Question #59946

[Puckish Fiend]

http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/59946/
The snake whisperer needs to start reading the questions fully. I think this is the second or third righteous indignant rant in a row over something silly and he/she comes out sounding like a jerk, and even like a hypocrite. The groom never asked for sex tips or insinuated that is what he wanted. In his own words he said, "What can we both do to better prepare ourselves for that night? Emotionally and physically". It is rude to put words into someone else's mouth. Especially if you are going to scold them for it. I thought her answer was the most "explicit" thing on the page. Other than that, I think the others had great ideas on the question.

It seemed like the groom had a good handle on the physical preparations, but Mico gave some great resources to check out. Paperback Writer covered the emotional preparations, and I think she got it spot on.

All in all, a good question, two good answers, and a rude holier than thou answer.

[TheAnswerIs42]

Well, of course there are many borderline things that can be said in response to that question that are things I wouldn't put on the Board, but would be VERY helpful to know. I know I was very glad for the advice I got - I have a friend in my weight lifting class that was a newlywed, and she passed on some information I was very glad I had before that night. I'm not talking about sex tips like the Cosmo magazine prints, just first timer "oh that's how that works" junk. Since Mormons don't discuss anything in that topic, as a rule, I think there are a lot of things beyond the basic mechanics of it that come as a big shock to newlyweds. I'd put that in a personal message to someone, but never on the Board itself.

But, anyway - I didn't see Snake Whisperer attacking the guy for asking the question. I just saw werf declining to answer the question as they saw it. There's a difference.

[Marduk]

Yeah, but why answer a question to say you're not going to answer it? It seems silly. If the question gets through, then I see no reason not to answer it in a frank and honest manner. But we'd better be careful here; can we hide this thread from the writers?

[Dragon Lady]

Yeah, but why answer a question to say you're not going to answer it? It seems silly. If the question gets through, then I see no reason not to answer it in a frank and honest manner. But we'd better be careful here; can we hide this thread from the writers?

Marduk, if you hate the writers so much, why do you keep reading the Board? (Not meant as an attack, but as a genuine question.)

[Craig Jessop]

PLEASE DON'T GO THERE AGAIN! I mean, the writers often do and say things we don't agree with, but that doesn't mean that we have to excoriate them! Most of the time what they do and say is perfectly reasonable. Every once in a while they write something that is a little patronizing or offensive, but, hate to break it to you, so do all of us. It's human nature, and the writers happen to have a more public forum than the rest of us.

After all, everybody thinks they're the smartest person in the world.

[Marduk]

Wow, I don't hate the writers. And I don't know why people think I do; is there any way I can say that they are very sensitive to criticism without everyone thinking that I hate them or think they are childish?

[Katya]

After all, everybody thinks they're the smartest person in the world.

And at least one of them is right.

[Imogen]

After all, everybody thinks they're the smartest person in the world.

And at least one of them is right.

it's me.

[Marduk]

One in six billion odds? I don't like those numbers....

[Puckish Fiend]

I don't think that the snake whisperer attacked the guy. There is a big difference between being rude and attacking someone. I think werf's answer was more of a, "Oh, I think he said something that I can make a holier than thou diatribe about". But considering the question and subject matter, it just wasn't very tactful.

Werf's comment about stretching was good, and if they had stuck with giving actual advice like that, it would have been a great answer. Some writers just can't give up the chance to be snarky, even when it might not be appropriate.

[Puckish Fiend]

@Dragon Lady

I think Marduk loves the board and that is why he dares to bring up things that oft-times writers would rather not talk about. If the writers can't take criticism, then they can stop writing. I'll admit that sometimes the boardboard is a little antagonistic towards the writers, but aren't the writers just as antagonistic towards the readers at times? This forum is the only non board-censored way of giving feedback, and I think most of the writers look on it with disdain. It is easy to see how readers can get frustrated by not being able to give voice to their opinions without being looked down upon. This might be why they lash out at times, especially at the super snarky.

@Marduk

Bravo Sir,

I commend you on your crusade of critiquing cynicism, hating on the hypocritical, and generally being awesome. Keep on keeping on!

[Gimgimno]

Guys, here is a clue:

the snake whisperer is always trying to get your goat. If you get indignant at their responses to questions, you are being acted upon—that's exactly how they want you to react. You guys are free to bicker about other stuff, but I don't recommend trying to change TSW like this—you're only going to encourage them.

[C is for]

Guys, here is a clue:

the snake whisperer is always trying to get your goat. If you get indignant at werf's responses to questions, you are being acted upon—that's exactly how werf wants you to react. You guys are free to bicker about other stuff, but I don't recommend trying to change TSW like this—you're only going to encourage werf.

Yeah, this is kind of what I figured. the snake whisperer is an alternate alias that's pretty much always rude. I don't think that this kind of rudeness is necessary (especially in the response in question), but it is what we expect from this alias.

Also, unless tsw is more than one person, I changed "them" to "werf". We can at least be grammatically correct. ;)

[Puckish Fiend]

That is what I figured too, and while I don't mind a funny-snarky answer (I think Gimgimno is a prime example of this), but I thought that the board editors were trying to town down the rude and holier than thou attitude of some of the writers/ aliases. And while a rude answer can add an interesting facet to an answer, but in this case tsw detracted from the seriousness of the conversation.

