Alaris' Comment - Brotherly Love

[Red]

I wanted to share a comment made by Alaris on another thread. I have hesitated saying anything to the moderators or the creator because I hate to sound "whiny", but there is a problem on this forum.

Alaris said:
"We should be able to disagree with a spirit of brotherhood and love whereas so many dismiss and condescend. But we can't even do that here where most of us are LDS doing this to other LDS ... I am sometimes guilty of this too though my intentions are to work towards elevating the conversation."

I have taken very long breaks from this forum, a place I come to to ask questions for my own understanding, because there are so many mouthy and condescending people who have no fear about saying whatever they please, in spite of how damaging it may be. I suppose it is easy to be mouthy when you're not saying it to someone's face, but it doesn't make it ok. Fighting with and degrading others does not help build intelligence or quash ignorance. Commentary on people's traits does not support an argument in logic.

Before you attack someone's character, writing style, or habits, perhaps you should ask yourself if you're "disagreeing with a spirit of brotherhood and love" or just tearing someone else down because you want to be "right".

[Michelle]

Sometimes people get offended when no offense is meant. I get that this is the Internet, but we read things with the voice we choose, not necessarily the one intended.

I've had trouble with Alaris, in particular, reading a comment to be rude, even when I assured Alaris no offense was meant.

Not trying to single Alaris out, just using that example because you shared his/her comment.

Brotherly love, yes. But not being easily offended either.

[Alaris]

Sometimes people get offended when no offense is meant. I get that this is the Internet, but we read things with the voice we choose, not necessarily the one intended.

I've had trouble with Alaris, in particular, reading a comment to be rude, even when I assured Alaris no offense was meant.

Not trying to single Alaris out, just using that example because you shared his/her comment.

Brotherly love, yes. But not being easily offended either.

Thanks Red & Michelle. Too many justify their mistreatment of others under the following pretexts:

It's my personality and I'm not changing

Jesus was also mean to people who were wrong

It's your responsibility to be unoffended not mine to be inoffensive

It is our responsibility to both love and teach one another. We will account for every idle word. Why? When you shame someone from not participating you will be held to account from what that person may have learned or shared with others ripple effect style.

Also..

Avoiding LOLs at people's posts and deeply held sacred beliefs is a great general tip to help foster brotherly love.

Edit: my intent Michelle was to elevate the way we treat each other. My method is not perfect but I did attempt to stay relevant to that effort and not throw insults back at you. If the end result was something less I apologize.

[Seek the Truth]

Sounds like we have another police force gathering.

Look at my start date and post count. The history of this forum is one of Snufferite apostasy, 9-11 truthers, moon landing denialists, reincarnationists, and Alex Jones sycophancy. Countless members of this forum have apostatized openly or been excommunicated. Also in this history are many wild and crazy end times predictions, that have failed at a rate of 100%. Every prediction made on this forum has been wrong. In the past this forum was very little LDS or Freedom, as people who were on the other side of these issues were continually moderated and banned for lengthy periods, myself included.

At one point something along those lines made a national media outlet and justifiably many of us were horrified that the above could be construed as representing LDS point of view.

A lot of this is special pleading, a desire to criticize but be free from criticism. But at the end of the day a lot of people put forth pet theories that have no basis in LDS teaching and this forum has a long history of this ending very badly for people.

[Alaris]

Sounds like we have another police force gathering.

Look at my start date and post count. The history of this forum is one of Snufferite apostasy, 9-11 truthers, moon landing denialists, reincarnationists, and Alex Jones sycophancy. Countless members of this forum have apostatized openly or been excommunicated. Also in this history are many wild and crazy end times predictions, that have failed at a rate of 100%. Every prediction made on this forum has been wrong. In the past this forum was very little LDS or Freedom, as people who were on the other side of these issues were continually moderated and banned for lengthy periods, myself included.

At one point something along those lines made a national media outlet and justifiably many of us were horrified that the above could be construed as representing LDS point of view.

A lot of this is special pleading, a desire to criticize but be free from criticism. But at the end of the day a lot of people put forth pet theories that have no basis in LDS teaching and this forum has a long history of this ending very badly for people.

You can declare truth and be respectful. Here is an example

Respectfully, not every prediction on this forum can be wrong if not for the mere fact that there are many standing predictions whose dates have not yet arrived.

