HAVOCA - Negative Feedback

[Harry]

It takes the stronger person not to rise to provocation, not to judge what is perceived as provocation. When we see something that irks us, we must be better than to judge it, even if it seems to beg judgement.

"What could that person have experienced that would lead them to think in that way? What could they have suffered that would cause them to lash out when their assumptions are challenged? - their predictable assumptions, the ones that make them feel safe?"

Hi CdL,
Very nicely put!

And thank you for contributing and doing so much for Havoca.
I appreciate that you set a good example of what you expressed so well above.

When people lash out because they disagree, it can take inner strength to not react to their provocation.
I like your ideas for thinking about and framing why that person might be reacting as they are.

H

[Kadie]

Hi Harry, I think are talking about different things here .. well I sincerely hope so.
I was referring to a post ( which was removed after attention brought to it) clearly stated in the rules not allowed ,which caused a lot of distress to people here who were sexually abused as children, but also I would imagine any decent person.
Also victim blaming posts which have caused at least two people to leave

[Harry]

Hi Harry, I think are talking about different things here .. well I sincerely hope so.
I was referring to a post ( which was removed after attention brought to it) clearly stated in the rules not allowed ,which caused a lot of distress to people here who were sexually abused as children, but also I would imagine any decent person.
Also victim blaming posts which have caused at least two people to leave

Hi Kadie,
Thanks for the note back

If I understand from what you wrote, you are making allusions to a post that you say distressed some people who were sexually abused as children.
Also you are alluding to "victim blaming" post(S) that are blamed for causing two people to leave.

This is all sounds very unfortunate!

The posts you are referring to, however, are unknown to me.
I have no way of knowing what, where, why, who, or anything about the deleted posts you are referencing...

I found Jamie's post puzzling.
It made vague allusions and cryptic inferences.
Vague allusions and cryptic inferences tend to be damaging.

Whatever it was that distressed you sounds like it was important to you.
I hope you were able to talk it through with whomever posted it.

H

[ashridge_mack]

The posts you are referring to, however, are unknown to me.
I have no way of knowing what, where, why, who, or anything about the deleted posts you are referencing...

I found Jamie's post puzzling.
It made vague allusions and cryptic inferences.
Vague allusions and cryptic inferences tend to be damaging.

Tbh I find this whole thread from beginning to end entirely full of "vague allusions and cryptic inferences". Sort of seems like everybody posting knows who they're talking about but doesn't want to actually say. Which I find a bit coy, and there's not much you can do with if you don't know (and I, like you Harry, don't).

Tbh it's a bit like the whole class being kept behind because some kids in it have been naughty. Imo not fair or helpful, and vaguely shame- and paranoia-inducing.

Jamie, maybe criticisms aren't very helpful unless it's a bit clearer (a) who's making them, and (b) who they're about?

xxxx

[vleon]

"What could that person have experienced that would lead them to think in that way? What could they have suffered that would cause them to lash out when their assumptions are challenged? - their predictable assumptions, the ones that make them feel safe?"

This reminds me of a joke I heard the other day. Two social workers are taking a walk when they stumble upon a homeless man who has seen brutally attacked and is laying in a pool of his own blood, barely alive. In horror, one of the social workers tells the other "whoever did this needs our help".

Jokes aside, not acting in a destructive manner in response to provocation is wise, but letting provocations go by can sour the atmosphere. I called out the nasty behavior of a member, which I know was appreciated by many, and I think it had a positive effect on that member's behavior, at least for some time.

To quote another dead thinker:

Tolerance if the virtue of a man without conviction.

[elephant]

I think it is very sad when someone joins a support site such as havoca and then feels a lack of support, understanding, empathy etc. if everyone of us could really check our words before responding and be sure that we are being as kind as possible then this may not happen again.
I was desperate when I joined and was very fortunate to feel supported and non-judged from the outset. I'm sure many others feel the same way.
I do believe that some people can be overly sensitive and seeing words in black and white does not convey the face behind the words. Sometimes we may be cruel to be kind but only the cruelty comes through.
Perhaps Bambi's mother had the right attitude- 'if you can't say anything nice , don't say anything at all'.

[Jamie]

Thanks Elephant, nicely put.

Jamie, maybe criticisms aren't very helpful unless it's a bit clearer (a) who's making them, and (b) who they're about?

A) a new member, who has now left.
B) I don't know, that person didn't stipulate but it felt important enough for me to share as a reminder to everyone about the impact we can have. I think Elephant summarises it nicely.

[DIVINE]

I am emotionally exhausted, but just want to say, my misery started here when a new member joined, she was toxic, other new members left, it was reported, but never addressed. Having said that, The good fight has left me, I will channel my energy in being supportive, no longer engaging in negativity.

I am truly grateful...for HAVOCA.

[Embers]

I am emotionally exhausted, but just want to say, my misery started here when a new member joined, she was toxic, other new members left, it was reported, but never addressed. Having said that, The good fight has left me, I will channel my energy in being supportive, no longer engaging in negativity.

I am truly grateful...for HAVOCA.

And we are grateful for.you

[DIVINE]

The posts you are referring to, however, are unknown to me.
I have no way of knowing what, where, why, who, or anything about the deleted posts you are referencing...

I found Jamie's post puzzling.
It made vague allusions and cryptic inferences.
Vague allusions and cryptic inferences tend to be damaging.

Tbh I find this whole thread from beginning to end entirely full of "vague allusions and cryptic inferences". Sort of seems like everybody posting knows who they're talking about but doesn't want to actually say. Which I find a bit coy, and there's not much you can do with if you don't know (and I, like you Harry, don't).

Tbh it's a bit like the whole class being kept behind because some kids in it have been naughty. Imo not fair or helpful, and vaguely shame- and paranoia-inducing.

