Ship of Fools: Martin to Moo

Thread: Martin to Moo Board: The Styx / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=5;t=003458

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Moo

In response to:
this.

May I say that I was actually feeling sorry for Nick, I felt ... guilty, responsible for his leaving the thread.

I wasn't being sarcastic or patronizing if that's what you thought?

Martin

Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :

Not my baliwick, but this may shed light.

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
May I say that I was actually feeling sorry for Nick, I felt ... guilty, responsible for his leaving the thread.

Might I suggest that a PM to Nick would have been a safer and more direct way to express that?

I will let Moo speak for herself, but as someone else who has been closely monitoring that thread, let me say that my Hostly radar perked up the minute you described another poster's biblical interpretations as "magical thinking." After that, it was hard not to see this post as sarcastic or patronising as well. You were cruising pretty close to the line all along, Martin.

[ 05. December 2017, 21:19: Message edited by: Mamacita ]

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

X-posted with Mamacita

quote:
Originally posted by Martin 60
May I say that I was actually feeling sorry for Nick, I felt ... guilty, responsible for his leaving the thread.

It is highly misleading to express sympathy for Nick based on this post.

Judging by the final sentence of Nick's post:

quote:
I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here. But to be honest, I don’t much care anymore. Sorry.

The ship is for the exchange of ideas. If someone feels they're not getting anywhere, it's not appropriate to assume they left because their feelings were hurt.

I still see the use of the word 'poor' as patronizing.

Moo

[ 05. December 2017, 21:24: Message edited by: Moo ]

Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
I wasn't being sarcastic or patronizing if that's what you thought?

The thing to remember is that tone is partially conjured by the relationship between the writer and the reader. The relationship that a large population of the Ship have with you, Martin, is one of profound obfuscation stuffed with bullshit. It is impossible to fail to recognize that you can step directly from apparent incoherence to reasonable clarity on a whim, or to notice that the incoherence is smeared with nauseating narcissism.

So, basically, any time anybody gets a whiff of possible sarcasm or patronizing tone from you, it has historically been a safe bet to assume it is so. That's part of the special injunction we placed on you to avoid the hassle of dealing with your bullshit. And that's why any time any Host on any board outside Hell tells you to step away from proto-snark-like blather, your only response should be to give the discussion in question more respectful conversational space.

It is totally understandable that you have strong feelings about squandered faith. Perhaps that conversation in particular was causing you difficulty in maintaining equilibrium. That's why we have Hosts - to help us maintain a seemly façade when our inner turmoil threatens to leak out past the borders of board-appropriate conduct, heedless of our feeble intent.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Thank you Moo, Rook.

Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :

Apparently I'm 20% narcissistic with a higher than average degree of exhibitionism, a degree of self-sufficiency and 'authority'.

Surprisingly I have minimal superiority, entitlement, exploitativeness and vanity.

Go figure.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

I think we are concerned on the Ship only with what you do, and not at all with the possible basis for it. YOUR analysis of your inner life is of no importance. The hosts and other shipmates will make their own determinations.

[ 06. December 2017, 15:49: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0