Prediction does not equal prophecy.

Criticizing those who make predictions fosters an atmosphere of fear rather than one of discussion.

[LucianAMD]

Also remember that moderating a forum is time consuming. Brian can't read everything. If you see a post that breaks the rules please use the report button and help make his job easier.

[Seek the Truth]

You can declare truth and be respectful. Here is an example

Respectfully, not every prediction on this forum can be wrong if not for the mere fact that there are many standing predictions whose dates have not yet arrived.

But why play games. Search the forum and find one end times prophecy that anyone made that came true.

Prediction does not equal prophecy.

When dealing with religious matters it starts blurring at best.

Criticizing those who make predictions fosters an atmosphere of fear rather than one of discussion.

Lol so free to criticize but free from criticism? No thanks. Restraining critics but no restraint for predictors. Free speech for me and not for thee.

I'll pass.

[Jonesy]

I have to be completely honest here. There was a time where I was in deception. When it really came down to it, was it people being "nice" to me that brought me back? No, I can't say that. Ultimately, it was the sharpness of the truth that brought me back and my ability to receive it. I didn't have much support from hardly anyone in my circle. In fact, the attitude of kindness from some on the other side could have pulled me into that deception. The truth didn't care who was kind, though.

Please don't get me wrong. My wife and I have a saying of something to the effect of "I will always love you, but I don't always like you". We should always strive for the virtue of kindness, but don't let it trump love. Love always elevates, even if it's sharp and sometimes hurtful. I greatly value when people speak freely and openly to me, even when I disagree with them. I can regard everyone equally, but I don't care if someone doesn't regard what I believe as long as I am free to act on my beliefs. It's possible to respect the individual, and not their beliefs. Frankly, there are beliefs that some have that I absolutely have no respect towards. It's one's free agency I respect.

I'm not giving a pass for mean-spiritedness or pride, but if it happens, I try and let it roll off like water on a duck's back. I just want open speech, yet, I make the effort to practice kindness. Maybe our frustration or anger comes from our inability to control others' kindness. We each have the responsibility to restrain our speech, as James teaches.

Anyways, I hope it's love that drives our speech and the way we treat others. We should be the example. But I hope we can discern love when we see it in its different forms. Hope this comes out right!

[Red]

I'm not speaking of overly sensitive people who can't handle criticism. I'm speaking of plain rudeness. Here's an example:

"You've never gotten it and I suspect never will. You consider yourself as one person capable of being guided by the spirit and yet somehow question that 15 Apostles having far better spiritual capacity than you have ever manifest could as a body mistake the inspiration of the spirit."

Or perhaps this comment:
"I have noted that you are not always good with context."

And again:

"You do have trouble with context. Think back to the conversation we had a couple of weeks ago and you said something I said was incorrect and then proceeded to illustrate what I said."

And yet again:

" I tried to explain that but that context got by you again."

This particular person is nothing but critical of people's character, not their ideas. He always fails to use logic and reason when arguing with someone and instead stoops to insults. It's not productive. And it's definitely not enjoyable.

[Z2100]

LDSFF has really gone downhill. I think we can all agree on that.

[David13]

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

[Arenera]

Sounds like we have another police force gathering.

Look at my start date and post count. The history of this forum is one of Snufferite apostasy, 9-11 truthers, moon landing denialists, reincarnationists, and Alex Jones sycophancy. Countless members of this forum have apostatized openly or been excommunicated. Also in this history are many wild and crazy end times predictions, that have failed at a rate of 100%. Every prediction made on this forum has been wrong. In the past this forum was very little LDS or Freedom, as people who were on the other side of these issues were continually moderated and banned for lengthy periods, myself included.

At one point something along those lines made a national media outlet and justifiably many of us were horrified that the above could be construed as representing LDS point of view.

A lot of this is special pleading, a desire to criticize but be free from criticism. But at the end of the day a lot of people put forth pet theories that have no basis in LDS teaching and this forum has a long history of this ending very badly for people.

I also found out that Mormons are very sensitive about the Word of Wisdom, there are as many interpretations as there are posters.

