A Dialogue About Healthy Dialogue Here in the Nexus

[Ajqij]

I have much gratitude for this community and have been enjoying the posts, replies, and exchanges between members in the short time I’ve participated. (I know you caught the word “Healthy” in my post title and I want to well . . . see if you’re all interested in dialogue about it.) As a veteran psychonaut, I’ve learned over the years that while many of my best trips were taken solo, having friends to talk things through, ask for support, and be of help to them has been a blessing in my life.

Most interactions here are loving and encouraging in my experience, while some feel more like getting grilled by my dissertation advisor or ghosted by my ancestors. (Not complaining, just sharing my take.) I don’t mind being questioned about notions I post and don’t even mind being disagreed with. What I do feel isn’t “healthy” is to have someone drop in, question everything that gets posted, and then drop out without being willing to engage and reach a place of mutual contribution.

It’s not my place to dictate how to share, but I do feel it’s fair to bring up the subject. I’m not looking for agreement, just want to gain insight into how convo flows here. (I’m aware that dialogue takes time and to not expect quick replies or no reply.) My interest is more on the process of contribution not on the timing of it.) And just because someone doesn’t reply, doesn’t mean they don’t value a post. I know this because I very much value many of your posts and seldom reply because I don’t feel the need.

Okay, so what has your experience been when you have something to share? Do you feel like you are heard? Appreciated? Or if challenged, where does the interaction lead? And since we're here to participate, share, and learn from one another, what can you offer that might encourage more of it?

 

[Varallo]

I appreciate that you’re trying to open up a conversation about how we interact here. Still, since you’re kind of referring to me and how I responded with questions in your tread, I do want to say something about that.

So because you’re new I have not been to critical on your style, but to be honest, the way some of your posts come across to me sometimes feels a bit like preaching. You often start new threads with strong opinions, like how the world works or how things are or aren’t, and there doesn’t seem to be much room to explore those things. For me that makes it hard to respond with anything else than questions, just to understand better what you actually mean or to see if there’s space for another view. That’s why I’ve asked these questions, not to bother you or to dismiss what you say, but to open up the conversation more and to challenge the certainty with which your ideas are presented. I strongly belief that when things are stated in an absolute way, a bit of friction can be necessary to open up the conversation.

Now, about not replying quickly, I already explained in private that sometimes I just want to take some time to think before I react. That’s not about ignoring you, it’s just how I do things. Also sometimes it’s good to see if others join the conversation before responding. What I don’t like is then when you get impatient you decide to go and send private messages asking why/to respond, it doesn’t really help nor motivate.

I strongly believe people here join the conversation when they feel ready or when they have something to add. That’s part of what makes this forum different from faster/shallower platforms. Some posts come back after years and still get responses, and I think that’s actually something beautiful about this place.

So in short for me, healthy dialogue also means being open to being questioned, even if the question is a bit critical, it’s not just about being heard. If you want more engagement on some of the topics you brought up it might be wise to consider that framing your ideas as absolutes is not per se the best approach.

Take care

 

[Traged]

Well thought answer or question is worth gold. I have personally taken extra time to post something here, to think beforehand and to have extra time to write it in a best possible way. I would like to believe that it shows on those posts.

I am of believe that to learn one has to question, be questioned and therefore you should be ready to be so. If your idea is sound no amount of dissertation advisors will brake it. You might get challenged if you use language in a way that doesn't communicate idea correctly. And for the love of god, remember its the internet. There will be interactions you wont like, just like in real life.

There are times I had great interactions and time where my time and effort went unanswered so far. In some cases I posted to myself and for future visitors looking for answer to question I had to solve by myself.

What bothers me the most is the extreme sensitivity to strong language. Common, sometimes we should be allowed to say FUCK! without next post being "mind the rules". Not that I am advocating for strong language, but sometimes things I wrote would sound and read better with bit more spicy flavor.

 

[Ajqij]

I appreciate that you’re trying to open up a conversation about how we interact here. Still, since you’re kind of referring to me and how I responded with questions in your tread, I do want to say something about that.

So because you’re new I have not been to critical on your style, but to be honest, the way some of your posts come across to me sometimes feels a bit like preaching. You often start new threads with strong opinions, like how the world works or how things are or aren’t, and there doesn’t seem to be much room to explore those things. For me that makes it hard to respond with anything else than questions, just to understand better what you actually mean or to see if there’s space for another view. That’s why I’ve asked these questions, not to bother you or to dismiss what you say, but to open up the conversation more and to challenge the certainty with which your ideas are presented. I strongly belief that when things are stated in an absolute way, a bit of friction can be necessary to open up the conversation.

