On Moderation

In case your second reply is a result of concern about my lack of reply, I’m only giving the thread time to breathe to allow MagsJ to respond to her categorical defeat.

edit: Before submitting this post, there were developments since I started writing it so I’ll leave the following provisionally tabbed out while I address the developments at the end of this post - as what I’ve tabbed out may no longer fully apply after all and so should be ignored for now in favour of skipping to the end of this post for MagsJ. There’s stuff for Mowk in between, mind.

[tab]That would be the honourable thing for her to do, so I do not expect her to do so - as honour in defeat requires humility, and even in the face of incontrovertible evidence and logic from all sides and by all involved she’s yet to show any sign of learning from incontrovertible evidence and logic.
That is not to say she won’t come around, which is what I hope for even if I do not expect it. The act of doing so will be the same as learning, but this does not rule out the possibility of her replying further to continue to dig her own grave - the same cowardice that we saw in her last response to me.

This leaves at least 3 possible paths for her that deeply define who she is as a person:

  1. to admit being wrong and learn from incontrovertible evidence and logic: showing integrity, honour, honesty, humility, and a lack of cowardice.
  2. to cease replying: showing deception through her slinking off - as well as cowardice, and a lack of integrity, honour, honesty and humility.
  3. to continue replying in denial of the truth: showing a severe lack of intelligence or at least pathological emotional issues expressed through stubborn denial, as well as cowardice, and a lack of integrity, honour, honesty and humility.[/tab]
    Mowk, you haven’t said anything wrong or inoffensive, don’t worry. I think any “drawing and quartering” has likely come to an end.
    Yes, integrity is easier for me than humility, though note what I said about things that “you have to work on force your conscious concentration, and that can make you even better at them than if you don’t have to think about them.” - I do take what you said as the compliment that you intended.
    I can’t deny that I am applying all the theory of moderation in practice to one particular person: in line with the thread being about one person as well as the generalities that can be gleaned from their bad example. I’ve even admitted a little savagery in my directness and lack of holding back within reason. Whilst “you can lead a horse/you can show them a mirror/etc.”, firm, overly assertive insistence can bring a certain urgency to a deeply important issue that can otherwise be ignored with potentially indefinite procrastination. There have been protestations from, e.g. phyllo, about my approach suggesting something simplistically sinister, which is undeniably a common thing to encounter on the internet, but I think there are interesting truths about teaching and even parenting psychology where approaches like mine are effective under particular circumstances - even to the point that bystanders who are usually not parents or teachers themselves might doubt the competence of the methods being used. I’m fine with how I’ve approached things, and while I suspect much of it has been me “winging it” and understanding it myself more in hindsight than foresight, I’ve not felt wrong in either foresight nor hindsight - coming from someone who, in your words, exemplifies integrity.

In case anyone was wondering, I’d improve the P2 in my syllogism to something like (A∈C)∧((¬A)∉C) therefore re-writing the conclusion as (B∈C)∧((¬B)∉C) - just to be clearer about what the ∃ was supposed to be doing when technically it wasn’t adding anything to the logic. The conclusion remains that same: all people who prefer to show humility (and none who avoid it) are preferable for positions of power.

I don’t think that’s a character fault at all, never mind being a good or bad fault.
The fact that you wonder whether you have anything valid to contribute shows in itself that you are thinking about valid things to contribute.
I’m reminded of the Ben Folds Five song “Jane”, though the lyrics are little more exaggerated than what you’re saying about yourself: “You worry there might not be anything at all inside. That you worry should tell you that’s not right”.

There’s no imperative for you to come up with something valid at any given point - it would be worse to try and force it and contributing invalidity. Saying that, however, the act of attempting to write a response can help transform the invalid into the valid because writing forces you to straighten out your thinking - you don’t have to post it. It’s something I do from time to time, before deleting what I’ve written and considering what I realised as a result of trying to formulate my thoughts into an argument. My account is older than pretty much everyone else who still contributes to this forum, and I’ve a markedly low post count to show for it - because I only post when I’ve something valid to contribute, that I’m able to fully form (that and a couple of periods of lengthy hiatus :wink: ). I like to think that this increases the density of quality in my contributions. Silence is always valid when it’s contemplation, so in that sense, your struggle wondering if you have anything valid to contribute is a positive sign. You can contribute validity whenever it’s time, and think about what makes the invalid valid in between.

No doubt. And you develop that working style in line with your experiences, and what works for you can likewise evolve you as a person.
I can’t change the latter, but apparently I’m part of the former even if not in a professional capacity - which you can only take however you will in line with your ongoing evolution as a person.

I think I see what this is about. I am not in favour of bullying and do not intend to bully.

You will recall that:
“I fully accept that too much humility can be counterproductive as the programme you watched rightly pointed out. It can be abused by others, it can be used as a mask for self-loathing and perhaps bottle up passive aggression - like all things it’s not an absolute good, I’m sure you can agree with me here? Perhaps this is in part why you’re so averse to it? My point of course is that when done rightly, it’s indispensible to the best leadership and authority, and when ignored will lead to poor leadership, being ineffectual and unfit for authority as we have recently witnessed.”

Would you say “exercising humility ain’t going to stop that bullying” if you replaced your use of the word “humility” with that “neohumility”, which Pareena Lawrence defined as “a new view of humility, neohumility, humility without weakness and transformed to fit the business world.” in the journal you helpfully provided in an earlier post of yours?
Might exercising “humility without weakness and transformed to fit the business world” stop that bullying?

