View previous topic | View next topic

Reply to comments in "20 songs" thread

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Alfred E Neuman
1312199.  Fri Feb 01, 2019 5:07 am Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
I'm really fascinated about this strange impression you've got of me. "Control everything so that it fits into little boxes"? I live in one of the most untidy flats you're likely to come across. I can barely keep the washing-up under control.

I think it's very foolish to try to do this sort of "pop-psychology" stuff on the basis of an internet forum. You don't know what I'm like in real life, so why paint me as some sort of control freak? I think I'm a pretty easy-going person, actually.


I think I need to respond to this. The strange impression Iíve got of you is the persona that you present to me. Itís not something I invented, itís the manner in which you behave in the tiny part of the world where we interact, tinted by whatever colour spectacles I happen to be wearing at the time I read it.

Iím not doing any pop-psychology. Iím responding to your comments and actions. Your style of posting often takes on a dictatorial slant which pisses me off. Often I just ignore it - youíre just being you after all. Some days I comment on it - me being me. You donít like being called controlling, and I donít like it when people donít agree with my erudite and well phrased criticism, so it usually goes a few rounds before we back off.

Years ago when I did a leadership course at work, we were told that perception is reality, in the sense that our subordinates perception of us and our management style is their reality. Whatever we believe our style and personality to be, we are judged on those around usí perceptions, not our own opinion. As much as I didnít like the idea, I am forced to accept its validity.

My perception of who you are is based on what I know and see of you. Iíll never see your kitchen and itís mess, and youíll never see mine in itís pristine state (which is created by the lady who cleans it for me and lasts for about five minutes after I get home). I judge you by what you type here, and how you react to certain events. You judge me likewise. Neither of us actually knows the other very well at all. I know that I donít say far more than I do say on here. Many times itís just too much schlep to spend the time phrasing what I want to communicate in a way that I am happy with and I just donít bother. If it bugs me enough, Iíll make the effort. If itís something personal that I decide to respond to, Iíll often do it privately.

What you are objecting to is criticism of you, when actually itís merely criticism of your behaviour. Not matter how I may cloak it, I canít actually criticise you, because I donít know you. All I can do is comment on our interaction in this artificial space.

 
GuyBarry
1312222.  Fri Feb 01, 2019 7:33 am Reply with quote

Replied by PM.

 
GuyBarry
1312383.  Sat Feb 02, 2019 4:09 pm Reply with quote

'yorz wrote:

The limit is 20 songs.


Except when it isn't. (*snigger*)

 
PDR
1312409.  Sun Feb 03, 2019 5:13 am Reply with quote

OK, I've been puzzling over this to the point where I just have to ask. Why is it that my "S for Sugar" (which is a genuine UK-RAF variation on the NATO phonetic alphabet) gets a grudging:

GuyBarry wrote:
OK - you can have that one for "S" unless someone else comes up with an entry for "Sierra", in which case it gets knocked off the list.


But the subsequent "S for Sarah" (which is not used by anyone anywhere as a phonetic and is this completely out of scope) gets:

GuyBarry wrote:
If there were points in this game you'd get an extra one for making me laugh!


I wouldn't care much, but you've been throwing your weight around over how people deviating from the "rules" upsets you, and I'm constantly tiptoeing on eggshells* trying to make sure I don't slip back into offensive ways, so things like this just makes it all the more difficult to judge.

The only conclusion I've been able to come to is that you resent my re-admittance - is that what it is?

PDR

* A mixed metaphor that's self contradictory, now I think about it

 
GuyBarry
1312420.  Sun Feb 03, 2019 6:04 am Reply with quote

First of all, it's only a game, and I really wouldn't get too worried about it. However, since you ask:

PDR wrote:
OK, I've been puzzling over this to the point where I just have to ask. Why is it that my "S for Sugar" (which is a genuine UK-RAF variation on the NATO phonetic alphabet) gets a grudging:

GuyBarry wrote:
OK - you can have that one for "S" unless someone else comes up with an entry for "Sierra", in which case it gets knocked off the list.


It was a compromise. I could have been strict and said "no, that's not in the rules as laid down in the original post" (which specified "Sierra"), or I could have said "hey, I don't care, that's near enough, anything goes". I thought the best approach was to say "that's good enough for now, but if someone comes up with a legitimate entry for 'Sierra' then it takes precedence".

In actual fact AFB did come up with an entry for "Sierra" in post 1312368, and I didn't knock yours off the list after all. So be glad that you got a reprieve!

Quote:
But the subsequent "S for Sarah" (which is not used by anyone anywhere as a phonetic and is this completely out of scope) gets:

GuyBarry wrote:
If there were points in this game you'd get an extra one for making me laugh!