Now, about not replying quickly, I already explained in private that sometimes I just want to take some time to think before I react. That’s not about ignoring you, it’s just how I do things. Also sometimes it’s good to see if others join the conversation before responding. What I don’t like is then when you get impatient you decide to go and send private messages asking why/to respond, it doesn’t really help nor motivate.

I strongly believe people here join the conversation when they feel ready or when they have something to add. That’s part of what makes this forum different from faster/shallower platforms. Some posts come back after years and still get responses, and I think that’s actually something beautiful about this place.

So in short for me, healthy dialogue also means being open to being questioned, even if the question is a bit critical, it’s not just about being heard. If you want more engagement on some of the topics you brought up it might be wise to consider that framing your ideas as absolutes is not per se the best approach.

Take care

Thank you for sharing your take on healthy dialogue V. As I tried to clarify, I don't have a problem with the timing of replies or the abscence of them. "(I’m aware that dialogue takes time and to not expect quick replies or no reply.) My interest is more on the process of contribution not on the timing of it.)" and I don't have an issue with being "ignored," not my deal, nor should "curiosity" be deemed as "impatience" in my opinion. I do appreciate your input about my framing and I will certainly pay closer attention to how it gets interpreted. If anything, I'm simply enthused to share here with folks, so forgive me if my posts come across to you as preaching.

The great thing about having friends is they provide us with another set of eyes. None of us can see the back side of our heads and having somebody pointing out the hidden terrain is useful. Now, perhaps something you might consider . . . why would you think you need to be "less critical with me because I'm new" here? I'm actually quite old and don't need to be treated with kid gloves . . . plus I simply don't endorse hierarchies like "senior members" and "new members." I do however, have a great respect for people's experience, and so I will accept and consider your suggestions. As a service to others, perhaps we can explore this topic together here in greater detail and maybe gain more insight from our fellow community members? Blessings to you.

 

[Ajqij]

Well thought answer or question is worth gold. I have personally taken extra time to post something here, to think beforehand and to have extra time to write it in a best possible way. I would like to believe that it shows on those posts.

I am of believe that to learn one has to question, be questioned and therefore you should be ready to be so. If your idea is sound no amount of dissertation advisors will brake it. You might get challenged if you use language in a way that doesn't communicate idea correctly. And for the love of god, remember its the internet. There will be interactions you wont like, just like in real life.

There are times I had great interactions and time where my time and effort went unanswered so far. In some cases I posted to myself and for future visitors looking for answer to question I had to solve by myself.

What bothers me the most is the extreme sensitivity to strong language. Common, sometimes we should be allowed to say FUCK! without next post being "mind the rules". Not that I am advocating for strong language, but sometimes things I wrote would sound and read better with bit more spicy flavor.

Thank you Traged. I'm in agreement about being questioned and accepting challenges. As for strong language . . . I'm not sure it's helpful towards making certain points. It sometimes can take away from encouraging dialogue in my experience. Blessings!

 

[fink]

There are two main ways to word our beliefs here. We can make them sound suggestive. Or we can firmly express them as our personal truths.

I think it's important to allow people to communicate in a confident manner without assuming them arrogant or immovable.

The suggestive method doesnt actually denote a lack of confidence (or arrogance), it only proves an ability to manipulate that confidence to appear less arrogant or immovable.

Add to that, audiences vary a lot. Some people prefer to see the diplomatic effort put in, where as others prefer straight talking.

TL/DR:

We should not assume that a confident statement holds any more arrogance than a more carefully worded one.

 

[Voidmatrix]

why would you think you need to be "less critical with me because I'm new" here? I'm actually quite old and don't need to be treated with kid gloves . . . plus I simply don't endorse hierarchies like "senior members" and "new members." I do however, have a great respect for people's experience, and so I will accept and consider your suggestions. As a service to others, perhaps we can explore this topic together here publically, and maybe gain more insight from our fellow community members. Blessings to you.

So, some of us, Like @Varallo and myself, are very critically minded, and as such, we poke a lot of holes in many peoples' ideas. And sometimes that process isn't one that feels good for the one that has their theory or idea broken down to see its "flaws." Being sure to not be too critical helps the community because otherwise more people would be scared off.