Jamie, maybe criticisms aren't very helpful unless it's a bit clearer (a) who's making them, and (b) who they're about?

xxxx

Agree

[DIVINE]

It takes the stronger person not to rise to provocation, not to judge what is perceived as provocation. When we see something that irks us, we must be better than to judge it, even if it seems to beg judgement.

"What could that person have experienced that would lead them to think in that way? What could they have suffered that would cause them to lash out when their assumptions are challenged? - their predictable assumptions, the ones that make them feel safe?"

Hi CdL,
Very nicely put!

And thank you for contributing and doing so much for Havoca.
I appreciate that you set a good example of what you expressed so well above.

When people lash out because they disagree, it can take inner strength to not react to their provocation.
I like your ideas for thinking about and framing why that person might be reacting as they are.

H

Disagree

[Harry]

It takes the stronger person not to rise to provocation, not to judge what is perceived as provocation. When we see something that irks us, we must be better than to judge it, even if it seems to beg judgement.

"What could that person have experienced that would lead them to think in that way? What could they have suffered that would cause them to lash out when their assumptions are challenged? - their predictable assumptions, the ones that make them feel safe?"

Hi CdL,
Very nicely put!

And thank you for contributing and doing so much for Havoca.
I appreciate that you set a good example of what you expressed so well above.

When people lash out because they disagree, it can take inner strength to not react to their provocation.
I like your ideas for thinking about and framing why that person might be reacting as they are.

H

Disagree

Hi Divine,
I see that you "disagree" with my post.
Please help me to understand.

Do do disagree with me that, as I wrote, it can take inner strength to not react to provocation?
Do you disagree with my expression of appreciation to Coeur de Lion for doing so much for Havoca?

I'd appreciate your helping me to understand by explaining what you mean.
Thanks,
H

[Kadie]

Hi Harry , sorry I know you are asking DIVINE but I believe we are of the same opinion.
There are some things that provoke outrage and should never be seen on this site .
I cannot be explicit about the post I reported as it was dealt with as soon as attention was drawn to it. But it was shocking and gave the impression that a sexual abuser might be on site and getting off on it.
I think we can all agree that victim blaming is not welcome here .
There are very few rules and boundaries but necessary to keep this a safe space for everyone .

[Clods]

hello,
I've been reading and wondering about this thread. Kadie, thank you for being explicit about the kinds of posts you're referring to (victim blaming and some kind of sexual gratification).

I've sometimes been concerned about posts - sometimes it's just something in the tone that feels to me a bit aggressive, and often when that has happened I see the conversation continue and the original poster, as far as I can tell, seems to be grateful for the input, that's been given with some passion.

Re minor victim blaming - e.g. someone raising a question about the poster's role in something upsetting - when that's happened, generally I think I've seen other people come in and challenge or offer a different view, so i think it's been managed and not become an issue.

I once raised a concern when someone was justifying their role in a recent, shocking crime - I happened to be on the site when the first post went up and I wrote to Jamie, who said to leave it and let the conversation happen - it was our responsibility to engage rather than just to exclude. I can't remember the details now, but I remember a very long thread evolving where there were challenges to the poster's actions, and eventually also some reflection from the original poster, who stayed around on havoca, sharing and being supportive, for a while after that. I still felt outraged, but tried to force myself to engage with them occasionally.

Another time I think someone was excluded (or perhaps left) for a consistent very difficult pattern of posting - I hadn't complained, but I had been caught up in it early on - responding to requests for help and having all responses criticised and rejected. I think a thread where this was happening again was closed, and the person was excluded, or maybe left. I remember feeling uncomfortable about what happened as it was as if everyone, including me, suddenly got fed up at the same time and started explaining to the person how their pattern of posting was difficult - and it felt a bit like bullying/everyone ganging up against them - though I was also relieved.

The other instance that comes to mind is one where someone was kind of justifying arguments for paedophilia - seeming to be deliberately provocative - and that person quite soon disappeared from the site.

I'm just listing these, as in general I feel like havoca gets it pretty right - allowing openness and giving members responsibility for responding, rather than shutting things down. Obviously, that does sometimes mean that we encounter things that are uncomfortable, and maybe it also means that sometimes a judgment falls on the side of 'tolerance' over 'safety' - that seems to be maybe what some of this discussion is about? I agree that it's important that people feel safe here - but the judgements of when that boundary is crossed are sometimes difficult.

Sorry for long post - I've just been watching this conversation for a while and am still unsure what I think.

XXX

[john100]

I'm no saint, I am flawed, but the message in Jamie's post is not to look for people to judge, it's the opposite.

It takes the stronger person not to rise to provocation, not to judge what is perceived as provocation. When we see something that irks us, we must be better than to judge it, even if it seems to beg judgement.

"What could that person have experienced that would lead them to think in that way? What could they have suffered that would cause them to lash out when their assumptions are challenged? - their predictable assumptions, the ones that make them feel safe?"

I like a comment that @john100 posted elsewhere, it says (in other words) that we don't have to assert that we are right, even if we are. It tells me that being right isn't the same as being useful.

"if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you"
-Nietzsche

Jamie said

I'll leave it here so that everyone can ask themselves, are my posts appropriate, supportive and kind?

As survivors, boundaries are likely to be an issue for us. When we were young we might never have had them or they may have been regularly crossed or boundaries may have been set for us which were far too tight. We need boundaries. We need to know when enough is enough for us and when we need to say no and/or walk away. When we don't, we can end up in bad places physically or emotionally or both. We have a responsibility to protect ourselves and if we perceive things are crossing boundaries then we should take measures that protect ourselves. That does not mean that we have to challange, although sometimes we may see that as an appropiate response. Sometimes, it's best just to walk away.