First Odeon and then Pyraxis?
Ok so two people on the site who were older members disagreed on the behavior of another member and that was over the top?
If it were as you stated then no. However, she had already answered all the questions making it repetitive and pointless. Pyraxis stated quite openly that she didn't really have the details but she thought Butterflies to be as nasty as you had told her. So how could she disagree?
Ok….so the collective group of Butterflies,Scrap, Adam, Squid, Bodie, and Bint (until recently)arguing against Odeon and that was Ok? Then the group of six became ganged up on and it was over the top that such strong views were aired by more than 1 member against the helpless hapless group? I see.
This was the thread that you made in the call out section, after you had left, then you stated you felt apathy about it and then left again. Odeon clearly stated it was not actually a call out so i did not realise there was any protocol regarding other members posting. I do not recall it ever happening like that. If i am wrong and there is a procedure that i should have observed then i apologise. I do not believe the six in question were acting as a group. It was six individuals with their own opinion which was different to Odeon. Did Odeon feel ganged up on? If he did he gave no indication of the fact. If he had asked me to butt out i would have respected his request. He also had the option of calling out Butterflies himself. This would have kept our comments to the peanut gallery. He chose not to take this option. I am happy to say sorry to odeon if he felt ganged up on.
Rather than Odeon and Pyraxis objecting, both perhapos ought to have been more understanding? Perhaps allowed a more than a three to one in an argument, to be fairer and not give the impression of a ganging up or stymieing creativity and potential for future? Allow for difference in life experience? Protect them from calling it as you see it in case they have not had the opportunity to come across something in their own life experience to know what it is you object to? Let them make mistakes and if they are under (30?) do not highlight it least you get seen as a headmaster?
It sounds like a bit of a cop out to be honest and a rather lopsided playing field. A protected class as it were. Allow the younger members more leeway because they are young and let them be unchecked by your own objections to anything they say or do. Or if you do defend anything you say, cop it sweet but be delicate in your replies. Don’t and you will be seen as being on a high horse, a headmaster, mentally ill, having a false sense of superiority?
Kinda sounds like what you are saying and it doesn’t seem to fit the “make a claim and be prepared to back it”.
Except that is not what i said at all. Those are your words. I said that i personally choose to go out my way and take into account that i have more life experience. I said that i make more of an effort to understand young people as i don't see any benefit in alienating the next generation. I also said that i have no influence over anyone else here. I never said anything about letting them off scott free. I just wouldn't persue them for weeks.
I see you making a claim of the former and not in possible but assertively saying it is so. Did not see anything close to any suggestion of the later. (Are you sure it may not be a case of the younger ones on high horses and older ones arrogant and set in their ways? That reading actually makes more sense to me. (Perhaps in that it better fits my self-image) In fact I have seen nothing but support of the younger ones regardless of what they say or do.
It looks a tad biased to be honest. Am I reading too much into this?
It is integral to my trying to nut out this site and the dynamics and culture that is/was here and what is/isn’t changing and why?
I really don't know what it is you are reading in to this. I get the impression that the words i have written already have not been received by yourself as i intended. I have no problem with older people calling out younger people, or vice versa. Or two people calling one person, or one person calling out ten. I felt Butterflies was being pursued. It seemed to be for kicks or revenge rather than any hopeful resolution of a disagreement. Odeon had said he was 'playing with her' and 'teaching her a lesson' (although fair play to him he did say he should not have said it). So, yes, i felt it was OTT. I have never stated that young people should not be corrected. Corrected yes. persued for lulz no.
