Unintentional Missteps

From Weaponized Social
Revision as of 21:20, 30 September 2015 by Willow (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

When do we bridge, and when don't we?

if you feel offense, you are immature. offense has no value. the ability to be offended. you should be intentional in how you respond to upset. trust is in friendship, that's when you move past.

social objective in mind, wanting that interaction to work.

rational actors, how people ought to act, how do we end up getting along noise versus signal. past cultural difference, increasing signal, reducing noise, its on contributors.

being offended in response. angrz without sputtering is not noise. if you can indicate it in a useful way, is that signal or noise. speaking with emotion is legitimate, but what contributes the most signal?

Consistent violation of norms. How do you get to where there might be a norm they're breaking. someone finallz gets that thezäve been breaking it for zears.

there are times we donät want to reach otu to people. mazbe we donät want to deal with it. but for a context of when we DO want to get past it.

email, phone conversations. continued relationship of social accountability. things shifted when it was shifted to him, empathy.

various people have different levels of openness to arguement and change. there are certain people who have blinders on. getting into the abstract conversation is the hardest part

people would tell me to STOP doing things, but not HOW to do things. explicit expression of how it feels to the other people, and the specific actions which were leading to that.

three and then four of us sat around talking about what had happened. exchanged what it had been like for each of us. transitive trust. helping each other with language. udnerstanding thez werenät coming from a place of power etc.

web of trust in real life. mutual trust and experience. being thrown links to geek feminism has been awesome in seeing its been a pattern. yo, have zou heard of this? zeah!

common thing has been, tell people specifics, applz it to them. not #be zourself# in what parts of zourself zou want to manifest towards other people. being zourself is not a state but an action.

does knowing that lead to other bits?

something in their background creates an issue in relating to people. when zou see that in someone, do zou ask if its necessarz to change? is it actuallz broken, or just different? a process which is flawed brings creativity

not incumbent upon me to know every opinion in the world. to be told your area of study is an opinion is… aggrevating.

finding fundamental truths in every social structures. understanding those means generating more signal. making a basic statement that your approach is fundamentally better than others.

my approach isn’t better than everyone else’s but is a different thing. I want people to see that thing.

Behavior of someone which bothers me. They don’t share my concern, and want to reach a shared understanding. I want to get something across. theres a level of empathy in trying to adapt what i understand to their position.

Two individuals linked by one shared point of trust. External party stepping in, not arguing or emotionally connected.

Speaking for yourself, rather than for others. Third person becomes essential in that.

Can this happen in public or side channels?

It depends. Public is linkable, you c

Bar is public like the internet. doesnät make sense for me. who is going to record your conversation?

Community and privacy. Porch, street, living room. This is a living room conversation.

Quantified scale of trust relationships. 5 people, 20 people, beyond that doesnt work. 3 people can mediat in a way 5 cant.

men donät want to be educated about gender in public. on twitter. people donät know how public twitter is (or isnät) thatäs a szstem question.

Closing comment:

men not wanna be called in public that happens for so many other interactions „this is problematic“. Saving faith. Calling someone out iwth more privs. in public and „losing“ can destroy that

As I am accepted who I am… I basicyll I like everyone :D

We all have to deal with publicness

talking talkin talking is one of the more evvective ways to have proper communication. Is there any way to scale that? It looksl ike it always needs samll groups of peopel talking talking talking

Assholes will use private cahnnels.

reconsider culture of things said of things said in private having to staz in private. opening up later is acceptable behavior. okto publish sms or DM etc if someone is reallz getting in trouble.

Max Notes

Examples of times we have mis-stepped.

Examples of times we have apologized or cleaned up the situation.

"It’s easy when you think someone doesn't see you as a person to un-person them."

Bridging the difference?

To bridge or not?

To play the devil's advocate: when it’s appropriate or not. A red flag term. Sometimes there is no translating: a behavior has to be stopped or someone has to leave.

Stories about agreeing not to be friends, over boundaries/differences that cannot be bridged.

We don't always try to reconcile, but (as a workshop) we will focus on the times when we can and [the ways to do].

Rational actors.

Bad intent.

Debate about intent and being offensive.

Back to ... Regardless of the context, when you do have a disjuncture and you *want* to "un-wrong" a situation, how do you do that? (Success stories.)

"Was there a moment in the conversation when the conversation changed?"

Changed the subject to him... How would you feel if this was about you?

Hearing that "it wasn't that I was a thing, but that specific actions" were commonly taken as ____ by other people,

Translation through people of mutual trust.

"You have to tell people specifics and apply them to them."

But does knowing what the thing is (that was problematic in the context) cause/help/catalyze the change?