[Alaris]

I have taken very long breaks from this forum, a place I come to to ask questions for my own understanding, because there are so many mouthy and condescending people who have no fear about saying whatever they please, in spite of how damaging it may be. I suppose it is easy to be mouthy when you're not saying it to someone's face, but it doesn't make it ok. Fighting with and degrading others does not help build intelligence or quash ignorance. Commentary on people's traits does not support an argument in logic.

I appreciate Red's sentiment, and what she says above is absolutely true. Since 5 people so far have liked Seek for Truth's first comment, I think there is more likely a mob forming here than a police force. So let's speak plainly.

Troll - make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them.

Trolling in general is deplorable. Trolls live in clouds of negative energy and feed off it. They seek to spread it by antagonizing others and deliberately seeking contention. There's nothing that trolls like more than a thread about why trolls are bad ... they'll jump right in and start contending and arguing. They often cite how many posts they have as though that somehow justifies their behavior without realizing the irony that trolls live under bridges.

LDS trolling is worse than deplorable. The pretext here so many use of lurkers and investigators should motivate us to be on our best behavior and not justify condescension. How we treat others while declaring our own understanding of truth is more important than the truths themselves. How can that be? Have you ever been at church where the spirit is strong and the speaker or teacher is saying A and the spirit is telling you B? The spirit teaches, not you and not me. The spirit converts. And there is no faster way to chase out the spirit than by inviting the spirit of contention. So if you are insulting, condescending, or contentious and then make several true statements there's more likely a tumbleweed to pass by on an empty wind than the Spirit of Truth.

It would be easier to hit the ignore button, and I'm not knocking that (I've used it.) Yet I feel it is a worthy endeavor to work to elevate the discussion by calling for higher standards of behavior from fellow saints--and my covenants I have made got God compel me to invite others to honor their own. I certainly don't enjoy it and am not looking to incite or provoke.

Jonesey1982 makes a good point, but we cannot divorce sharpness from the rest of D&C 121. Sharpness is the exception to the rule:

D&C 121:39 We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
40 Hence many are called, but few are chosen.
41 No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
42 By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—
43 Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;
44 That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

There are those here whose default is condescension, mocking, and belittling - all of which invite contention giving every appearance of seeking contention like an addict seeking their next fix. Sharpness is not condescension, mocking, or belittling and it is certainly not the default.

Let's be clear that the point of sharpness is to correct each other and afterwards show forth an increase of love. Without naming names, I have attempted to follow this pattern given to us by the Lord and could name at least three forum members whose interactions elevated afterwards. During the back-and-forth posts that were uncomfortable at the time I wondered if it was worth it. I testify to you brothers and sisters that it is indeed worth it. We will account for every idle word. I have read several near death experience books and one extremely common experience is a life in review where the experiencer relives their entire life in exquisite detail. They also relive how they treated others from the other person's perspective good or bad. So if they were callous or mean to someone they felt the consequence in lucid detail from the other person's perspective. Please think about that anyone reading this and thinking I'm silly or wrong for endeavoring a crusade to elevate our interaction.

However, if I am able to help a few elevate their treatment of others where someday their life review & judgement shifts from reliving the hurt they caused to reliving the joy they caused - worth it. That is my aim, even if I have to suffer more ignorance than success along the way. Covenants honored. Meaningful change implemented.

[Alaris]

You can declare truth and be respectful. Here is an example

Respectfully, not every prediction on this forum can be wrong if not for the mere fact that there are many standing predictions whose dates have not yet arrived.

But why play games. Search the forum and find one end times prophecy that anyone made that came true.

Prediction does not equal prophecy.

When dealing with religious matters it starts blurring at best.

Criticizing those who make predictions fosters an atmosphere of fear rather than one of discussion.

Lol so free to criticize but free from criticism? No thanks. Restraining critics but no restraint for predictors. Free speech for me and not for thee.

I'll pass.

Prophecies usually start with "Thus saith the Lord." If anyone oversteps a "prediction" where you think it may actually cause others to apostatize, I challenge you to attempt to offer correction with love, respect and the principles of D&C 121 (see post above.)

Who is saying they're free from criticism? Who is saying free speech for me and not thee? You can honor both the truth and brotherly love at the same time. It's really not that hard.

In April 1843, Pelatiah Brown sought to silence certain critics of the LDS Church by stretching and twisting the meaning of passages from the book of Revelation to make his point. After Brother Brown had been disciplined for doing so, Joseph Smith said: “I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latterday Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/selected-a ... ing-church

Trammeled. I like that word. The Prophet Joseph Smith has taught us not to trammel those who err in doctrine.

