Subject:
|
Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Jan 2000 08:56:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1151 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello,
Peter Callaway wrote:
> In lugnet.general, Eric Kingsley writes:
> > Really it all comes down to respect. Whether it is respect for Todd and his
> > rules or respect for someone elses opinion we all deserve it. For me respect
> > is something you lose not something you have to gain. I will respect anyone
> > and their views until they do something to lose that respect. This may be
> > because I am an optimist or because I am to trusting but that is how I feel.
>
> You certainly are more optimistic than me. I think respect is something that
> has to be earned, either by actions or attitude or both. In my industry, and
> even within my company I come across a lot of people who are less than
> competent to perform their duties or make important decisions. These people
> tend to use the "I'm the boss that's why" argument. Whilst you are compelled
> to comply because they are the boss, they certainly don't gain any respect as
> the boss.
Respect as an abstraction isn't variable for me; what I respect about another is.
Note that Todd himself hasn't fallen back on that "because I said so"
argument--and when we had the leaked-scans issue, he was very quick to give
reasoning and seemed very reticent to fall back on that authority. In part, I
respect Todd's authority precisely because I have a great deal of faith (scratch
that--not faith, but *proof*) that it's founded on something reasonable and not
caprice. If you go back and look at the threads where Todd has been involved in
an administrative-opinion category, note carefully where and when he chose to
intercede and when he did not (and I have very little doubt that he did, in fact,
read everything). That, to me, is the surest sign of good administration--far
better than I would be capable of--and I've taken very careful note of it.
As a rule, I respect *anyone* until they(2) give me reason not to respect them.
The nature of that respect may differ--the respect I have for my students, for
example, is far different than the respect I have for my mentor, which is in turn
far different than the respect I have for my colleagues (and on and on).
Sometimes people can lose "respected" status the moment they open their mouths,
but often I still maintain social decorum until I am assured of a basic ineptitude
in the other person. My problem with free and loose profanity is that it usually
operates from the other belief--that everyone must respect *you* and your
feelings, but that the converse isn't mandatory(1). So I agree with Eric that
respect should be something one loses rather than something one starts without and
must gain. When we believe that people aren't deserving of respect from the
beginning, we open ourselves up to all sorts of unsavory things and tragic
misunderstandings. Always best to err on the side of caution and civility, I
say--offend one too many people in my field and you're done, and while I don't
know your occupation, Peter, I can assure you that academics are probably far more
sensitive. Henry Kissinger said something on the order of it being that way
because the stakes are so very low. ;)
Of course, I'm assuming a definition of "respect" that includes simple things like
"respecting people's basic human rights," which I doubt you'd disagree with. That
is also a predicate of assumed respect for others, even if you weren't quite
thinking of that. I'd better stop before I devolve into semantics. Too late.
Nuts.
best regards,
Lindsay
(1) Obvious exception: Hitting your head on the corner of a cupboard--but follow
it up with the proper obeisances. ;)
(2) The Royal they, or the plebeian they, or some kind of they that just
highlights why we need a third-person singluar neuter pronoun just like we need a
second-person collective one.
---
Lindsay Frederick Braun (Mr)
Department of History
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
| Lindsay, I think we are talking semantics here, and I can mostly be blamed for the confusion due to my less than accademic-standard grasp of the written and spoken word. (...) True, and that is one of the reasons why I accord him with a great deal (...) (25 years ago, 31-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Who oversees the rec.toys.LEGO newsgroup?
|
| (...) You certainly are more optimistic than me. I think respect is something that has to be earned, either by actions or attitude or both. In my industry, and even within my company I come across a lot of people who are less than competent to (...) (25 years ago, 25-Jan-00, to lugnet.general)
|
50 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