Given what we’ve both provided so far about the incontrovertible value of humility - your papers and my logic - throwing humility out altogether and projecting a lack of need for such things may appear to be an effective or at least reflexive counter against the example you gave of being bullied in the workplace, but in doing so you also throw out the incontrovertible value of what we might as well now refer to as neohumility.
The reflexive counter of throwing the baby out with the bathwater may be an understandable initial resort, but this does not necessitate that the baby remains thrown out with the water. A re-introduction of neohumility could very well be the next evolution of such a person in light of its incontrovertibly proven value as follows:

As Carleas and I were saying, there exists costly signalling and “anything that’s costly is honest”. If anything, a bully is attracted to someone who is suspected to be hiding a fear of e.g. showing humility, but someone who projects humility without fear of hiding it is no target for bullying. Ironically workplace bullying can worsen from any initial acts of self-protection that merely “cover up and deny”, but it cannot happen to someone who is projecting a costly form of signalling without fear - as the costly is honest. This is why those who flaunt luxury are not taken to be unable to become rich even if they made themselves poor through the sacrifice! The most convincing points are made with full disclosure of their potential weaknesses - because their strength can withstand even their own critique placed right beside them, and it reminds everyone else that every counterpoint must likewise acknowledge its weaknesses too if it is to stand up honestly in opposition.

Re-read, and don’t get back to me. This matter is none of your concern, and my characteristics keep me in good stead just fine. :wink:

Well a man can try to do good for someone.

Thanks for sticking through it for this long.

I can only wish you the best if you insist on denying the research, the logic, and even anecdotes.

Lol

I think you need to work on your style and communication skills… just a suggestion. I’m sure the data will come in handy at some point in time for you though…

I absolutely agree :slight_smile:

Thanks for the good advice, I will bear it in mind for the future.

Sill, I think I see a little humility showing though. Your sincerity is the final judge.

Silhouette,

I think that these two can be in harmony with one another ~ like “kissing cousins” or even closer.
Without humility and the capacity to truthfully understand who we are and what our limitations are, how can we act in accord with and stand by our own values and moral code in relation to others.

Humility can get you in a lot of trouble. I don’t know how to quantify that but perhaps as much as or more even than pride can.

Pride will simply teach you humility. What you get is a vigilant pride, a care not to fall in hubris, a general respect for the earth, gravity, ones ancestors, and all that to which pride owes itself. But humility, when taken as a guideline, will teach you all sorts of wretched things you won’t even know you’re learning. First it teaches outward hypocrisy, then as a direct extension it teaches the same before oneself, and once you are obscured to yourself well enough you will learn whatever your weaknesses require to fester - anything to justify the humility.

Humility is the chisel to the pillars of pride - it serves a purpose whereas pride is the purpose, and thus the cause. Within the raw marble, cause and purpose are the same.

Be humble the masses cry, but they do not practice humility themselves… the valued and the value-less have been separated, here in this thread, and they disgust me much… the lieing value-less masses.

As when the exchange of values sets it’s rate, do we try to navigate in conflicting goods.

…it’s all part of the game that the very-able play and that I’ve been dragged back into… first by my own family back in Feb, and then secondly here on ILP… despite my reluctance and protestations, to both.

If you breath, and are awake more hours in the day than you are asleep, then you’re in the game… apparently, or you automatically get relegated… by default, and I weren’t going to let that happen. :angry-nono:

Those that play a vile game or are too mentally unwell, for my moral tastes, are removed from my radar/arena/playground/line-of-sight etc etc etc., for I refuse to be the cause of any effects and actions that such types may incur. So definitely a conflict of differences going on, mais… c’est la vie.

What? I hadn’t even seen this.

Carleas my man, never let tyrannical power fool you into thinking that the structure on which it rests is uncorrodable.

People start getting rid of key ministers in tyranical drunkenness and next thing they know, they’re China.

MagsJ, if you ever wanna start a faction for a suicidal coup, I’m with ya.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_xDdMWTCdQ[/youtube]

I think the coup’s already started… without us.

I ain’t missing moderating twits and belligerent drunks… they know who they are, because I didn’t want to moderate twits or belligerent drunks… hence no hard feelings or resentment, on my part.

Enjoying the show of the last 2 days? That Aegean… a funny guy huh? and what ever happened to Phon? a fine example of becoming the company you keep…?

the wha?

My observation, of your current designation… meaning your current rhetoric. I can but only read into it, due to your current demeanour at hand.

What?

So Phon, when was that last time you admitted to a fellow member, you had a few? Or what?

So Pedro made me out as the drunk, what does that leave you with in an “or” qualification?

Poll:

Who believes magsj is honest with anyone?

Yes, its pretty silly how much they are being allowed to destroy. Carleas has no time, and with what he doesn’t moderate, porn and nazism, this place runs a risk of being taken offline. Ive talked to him about that but he said that such things cant happen in America.

Nonetheless, I volunteer for moderatorship.

No, scrap that. Ive already collected most of my writing.

The report function is very helpful for me, I can’t read everything but I do check the reports.

Is the porn just naughty words, or are people posting pictures? The latter are a problem

Nazism is a harder case. If people are defending bad ideas, that’s OK, they can be wrong and the response is to argue or ignore. If people are harassing people for their perceived identity, that’s not OK.

Either way, I’m happy to review anything anyone views as problematic. Fair warning that I have a pretty high tolerance for what’s OK, but I’ll seriously consider any reported post.