent in futile discussions with arrogant people on the Internet.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Juan Valdenebro

About tact:

Tact doesn't make better photographers.

Tact posts don't make photography forums better.

Ignoring arrogance don't make arrogant people better.

Just my opinion, and just because you're asking for it... Of course your opinion, if different, has exactly the same value as mine, or any other person's opinion.

By the way, I think this thread didn't start with tact, but for sure it gave you something... I mean, you were in the need of something not related to photography.

Honestly I don't understand what, and that curiosity made me get involved... If you allow me to make another statement lacking tact, I have often had the sensation, when reading you, that you don't get enough from your photography, and not even from your photographic coments, so you talk about other things... But I can be wrong, and as Keith said, could be just my little understanding of english what doesn't allow me to enjoy your humor, even when I know you are trying to be humoristic... I just perceive some agression and unsatisfaction, although by now I know you're not a bad person. Maybe you're just the king of tact, and as I lack it completely, I envy you... Only God knows!

Cheers,

Juan

Dear Juan,

The part I have highlighted is an entirely fair point, and one that I have thought about myself. I suspect (if I may be permitted to be even more self-centred than usual) that I like RFF because it is related to photography, but it is not necessarily limited to photography.

Bear in mind that the majority of my income comes from writing for the photographic press, and that a great deal of that is necessarily 'hard' technical stuff: not 'hard' as in 'difficult' but 'hard' as in 'unadulterated'. That's quite apart from the web-site. In other words, I have to shoot a lot, and to write a lot about photography. Against that, I like some relaxation, and RFF provides it. I try to help people where I can, but often, I find the 'off topic' stuff more interesting because I'm not so immersed in it.

I even try to help sometimes with the 'should I buy A or B' threads, because although I know that nine times out of ten my advice is at least as worthless as most of the rest, the tenth time, it may be that I have tried the kit (or something very like it) in the last 40+ years and can be of some use.

Aggressive? I try not to be, though I have not unjustly been described as irascible. The 'tact' thread involves principally quite a small number of people on RFF, including myself, and that is why I am especially grateful for such responses as yours.

Finally, I very strongly suspect that tact does in fact make better photographers, and one reason for starting this thread was try to to learn to be more tactful myself -- and again, I'd suggest that tact does, indeed, make for a much better (more agreeable, more informative, more thoughtful) forum.

Cheers,

Roger

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Keith

I think sometimes we have to remember also that a lot of RFF contributors are not native english speakers. Sometimes dialogue that comes across as slightly boorish or arrogant is not so intentionally!

We Australians struggle with this you know!

Dear Keith,

I think I've more often had problems with the ones who do think of themselves as native English speakers, especially if they do not appear ro have much of a sense of humour or (which is at least equally likely) if they have a sense of humour I do not understand. From all I've seen and heard, I rather like the Australian sense of humour. But is Barry Humphries seen as being as funny in Australia as he is in the UK?

Cheers,

R.

[Juan Valdenebro]

Thanks, Roger, I certainly feel warmth in your words, even to a totally unknown as me...

I also try to have more tact generally speaking, because it helps our living. I don't succeed, as you see...

As you know, I started a thread on music sharing (am a collector and before photography studied piano and composition for six years) so I share your opinion on RFF being wide and a source of relax too. And I know you're very respected for your writings and your equipment knowledge, and from the love that lots of people express you around here, as much as for the kind answers you've given me, I know as I told you before, that you must be a very kind one to treat personally...

I apologize formally and in public if my words seemed rude, I really wondered why you needed to say "some people got no tact, let's ignore them", but... Maybe you're right, and maybe there's no cure in some cases...

I agree with you, and I'll try to consider these kind words from you and make this a better forum starting with myself, so you got that point about maybe tact can really make any forum better as a more respectful one...

I see you're definitely a special person, and maybe there really is a limit in my english, so I'll try to keep cool. Thanks for the advice and the tact...

By the way, I'm glad to see you're around here again and hope you're fully recovering.

All the best,

Juan

[Merkin]

Is everyone on RFF polite to everyone else 100 percent of the time? No. Do a majority of RFF'ers read a post from time to time that really pushes their buttons? I don't know, but I would imagine so. Is it likely from the wide range of opinions, philosophies, likes, dislikes, pet peeves, and beliefs here on RFF that people are inevitably going to have disagreements, some of which may seem quasi-religious in scope to those engaging in them? Certainly. Do things get said from time to time that seem more like personal attack than intellectual debate? Sure, it is the internet, such things are inevitable. Does RFF, as a whole, do a pretty good job at keeping things reasonably civil and tactful compared to the internet as a whole? I think so, for I wouldn't be here otherwise.

None of us are perfect, and some of us, myself included, are less perfect than others , but I think we can look at the example set by the majority of internet message boards and give ourselves a pat on the back. The simple fact that we are having this discussion shows that we actually care about maintaining a quasi-civil environment for discussing the things about which we are passionate. Sure, we might all fall down occasionally, but we all seem reasonably capable of picking ourselves back up when we do, and then we all collectively seem to go back to the business of at least attempting to elevate the discourse.