The hierarchy is necessary to instill a particular kind of culture here. It aids in the facets that set this forum apart from others.

What bothers me the most is the extreme sensitivity to strong language. Common, sometimes we should be allowed to say FUCK! without next post being "mind the rules". Not that I am advocating for strong language, but sometimes things I wrote would sound and read better with bit more spicy flavor.

Apologies if this was ever me, particularly when I first became a mod. I am neurotic and can be a stickler. I try to allow it when it seems "appropriate" which is contextual, but say, in instances in which a person is describing their reaction or response to something in their experience is usually done justice by a curse word or two.

One love

 

[Voidmatrix]

There are two main ways to word our beliefs here. We can make them sound suggestive. Or we can firmly express them as our personal truths.

I think it's important to allow people to communicate in a confident manner without assuming them arrogant or immovable.

The suggestive method doesnt actually denote a lack of confidence (or arrogance), it only proves an ability to manipulate that confidence to appear less arrogant or immovable.

Add to that, audiences vary a lot. Some people prefer to see the diplomatic effort put in, where as others prefer straight talking.

TL/DR:

We should not assume that a confident statement holds any more arrogance than a more carefully worded one.

Since all we have is a text based conversation, and nothing of body language and tone, it's hard to do this. We can only operate off of what they said and how they said it in text.

I'd argue that how we speak implicitly shows aspects of our orientation to our ideas and the world. When someone speaks their opinions as facts, they may actually be neglecting or forgetting or even not understanding the nature of their opinion and how that it is not a fact (though can be built up by facts and interpretations therein).

One love

 

[Traged]

Apologies if this was ever me, particularly when I first became a mod.

Well it was probably you but you don't have to apologize. I usually don't swear even in real world - exceptions are injuries and theatricals... I sometimes sto in the end of my point to loudly exclaim something like "how do you say that without swearing" following by long pause and then some profanities... its usually done in company I should definitely not swear

So the poor profanity word was asking to be there, it belonged... it was just right...

 

[Ajqij]

So, some of us, Like @Varallo and myself, are very critically minded, and as such, we poke a lot of holes in many peoples' ideas. And sometimes that process isn't one that feels good for the one that has their theory or idea broken down to see its "flaws." Being sure to not be too critical helps the community because otherwise more people would be scared off.

The hierarchy is necessary to instill a particular kind of culture here. It aids in the facets that set this forum apart from others.


Apologies if this was ever me, particularly when I first became a mod. I am neurotic and can be a stickler. I try to allow it when it seems "appropriate" which is contextual, but say, in instances in which a person is describing their reaction or response to something in their experience is usually done justice by a curse word or two.

One love

I like @Varallo as well, and I don't have a problem with him, or you, or anybody else being critcally minded. Also having "holes poked" is a good thing in that they provide a glimpse into what exists beyond conclusion. As for the hierachy, yes it provides needed structure, and yet, if it gets used as a parental protection policy as in "your new so I'll go easy on you," it just feels to me assumptive. But hey, I'm happy to be here and to be getting a feel of the Nexus space. Blessings V and V!

 

[Voidmatrix]

I like @Varallo as well, and I don't have a problem with him, or you, or anybody else being critcally minded. Also having "holes poked" is a good thing in that they provide a glimpse into what exists beyond conclusion. As for the hierachy, yes it provides needed structure, and yet, when it gets used as a parental protection policy as in "your new so I'll go easy on you," it just feels to me assumptive. But hey, I'm happy to be here and to be getting a feel of the Nexus space. Blessings V and V!

We get to see the purpose behind it all though by virtue of this thread. Now, many of us who are "critically minded" can be more upfront and frank, and in some ways, more productive with you.

It is assumptive, but based on experience. Trust me, I've scared off my fair share of new members without meaning to. And because that doesn't help foster the community, I try to "get to know my audience" a little more before I really open up in the ways that are meaningful for me to do so.



One love

 

[fink]

Since all we have is a text based conversation, and nothing of body language and tone, it's hard to do this. We can only operate off of what they said and how they said it in text.

I'd argue that how we speak implicitly shows aspects of our orientation to our ideas and the world. When someone speaks their opinions as facts, they may actually be neglecting or forgetting or even not understanding the nature of their opinion and how that it is not a fact (though can be built up by facts and interpretations therein).

One love

I'm not disagreeing with you. However, I would like to suggest that how we receive someone's post requires as much attention as how we post our thoughts.