Well, tetsabb did make me laugh. It's like when Nicholas Parsons gives bonus points in Just A Minute for illegitimate challenges because the audience enjoys them. It wasn't intended as a serious submission by tetsabb.

Quote:
I wouldn't care much, but you've been throwing your weight around over how people deviating from the "rules" upsets you


No I haven't. Where do you get this rubbish from?

Alf says I'm obsessed with rules. 'yorz says I'm obsessed with rules. You say I'm obsessed with rules. Yet we've just seen a category where I tore up the rulebook and allowed 24 posts because it was more fun getting the list complete than sticking to the rigid 20-post limit.

I have no idea where this stupid idea came from that I'm obsessed with rules. One of the games that I'm proudest of on this forum is "Reverse Quiz". I invented the game. There are very few rules at all. There's no set format for the answers or the questions. People can suggest whatever questions they like, as often as they like. The questionmaster can drop any hints he or she feels like. Games stop and start whenever people feel like it. Sometimes you get breaks of several months in the middle of a game. It's about as close to "anarchy and chaos" in a game as you're likely to find, and yet I get these ludicrous comments from Alf saying "you cannot cope with the slightest hint of anarchy or chaos".

What planet is he on? Has he actually been reading the thread? He must have been, because he's taken part in the game. Is there the slightest evidence in that thread that I'm a stickler for enforcing the rules? I enjoy the game because it's unpredictable. I wish there were more games like that.

I'm quite happy to accept criticism from people, but when they criticize me for something that's blatantly so far from reality that it's thoroughly laughable, I don't know how to react. Show me the evidence that I'm obsessed with enforcing rules, please. I don't think there is any. It just seems to be this weird idea that a couple of people have got hold of, and I can't disabuse them of the notion.

So please take it from me - I liked your "Sugar Sugar" submission. I thought it was very inventive. I wasn't, in all honesty, expecting that we were going to end up with all 26 official NATO keywords, so I didn't much care whether it was right at the time. Once it looked as though we were going to get the whole list, though, it would have been odd if we'd had the official NATO keyword for the other 25 and not for "S".

Quote:
and I'm constantly tiptoeing on eggshells* trying to make sure I don't slip back into offensive ways, so things like this just makes it all the more difficult to judge.


You're doing just fine. I've very much enjoyed your contributions since you've returned and hope they continue in this spirit.

Quote:
The only conclusion I've been able to come to is that you resent my re-admittance - is that what it is?


I never wanted you banned in the first place, as you know. Why would I resent your re-admittance?

In post 1310063, I wrote: "Can I say how very pleased I am to see PDR's return as a member of this forum. Whatever differences we may have had, he is certainly one of the most eloquent and knowledgeable voices here". I've had no reason to change my opinions since then.

 
GuyBarry
1319371.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:22 am Reply with quote

Just for reference, a list of the most recent categories in the "20 songs" thread.

Celebaelin (Mar 3) - Bread and bread products
Jenny (Mar 4) - Spring
suze (Mar 6) - Scents/smells/whiffs/pongs [proposed by 'yorz]
Celebaelin (Mar 8) - Angel(s)
Efros (Mar 8) - Devil
GuyBarry (Mar 9) - Lyrics that sound a lot less impressive when you take them literally
Celebaelin (Mar 20) - Aliens [finished by duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk]
Celebaelin (Mar 22) - Sauces
duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk (Mar 24) - Australasia
Celebaelin (Mar 27) - Scott Walker [proposed by 'yorz; finished by GuyBarry but opened to floor]
Efros (Mar 28) - Cold
Celebaelin (Mar 30) - Running
Celebaelin (Mar 31) - Change [finished by Stefan Linnemann]
Celebaelin (Apr 1) - Rooms of a house
Jenny (Apr 1) - Less than desirable people
GuyBarry (Apr 2) - Not to be confused with...
Stefan Linnemann (Apr 4) - Success after the band
Celebaelin (Apr 4) - Unctuous; slimy; oily; greasy; offensively suave and smug
AlmondFacialBar (Apr 6) - Songs that make you happy
Jenny (Apr 6) - Songs you always find yourself singing along to
Celebaelin (Apr 7) - Geometric shapes
Olinguito (Apr 7) - Tales [proposed for the previous category]
suze (Apr 9) - Heads
Celebaelin (Apr 10) - Communication
Celebaelin (Apr 12) - Shouting

 
Alfred E Neuman
1319388.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:47 am Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
Just for reference, a list of the most recent categories in the "20 songs" thread.