[Finrock]

This is a forum for discussion of the principles of Liberty and the many topics encompassed in the gospel of Jesus Christ - which embraces all truth. All are welcome who can engage in such discussions civilly and respectfully.

The following rules are a guideline to help make this forum a better place. If you choose not to adhere to these standards you may have your access restricted or be asked to leave. Keep in mind that the moderators do not always see all inappropriate comments and we rely on you to report to us any forum rules violations.

By participating on ldsfreedomforum.com, you agree to abide by the rules and standards of the forum as posted here.


LDS FREEDOM FORUM RULES

#1: Be kind and respectful.

“And see that there is no iniquity [on LDSFF], neither hardness with each other, neither lying, backbiting, nor evil speaking” (D&C 20:54)

- No personal attacks (ad hominem) or threats. No defamation of character, libel, slander, etc.

- No Trolling, flaming, spamming, baiting.

- You are expected to follow copyright laws and any other applicable laws when posting content on this forum.

END.


The forum administrator reserves the right to restrict access or ban anyone from the forum at any time for any reason.

If you disagree with the actions of a moderator or the forum administrator you may address your concerns privately by contacting the forum administrator.


Some food for thought...

From Alma 30:7: "..there was no law against a man's belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds..."

Joseph Smith said: "I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine." (DHC 5: 340.)

We understand from D&C 121 that "Influence can or ought to be maintained by... persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile..."

"We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." (Articles of Faith 1:11)

-Finrock

[Finrock]

There is basically just one rule on this forum: Be Kind and Respectful. It is specifically forbidden on this forum to personally attack another poster (ad hominem).

No matter what justification a person uses, how they feel, what they think, etc. the fact is that on this forum ad hominems are against the rule.

If you don't address the content and the substance of another posters post but instead you speak about them personally in any way, you are violating the rules of the forum. Whether you feel it is okay to attack someone personally or not, it is against the rules of this forum.

By this principle alone it would seem to me that people who call themselves Latter-day Saints would show honor and respect towards the forum owner(s). When you are in someone else's house, you honor and respect their rules, regardless of your personal feelings about those rules. To be a person of integrity you either respect the rules or if it is too much for you, you leave that person's house (or forum).

-Finrock

[Seek the Truth]

Prophecies usually start with "Thus saith the Lord."

Depends on who you talk to.

If anyone oversteps a "prediction" where you think it may actually cause others to apostatize, I challenge you to attempt to offer correction with love, respect and the principles of D&C 121 (see post above.)

Who is saying they're free from criticism? Who is saying free speech for me and not thee?

You.

You can honor both the truth and brotherly love at the same time. It's really not that hard.

In April 1843, Pelatiah Brown sought to silence certain critics of the LDS Church by stretching and twisting the meaning of passages from the book of Revelation to make his point. After Brother Brown had been disciplined for doing so, Joseph Smith said: “I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latterday Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine.

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/selected-a ... ing-church

Trammeled. I like that word. The Prophet Joseph Smith has taught us not to trammel those who err in doctrine.

Great. But if you get to do it you have to let other people do it.

[Finrock]

I've posted about how we should respect and honor the rules of this forum as a matter of integrity. There are other reasons and levels to this issue.

There are people who are abusers. All abusers no matter who they are or how they abuse, have a few things in common. People who abuse other people (bully, ridicule, mock, malign, etc.) are insecure and they are trying to compensate or cover up core negative beliefs about themselves. They are emotionally immature and they have not found a way to deal with their insecurities and negative core beliefs in a healthy way. Abusers also feel a sense of control and exhilaration from abusing others. These are powerful motivations for an abuser to continue to abuse. Many abusers have not acknowledged to themselves that they are abusers or they are blind to their behavior. Many abusers know exactly what they are doing.

In most cases abusers will continue to abuse unless someone or something intervenes. If an abuser was never supported, sustained, or upheld in their actions, they would stop the behavior, at least until they can get away with it without others knowing about it. But, on a public forum, a person who is a bully or an abuser will stop their behavior if they are confronted enough times or if their behavior is not enabled by others.