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Juan,

Thank you for the kind words, and there is absolutely no need for any apology: your words did not seem rude for an instant, and although the point about what I get from my photography and from the forum was tangential, it was far from irrelevant.

I fear I may not have made myself clear in the original, though. My basic point is this:

1 How do others deal with other posters who are tactless to the point of boorish?

2 How do others respond when they are accused of being tactless/boorish, etc?

Is 'ignore' the safest bet? Or is there any other way to raise the (already extremely high) standards of civility of the forum?

Cheers.

R.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Merkin

Is everyone on RFF polite to everyone else 100 percent of the time? No. Do a majority of RFF'ers read a post from time to time that really pushes their buttons? I don't know, but I would imagine so. Is it likely from the wide range of opinions, philosophies, likes, dislikes, pet peeves, and beliefs here on RFF that people are inevitably going to have disagreements, some of which may seem quasi-religious in scope to those engaging in them? Certainly. Do things get said from time to time that seem more like personal attack than intellectual debate? Sure, it is the internet, such things are inevitable. Does RFF, as a whole, do a pretty good job at keeping things reasonably civil and tactful compared to the internet as a whole? I think so, for I wouldn't be here otherwise.

None of us are perfect, and some of us, myself included, are less perfect than others , but I think we can look at the example set by the majority of internet message boards and give ourselves a pat on the back. The simple fact that we are having this discussion shows that we actually care about maintaining a quasi-civil environment for discussing the things about which we are passionate. Sure, we might all fall down occasionally, but we all seem reasonably capable of picking ourselves back up when we do, and then we all collectively seem to go back to the business of at least attempting to elevate the discourse.

Seconded, without hesitation, especially the highlighted part.

Cheers,

R.

[david.elliott]

I will just add this thought --

RFF has always felt, for me, more like a classroom seminar than an internet forum.

[wgerrard]

The nature of the medium encourages us to slip into broadcast mode, rather than engaging in a conversation. The only feedback is written and it's delayed. There's none of the subtle and immediate feedback that channel and guide in-the-flesh conversations and allow us to make mid-course corrections. The non-verbal components of conversation, which are so important in conveying emotion, are completely absent online.

[nextreme]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Dear Juan,
1 How do others deal with other posters who are tactless to the point of boorish?

2 How do others respond when they are accused of being tactless/boorish, etc?

Is 'ignore' the safest bet? Or is there any other way to raise the (already extremely high) standards of civility of the forum?

Cheers.

R.

I don't use the ignore feature of the forum software, I just ignore.
Unfortunately, there has been a lot of threads that degraded in the past, maybe less so recently. I guess 'ignore' is a good policy (but not ignore list), cause someone could just be having a bad day. If you experience reoccurring boorish or rude posts from someone, then I would imagine the best policy would be to advise the moderators and a warning be issued to the person. After n warnings, account suspension, kicked off, tar and feathers....

Cheers
Steven

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by wgerrard

The nature of the medium encourages us to slip into broadcast mode, rather than engaging in a conversation. The only feedback is written and it's delayed. There's none of the subtle and immediate feedback that channel and guide in-the-flesh conversations and allow us to make mid-course corrections. The non-verbal components of conversation, which are so important in conveying emotion, are completely absent online.

Dear Bill,

Very true. This is made worse by the fact that I can't stand smilies and am not keen on emoticons. Both seem too self-consciously ironic when I use them, though I cheerfully accept that others can use them easily.

But it does sometimes seem -- and once again I do not exclude myself -- that not-so-subtle feedback is sometimes missed or even sometimes deliberately ignored.

Perhaps the geek poll from a few weeks ago is relevant here. Some people are permanent geeks, but I think most of us can slip into geek mode if the right buttons are pressed.

Cheers,

R.

[MCTuomey]

I will endeavor to practice greater tact while posting, not because it could have a difference on photographic efforts, but because tact leads to more deliberate reflection, rather than emotional outbursts.

If I'm wrong, then at the very least greater tact will result in a more pleasant environment by my standards, of course. I prefer civility over its various alternatives.

[Merkin]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Dear Bill,

Very true. This is made worse by the fact that I can't stand smilies and am not keen on emoticons. Both seem too self-consciously ironic when I use them, though I cheerfully accept that others can use them easily.

But it does sometimes seem -- and once again I do not exclude myself -- that not-so-subtle feedback is sometimes missed or even sometimes deliberately ignored.

Perhaps the geek poll from a few weeks ago is relevant here. Some people are permanent geeks, but I think most of us can slip into geek mode if the right buttons are pressed.

Cheers,

R.

I find emoticons to be a necessary evil, mainly as seriousness (well, lack thereof) and sarcasm indicators. It isn't just body language we are missing here, it is tone of voice. In the largely context-less environment that is the internet- informal conversations using a more formal form of communicaton, the written word- it is all too easy sometimes to mistake sarcasm or humor for seriousness, and this leads to too many internet conversations going horribly wrong. Unfortunately, the most elegant, but far from perfect (and rather idiotic looking) method I have found for conveying the informalities we are intending are emoticons, a couple of simple smilies in my case.