Putting the burden solely on the writer is artificial. The burden of understanding is a responsibility of both reader and writer combined.

 

[Voidmatrix]

I'm not disagreeing with you. However, I would like to suggest that how we receive someone's post requires as much attention as how we post our thoughts.

Putting the burden solely on the writer is artificial. The burden of understanding is a responsibility of both reader and writer combined.

Well said my friend.



One love

 

[Ajqij]

We get to see the purpose behind it all though by virtue of this thread. Now, many of us who are "critically minded" can be more upfront and frank, and in some ways, more productive with you.

It is assumptive, but based on experience. Trust me, I've scared off my fair share of new members without meaning to. And because that doesn't help foster the community, I try to "get to know my audience" a little more before I really open up in the ways that are meaningful for me to do so.



One love

I totally get that V . . . I can see how going slowly with new members is a wise approach. I still feel there is an elemant of hubris involved that we are stepping over, but like I said, I can roll with it. I don't need tender treatment and prefer respectful rigour. Believe me, I can field rigour without wimpering . . . in fact, I can without a tear take you to task on the assumptions lurking within the piety of "critical-thinking." (It's not called "critical" for no reason.) Now . . . are you getting to know me a little better?

 

[Ajqij]

I'm not disagreeing with you. However, I would like to suggest that how we receive someone's post requires as much attention as how we post our thoughts.

Putting the burden solely on the writer is artificial. The burden of understanding is a responsibility of both reader and writer combined.

Fink, this is one of the wisest notions I've seen so far in this dialogue . . . including my own. Thank you kindly!

 

[fink]

Hehe, how generous of you my friend!

Hang around a bit longer and you'll see that on average my level of wisdom is mediocre at best

 

[Ajqij]

Hehe, how generous of you my friend!

Hang around a bit longer and you'll see that on average my level of wisdom is mediocre at best

The hint is in your name . . . fink, but okay, I'll take note, and when I see brilliance I'll point it out, and when I see mediocrity, I too will point it out, perhaps with greater finesse that is. Take care and thanks for your sharing and insights.

 

[fink]

You got the fink reference correct. I definitely fink too much and then sometimes make loud, self obsessed finger noises here at other people. It's a wondeful therapy for me.

I really love that you made this topic and aired your thoughts so transparently. I think it is an important one. Nobody should ever feel they have to tread carefully all the time in a community dedicated to inhaling a molecule then talking to aliens.

That goes both ways. People should all post as freely as they like if it is respectful. Also replies should feel free to call them a loony.

We can all still love each other after that type of exchange if no one feels they have to hide themself.

 

[Tripolation]

Had me thinking... Did I say something stupid? LOL

Some of the best friends I have had in my life were people I initially had problems with. I have even physically fought and became friends afterward. I think it's a guy thing mostly. Bravado and pride in my case. Sometimes you gotta butt heads and get it out of the way. Learning the other person.

I am a matrix dork.

 

[Ajqij]

Had me thinking... Did I say something stupid? LOL

Some of the best friends I have had in my life were people I initially had problems with. I have even physically fought and became friends afterward. I think it's a guy thing mostly. Bravado and pride in my case. Sometimes you gotta butt heads and get it out of the way. Learning the other person.

I am a matrix dork.

We get to see the purpose behind it all though by virtue of this thread. Now, many of us who are "critically minded" can be more upfront and frank, and in some ways, more productive with you.

It is assumptive, but based on experience. Trust me, I've scared off my fair share of new members without meaning to. And because that doesn't help foster the community, I try to "get to know my audience" a little more before I really open up in the ways that are meaningful for me to do so.



One love

It has been explained to me that the Nexus doesn't want to "scare off new members" and if that is really a thing, perhaps the staff and mods ought to take a look at how new members are interacted with by "senior" members. I'm a resilient new member and won't be intimidated.

Maybe why people leave this site is because they feel talked down to or dismissed when they ask for clarification about why holes were pointed out in something they shared. It would go a long way towards fostering collaboration here for those who've been around awhile to follow the charter of this site, which is to "Learn, Share, and Expand," rather than ignoring someone after having grilled them publicly and then refuse to respond to innocent questions from the member who they grilled, and then when they did finally respond they stepped over the questions asked of them and used "critical thinking" to negate the member by calling them inpatient or incapable of being dealt with as a well-adjusted, good intended adult.