@ Gimgimno Rather than telling readers that we shouldn't react to a situation, it would probably be better to make a statement that yes, tsw's answer was a little too much rude and not enough contributive in this instance, and that the board would take matters into their own hands. I thought the board editors were all for censorship.

[Whistler]

having a snarky alternate alias is tricky. You feel okay about it if you answer the same question with both aliases, but sometimes if readers don't know it's a joke it appears rude. I'm not sure if TSW is being funny... the first line seems extreme enough to be satire, but the follow-up with actual advice is confusing.

[Laser Jock]

Yeah, but why answer a question to say you're not going to answer it? It seems silly. If the question gets through, then I see no reason not to answer it in a frank and honest manner. But we'd better be careful here; can we hide this thread from the writers?

Marduk, if you hate the writers so much, why do you keep reading the Board? (Not meant as an attack, but as a genuine question.)

Wow, I don't hate the writers. And I don't know why people think I do; is there any way I can say that they are very sensitive to criticism without everyone thinking that I hate them or think they are childish?

I don't think it helps when you go out of your way to make comments like this, without anything specific in the thread to prompt them. When you do, you come across as bitter, or like someone with an ax to grind. There's a difference between responding to instances of oversensitivity or overreaction and bringing it up out of the blue; the latter makes it seem like you just have a problem with the writers.

For what it's worth, I do think that sometimes some writers overreact to criticism. It might even be helpful sometimes to point it out. However, I find comments like this more inflammatory than helpful.

You were asking how to get your opinion across without people thinking you hate the writers; I don't have a full answer for you, but I do think it would help to avoid comments like the one above. Additionally, even when a thread is discussing the writers' reactions you might consider making your posts more moderate. Hopefully you can look back on that now and see that it was on the heated side, and (as Tao pointed out) not in any way an effective attempt at moderating.

Finally, a request, not just of you but of everyone who occasionally criticizes one or more people (writers or readers): could you (and from here on out I'm using plural "you," not just referring to Marduk) please avoid painting everyone with the same brush? If you have a problem with someone, you are of course free to say so. However, when you speak as if all writers/readers are the same, and as if they all act the same way, it's offensive to everyone who doesn't fit your criticism. (I, a complete nonparticipant in the recent drama-filled threads, still got annoyed by the many over-broad comments: and not even just the ones about writers!) There is no better way to get someone on the defensive than to accuse them of something they haven't done. If people will stop slamming an entire group, perhaps there will be less defensiveness and more effective discourse.

[Gimgimno]

Honestly, I don't think that TSW is ever so out of line to justify being censored in the first place. If there are personal attacks, that's one thing, but TSW just paints the truth in the least flattering way possible. I find it pretty hilarious, to be honest. I find their sweeping generalizations to be funny, too. I don't think that they should have to preface all of their answers warning readers that what follows is tongue-in-cheek; I think that's becoming more evident as time passes.

Treat TSW as any other secondary snappy nym, like obstreperous or Wisecrack. That makes things all better.

[Whistler]

Gimgimno, I'd like to treat TSW as a snappy nym, but when part of TSW's answer seems serious or general, not snarky, it confuses me.

[Dragon Lady]

Marduk, I promise I wasn't trying to start a debate. It really was an honest question. It was based on my very non-scientific observations. Generally (not always), most of the meanest comments about writers are by you. And whenever there is an attack on writers, you jump in the fray. So, not knowing you at all outside this forum (and I'll admit that I don't read everything on the forum, nor do I even read it consistently), I only have what I read to go on. I know you're snarky in general (which I'm not saying is bad!), so that tempers my opinion a bit; I just assume when you're being mean that part of it is just habitual snark. But I rarely hear you say good things about writers. At least in general. It's very possible you've said great things about specific writers or specific questions. Again, I haven't kept any stats on this. It's just my general perception.

If it makes you feel any better, I'd probably put Foreman and maybe CK in the same kind of category, but against readers. (But I know them both personally, maybe not well, but I do have more info to pull from when I form their character in my mind.)

And I agree with LJ, "For what it's worth, I do think that sometimes some writers overreact to criticism." I'm not sayin' writers are perfect by any means. Oh heavens no.

And… I think I've rambled on too long in explaining why I think (thought?) you hate writers. And I hope and pray that I did so in a manner not to offend or exacerbate, but to explain in an attempt to understand and maybe even to be corrected. (And if this topic continues, perhaps we should move it to another thread so TSW can continue to get unadulterated boos and hisses in here?)

[Marduk]

Continuing to be off topic, but I could never be offended by you, Dragon Lady. Anyone who takes offense at you ought to take a hard look at themselves; you're about as low on the offensive scale as it gets.

I'll admit, some of it just might be my pride getting hurt, but when you've offered in the double digits of corrections to incorrect or incomplete information, and been told every time "we're sorry, we know this is factual information, but we don't like the idea of being corrected" and then also see any sort of criticism laid out here, in this board ESPECIALLY for the reader response to board questions, it gets to you eventually.

I will also admit surprise at you thinking I rarely have anything good to say about ANY writers. I've been accused on more than one occasion of lapping up whatever Sauron says and asking for seconds. But can I help it if the man is brilliant?