Celebaelin (Mar 3) - Bread and bread products
Jenny (Mar 4) - Spring
suze (Mar 6) - Scents/smells/whiffs/pongs [proposed by 'yorz]
Celebaelin (Mar 8) - Angel(s)
Efros (Mar 8) - Devil
GuyBarry (Mar 9) - Lyrics that sound a lot less impressive when you take them literally
Celebaelin (Mar 20) - Aliens [finished by duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk]
Celebaelin (Mar 22) - Sauces
duglasbell @ hotmail.co.uk (Mar 24) - Australasia
Celebaelin (Mar 27) - Scott Walker [proposed by 'yorz; finished by GuyBarry but opened to floor]
Efros (Mar 28) - Cold
Celebaelin (Mar 30) - Running
Celebaelin (Mar 31) - Change [finished by Stefan Linnemann]
Celebaelin (Apr 1) - Rooms of a house
Jenny (Apr 1) - Less than desirable people
GuyBarry (Apr 2) - Not to be confused with...
Stefan Linnemann (Apr 4) - Success after the band
Celebaelin (Apr 4) - Unctuous; slimy; oily; greasy; offensively suave and smug
AlmondFacialBar (Apr 6) - Songs that make you happy
Jenny (Apr 6) - Songs you always find yourself singing along to
Celebaelin (Apr 7) - Geometric shapes
Olinguito (Apr 7) - Tales [proposed for the previous category]
suze (Apr 9) - Heads
Celebaelin (Apr 10) - Communication
Celebaelin (Apr 12) - Shouting
If youíre trying to say something, perhaps you should have the guts to just say it.

 
GuyBarry
1319389.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:52 am Reply with quote

See post 1319370.

 
Alfred E Neuman
1319391.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 4:59 am Reply with quote

I see. So you can criticise someone in the thread itself, but this needs to be in a different thread?

And youíve gone from chivvying the thread along and losing sleep over it languishing (even before it languished) but now youíre telling others to relax because this isnít unusual. Isnít that just a little hypocritical?

Youíve lost the plot.

 
GuyBarry
1319393.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:16 am Reply with quote

Alfred E Neuman wrote:
I see. So you can criticise someone in the thread itself, but this needs to be in a different thread?


It would have been a tad disruptive to post all that to the "20 songs" thread itself, I think. Since this thread was already here it seemed to be the most appropriate place to do so.

Quote:
And youíve gone from chivvying the thread along and losing sleep over it languishing (even before it languished) but now youíre telling others to relax because this isnít unusual. Isnít that just a little hypocritical?


Not at all. Two days for a category is perfectly normal. It's when they start going on for over a week that they may need chivvying along a bit (as Celebaelin did to my "lyrics that are less impressive when you take them literally" category, for instance). I've no objection to that.

Quote:
Youíve lost the plot.


I don't believe so. To be honest, the last time you contributed to "20 songs" was over two months ago, so are you really in the best position to judge?

 
Alfred E Neuman
1319395.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:24 am Reply with quote

GuyBarry wrote:
To be honest, the last time you contributed to "20 songs" was over two months ago, so are you really in the best position to judge?

I believe so.

Iím not emotionally tied to the speed or direction of the thread, and as I donít have a horse in the race (being mostly a reader of the thread and not a poster) I have the benefit of some degree of impartiality. And finally, there is no evidence of me trying to take control of the running of the thread, as you keep doing.

If youíre claiming the right to shepherd the thread merely because you post often, then you really have lost the plot.

 
GuyBarry
1319396.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 5:33 am Reply with quote

I'm not trying to "take control". I just thought Celebaelin was being a bit over-eager on this occasion, first by posting two categories in a row without giving anyone else the chance to start one, and then by castigating other posters because they hadn't contributed to the latest category as fast as he'd like.

Anyway, I know by now not to take too much notice of anything you say, because you just like moaning at me. So I thought I'd indulge you.

 
Jenny
1319455.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 2:55 pm Reply with quote

You know, Guy, if you would just peaceably scroll on by and let it go, it would be easier all round. Nobody polices these things - they just happen.

 
GuyBarry
1319458.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 3:11 pm Reply with quote

And Celebaelin was absolutely fine about it, Jenny.

Who wasn't fine about it? Alfred E Neuman. Self-appointed "net cop", telling people what they can and can't say. Sticking his oar into issues that shouldn't concern him. Taking hold of minor issues between other posters that ought to be resolved in a couple of posts, and building them up into major disputes. He is essentially a shit-stirrer.

There was no big dispute between me and Celebaelin. Nor was there any big dispute between me and Stefan Linnemann at the start of the thread. It was just a minor issue that was dealt with amicably.

Every time I take issue with anyone about anything, Alfred E Neuman jumps in and castigates me about it and tries to make things ten times worse. And I think it's revolting.

 
Efros
1319460.  Sun Apr 14, 2019 3:37 pm Reply with quote

 

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group