| | The phrase you suggest -- "prone to being misunderstood" strikes me as self-sacrificial (as if a businessman described himself as "prone to not being paid," he would thereby appear to blame himself for not having received payment). Would you mind if I used a less self-sacrificial wording? (e.g., "Others often misunderstand my messages")? My advice is intended as just that, hopefully helpful advice. Use, discard, reword at your discretion. As to the sacrifical wording you see, I don't see it. I used that phrase because you possess a syndrome that apparently causes communication issues often originating from your side of the exchange, therefore you are prone to be misunderstood. It seems a minor and fairly irrelevant distinction though.
/b/
Since the most frequent (and the strongest) complaints against my postings have come from Teresa, no suggestion -- however excellent -- can serve the purpose unless she approves it. (If I adopt your excellent counsel, and then Teresa finds it insufficient or otherwise improper or ineffective .. why, in that case I might as well not have bothered.)
I disagree. Teresa certainly has been the most vocal lately, but I'm pretty sure most of us have been thrown off in communication with you. I personally went through a period where I just tried to ignore all threads from you, on the sole basis that it seemed obvious that you were on the attack. However, that is irrelevant because you are not beholden to anyone here. If you decided to adopt advice, and it seemed to help you meet your own goals of posting by helping others understand you what would it matter if the most vocal person still had a problem. If it helped you be more confident in your communications and seemed generally worthwhile to you then thats an end in itself. You have no obligation to "satisfy" others by your efforts, only to attempt to meet your own goals via the best method you can discover or devise.
I don't recall refusing -- and I don't (yet) know how to search this forum for old posts -- so I'll clarify now:
Objectivism interests me, I agree with a lot of it (not all -- or not yet all), and those strike me as sufficient reasons to participate here. Prehaps refusal is a bit strong. You never responded one way or the other, and the root of this issue was pretty clearly stated right there in the beginning. That your intent couldn't be read. The mention your interest in Objectivism is clearly listed in your bio. The issue has been that the consistent nature and tone of your posts has subtly indicated that debunking Objectivism interests you. I'm not saying thats true or not, that has been my impression and I suspect others might agree they thought they saw that too.
I don't want pity (I don't like the way it tastes). Re discrediting the pseudos -- I sought to know whether most Oists resembled them in certain significant and (to me) disturbing ways. (Experiences here have persuaded me that most of the Oists here do not resemble the pseudos I'd run afoul of.)
I didn't think so. If I did, we wouldn't be this far into the conversation. I'm just saying that some of your posts could be misconstrued to look like that.
Unfortunately, the only person I live with (my husband) has neither time nor inclination to read and correct material written on topics that do not vastly interest him. Even if he had the time and inclination, he too has Asperger's -- so anything I wrote that looked okay to me would, almost certainly, look okay to him too. (And I don't have the budget to justify hiring someone to come in every day and vet all my thread starters.)
Send them to me if you're worried about it. I would think someone that knows you really well would be potentially the worst person to do it, because they would know you well enough to fill in the gaps. Reading a thread every once in a while and returning a very general impression regarding intent of the poster really isn't in depth. Look how many people have already been doing it. I'm not naming names, but I'm sure I'm not the only one here that would be willing to take a second to return an email and say "This seems like an attack", "your intent is unclear", "did you intend it to sound like you believe X", etc.
|
|