We enabled bullying and abusive behavior by ignoring it or by not addressing it. Because people have a tendency to form in to groups or cliques, people tend to form loyalties to their particular group or clique. Because of these loyalties people quite often will ignore abusive behavior or bullying that is perpetrated by people who are a part of their group. Here is how this might look:

Person A and Person B share the same view and they are in disagreement with Person C.

Person B, while defending their view, employs ad hominem tactics in their discussion towards Person C.

Person A, although they may not attack another person personally, does not say anything to Person B about their behavior because Person A believes in what Person B is saying.

This ought not to be. If most everyone on this forum agreed that attacking another person personally is not OK, no matter who is doing it, then abusers and bullies would not be supported in their actions. In other words, we should all be able to sustain the forum rule of being kind and respectful towards others. We should all be in agreement with that, regardless of where we stand otherwise, we should all agree that no matter who is acting in an abusive way, whether they support our point of view or not, they ought not to be supported in that behavior.

It is not OK to attack a person personally during the course of a discussion. There is no justification for it. ANYBODY who begins to attack another person personally during a discussion is doing so out of a place of insecurity and due to negative core beliefs about themselves. Attacking another person personally is truly a reflection of the person who is attacking and they ought to look inward and find out why they feel the need to tear down or to harm another person.

Regardless of where we might stand, as Latter-day Saints, all of us should be united in supporting the principles of being kind and respectful. We should actively discourage people who are attacking others personally even if these people support our point of view or perspective on other issues or on the topic at hand.

-Finrock

[Alaris]

Who is saying they're free from criticism? Who is saying free speech for me and not thee?

You.

Have I said that? Where have I said I'm free from criticism? Where have I said I'm free to speak but you are not? My aim is more liberty of speech not less by inviting and not compelling others to stand a little taller in their treatment of others - even those with whom you disagree. Did you read the quote above you quoted me quoting from Joseph Smith? That perfectly encapsulates what I am standing for. I have never tried to silence anyone and certainly not on substance. The truth speaks for itself and does not need to compel others to silence--that is the way of the adversary.

You can honor both the truth and brotherly love at the same time. It's really not that hard.

Great. But if you get to do it you have to let other people do it.

I have already agreed to that sentiment and am fairly certain I've never said anything to the contrary. In fact I believe it was Red that I once offended with a callous response to one of her posts. She called me out on in publicly and I reread my post and realized it was indeed without charity and I apologized to her publicly. I'm glad she called me out as I didn't realize I had offended her - perhaps even hurt her - and I was able to make amends. This culture of non-apology which has overtaken our world should not creep in to our LDS culture. The left is overt in their non-apologies and this is not something we should ever emulate. I think that about sums up about how Pro "let other people do it" I am. :ymhug: Asking ourselves, "when's the last time I apologized for something?" may produce meaningful fruit.

My favorite scripture:

2 Nephi 2:27 Wherefore, men are free according to the flesh; and all things are given them which are expedient unto man. And they are free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil; for he seeketh that all men might be miserable like unto himself.

[Alaris]

I just now realized the scripture and quote I keep referring to are in the forum rules. Alma 30:7 and AoF 11 are also great. Thanks Finrock for quoting them here and BrianM for those great reminders.

[Red]

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

[David13]

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

But usually there is honesty with the spirit, no?

"Why be unkind when you can be kind?"
Have you been kind with Alaris, or contentious?
"Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy?"
Have you been empathetic or sympathetic with Alaris?
Or contentious?
dc

I guess I may have some misunderstanding there. I guess your contention is not with Alaris, but with those unnamed who you deem to be contentious? Is that it?

[Red]

I really love this, thanks for sharing.

"In April 1843, Pelatiah Brown sought to silence certain critics of the LDS Church by stretching and twisting the meaning of passages from the book of Revelation to make his point. After Brother Brown had been disciplined for doing so, Joseph Smith said: “I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latterday Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine."

I feel like Joseph would have gently corrected Brown, with love and kindness. We learn by being corrected, but it can be done in good spirit. It takes an open mind to accept correction. I try to be this way, but I shut down very fast if someone does it unkindly. I recognize attacks on my character, especially if I genuinely considered the ugly things someone has said to me. I still consider the validity of ugly things people say to me, but it's more enjoyable if it's said with kindness.

I have no pride. I know that I have much to learn. I'm grateful for others who can teach me. We are ALL learning. It never stops. Why not make the journey better by being kind?

I vaguely remember what Alaris said about our tiny altercation. I can't recall what it was, but I do remember being surprised that he apologized for the way he responded. No one on the forum has ever done that, and I've called quite a few out on being rude. I have a lot of respect for people that can apologize for things like that. It means they can see outside themselves. I have had to do that with my children many times. It would be easy for me to feel justified for snapping at them when I have a bad day and not apologizing because I am the parent and I can demand respect. But what does that teach them? Nothing good. My children are more quick to repent now because I have apologized to them for my mistakes rather than justifying my actions. They are kinder.

[Red]

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

But usually there is honesty with the spirit, no?

"Why be unkind when you can be kind?"
Have you been kind with Alaris, or contentious?
"Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy?"
Have you been empathetic or sympathetic with Alaris?
Or contentious?
dc

I guess I may have some misunderstanding there. I guess your contention is not with Alaris, but with those unnamed who you deem to be contentious? Is that it?

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

But usually there is honesty with the spirit, no?

"Why be unkind when you can be kind?"
Have you been kind with Alaris, or contentious?
"Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy?"
Have you been empathetic or sympathetic with Alaris?
Or contentious?
dc

I guess I may have some misunderstanding there. I guess your contention is not with Alaris, but with those unnamed who you deem to be contentious? Is that it?

No I don't have a problem with Alaris. There's another on the forum that gets under my skin. I don't want to call them out because my better option is to take a break from the forum or avoid topics in which he frequently posts or is attracted to read. I can't help him see what he is doing. I keep hoping he will have a lightbulb moment that lets him see outside himself. I'm not sure if he's a narcissist, but if he is, narcissism is extremely hard to reform. I have to just tell myself, "he knows not what he does." (Jumbled up Luke 23:34 )

In answer to your questions tho, I do try to be kind always. I try to not take my stress out on others. I try to have empathy/sympathy. I know most of all that everyone is fighting a hard battle and that some people cannot help the things they don't know. Sometimes they have no self control. I pray that the spirit finds them and some day they figure it out. This works the best.

I am red headed and Scottish, so I have to work especially hard to be kind to people that are not.

[David13]

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

But usually there is honesty with the spirit, no?

"Why be unkind when you can be kind?"
Have you been kind with Alaris, or contentious?
"Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy?"
Have you been empathetic or sympathetic with Alaris?
Or contentious?
dc

I guess I may have some misunderstanding there. I guess your contention is not with Alaris, but with those unnamed who you deem to be contentious? Is that it?

What was that so many said when we were kids?
Oh, yeah, sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.
But like Jonesy posted, words might wake me up to some truths about myself. Or I can use the ignore button.
dc

Yes, but at what point is it just plain cyber bullying that is detrimental to a learning experience? Is this forum not intended to be a learning experience? Why be unkind when you can be kind? Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy? Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. Alaris has a great point, the spirit teaches more than a person ever could, but the spirit is driven away by contention.

But usually there is honesty with the spirit, no?

"Why be unkind when you can be kind?"
Have you been kind with Alaris, or contentious?
"Why not exercise empathy or at the very least sympathy?"
Have you been empathetic or sympathetic with Alaris?
Or contentious?
dc

I guess I may have some misunderstanding there. I guess your contention is not with Alaris, but with those unnamed who you deem to be contentious? Is that it?

No I don't have a problem with Alaris. There's another on the forum that gets under my skin. I don't want to call them out because my better option is to take a break from the forum or avoid topics in which he frequently posts or is attracted to read. I can't help him see what he is doing. I keep hoping he will have a lightbulb moment that lets him see outside himself. I'm not sure if he's a narcissist, but if he is, narcissism is extremely hard to reform. I have to just tell myself, "he knows not what he does." (Jumbled up Luke 23:34 )

In answer to your questions tho, I do try to be kind always. I try to not take my stress out on others. I try to have empathy/sympathy. I know most of all that everyone is fighting a hard battle and that some people cannot help the things they don't know. Sometimes they have no self control. I pray that the spirit finds them and some day they figure it out. This works the best.

I am red headed and Scottish, so I have to work especially hard to be kind to people that are not.

And that should include the person who gets under your skin, right?
dc