Memes and stuff

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related. No insults or personal attacks allowed. Rated G.
User avatar
Binger
God
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am

Re: Memes and Stuff

Post by Binger »

Marcus wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:22 am
Binger wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:08 am
These are the conditions as he feels it:


This is his reaction:


This conversation is the trigger and the reaction we see here is to state one's grievances and bail. Anyone who has invested any amount of time or effort into a forum has certainly been in this situation. God knows I have.

This has all the motivations and priorities of a victimized dick. Again, that is not a pejorative or an insult. This is about him, his feelings, his experience, his status below the moderator. We are not maligning any of it, it just is what it is. It is about his personal situation. The priority here is him. Selfish. No problem at all with that. This is about him, he has a grievance with another poster so he is out of here. Goodbye.

This too is a form of control. Maybe he wants us to change the tone or maybe he does not want Res to be a moderator. Maybe he just wants us to grovel and beg him to stay. Hell, we have no idea. But this is communication by pouting and victimization to influence or control. No big deal.

We pointed this out before. In the extreme, this combination of selfishness and conscientiousness can be damn mean. In this case, it is just a breakdown or termination of communication, and the forum goes on. No big deal here. In real life, when we pull this stunt and pout and withdraw and refuse to communicate or engage because it is not going our way, well, that is a bigger deal.

Has anyone read, for amusement and S&G's or otherwise, Men are from Mars Women are from Venus? It is cringe crap bad. But this pulling away and withdrawing is a big part of the man's story in that book. The man gets to go away, to his cave, with his misunderstood grievances, and woman must wait it out and know he is misunderstood. Feels gross just typing that out.
:lol: I know I said I wasn't participating, but I canNOT resist just having a little laugh. This little sermon from our foul-mouthed sociopathic troll of the century is priceless. :lol:
My hunch, when someone sets conditions like you have in this thread and in a relationship, the only way to achieve any connection is to either submit to the conditions or collide with them. One can agree to your terms or reject them, right? And having your terms rejected must feel like a foul-mouthed sociopath is not doing it your way on your terms with you in control. That does not mean that the person rejecting your terms is actually a foul-mouthed sociopath, but your feelings that this is happening must be intense AF, especially when you are so hyper conscientious. Am I right?
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 5483
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Searching for the missing pieces of the Bothell Codex

Re: Memes and stuff

Post by Res Ipsa »

I'm disappointed, as I was hoping to get some feedback in terms of how to phrase what I intended to communicate (Here's a hypothetical example to show you how the interaction feels from my side) so that what is received is not a convoluted version of what I intended (I know your intent better than you do, Marcus, and you are being intentionally malicious.) I remain completely baffled as to how that happened. Absent explanation or feedback, I have no idea how try and fix the dysfunction, so I'm left with avoidance as an option. If anyone has ideas or thoughts, I'm all ears.

So, shifting gears. Binger, you provided some running commentary on this interaction. And, if I recall correctly, you and I both see control as a pervasive issue in personal interaction. But it seems to me that there are all kinds of things one could try to control in an interaction. Another thing I'd like to stick a pin is thinking through the circumstances under which control issues become an impediment to clear communication and, when there is a struggle over control in an interaction, what exactly are the parties attempting to control?

But I owe you a bunch of responses, I think.
Binger wrote:Neil Peart says that if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice. Maybe we need a version of that for moderators. If you choose not to moderate you still have made a choice.

This distinction you are highlighting is part of the model. It is a HUGE part of the model. The reaction that is extreme is usually not thought out and is usually just us doing what we do, without a lot of thought. Trigger happens. BOOM! The blood surges and the anxiety builds and we react. We STRIKE! we submit. We accept the victim role and pout and blame and gaslight. We pretend we are cool. We do what we do. What you are describing is a healthier and thoughtful response.
I'm not familiar with Peart, but I agree that not responding is generally a choice. In the case of the Biden meme, I explicitly considered not responding. I'm conflicted with the from: post. On the one hand, I didn't recognize the post as a communication to or about me. On the other, I could have chosen to acknowledge the post in any number of ways, especially as it appeared to me like what I'd previously asked you to do. So maybe my nonresponse was more like a reaction. I dunno. But I think I get the response/reaction distinction and how it functions in the model.
Binger wrote:Leading to your next point, these extreme reactions are all a form of control. ALL of them. Even submission. Even imitation. Even victimization. Particularly aggression. In the example you used, you were exactly right in your perception that pausing and not doing anything was more controlled than a flash-bang reaction. I hope we continue to distinguish the differences between these forms of control and responses.
Okay, I'm gonna do my describe my understanding to you for confirmation thing. You post the Biden meme. From my perspective, the model labels that the trigger in this portion of our interaction. It then classifies what I do into reactions or responses. One of the distinctions between reactions and responses is that the former happens with little to no conscious choice -- its more more driven by emotion in contrast to reflection or reason. A response involves a conscious choice among perceived alternatives -- something like that.

The model classifies reactions into four categories: aggression, submission, imitation, and victimization. Each reaction is a form of control. Each category of reaction has a corresponding category of response, which we haven't gotten to yet. Ballpark?

And questions. Are responses also a form of control? Can they be? If I make a conscious decision to use passive aggression intentionally as a strategy, would the model treat that as a reaction, a response, or a combination of the two?

I've generally thought that aggression, whether active or passive, functions as a method of control. Up to this point, I've come to view passive-aggression as similar to the model's concept of reaction -- a reflexive, learned behavior that the actor is generally unaware of. And it's not hard for me to think about active aggression and victimization the same way. But I run into a mental brick wall with submission and imitation as methods of control. Opening a can of worms: what are they a method of exercising control over?
Binger wrote: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. All of that. You asked what I expected or intended. My intent was to make a point that WE are not done with it and I am injecting myself into that as much as I can. My use of that word, in all caps, was intentional and meant to imply this element of control. There is no other explanation than this was me either taking or influencing control, and failing to take it but influencing enough that we are still discussing it.

I want to add emphasis on your final sentence in the previous quoted section: "Emotionally, if feels like a power struggle." I hope you or anyone else never forgets that line and that feeling. That is the point of setting conditions and these extremes. That is exactly the point. It is meant to have an emotional feeling and an emotional force. Aggression is meant to hurt, that is the point. Victimization is meant to manipulate, that is the point. Submission is meant to keep some control, by relinquishing and forcing someone to take control. That sounds bizarre, but if I force you to be in charge, I am in effect, controlling you. Imitation, particularly in leadership, is really hurtful and harmful. It is funny when dudes pretend they are cool, it is not funny when the CEO is pretending to know what he is doing as the company gets driven into a ditch.
Hmm, got ahead of myself with my questions. If I'm understanding, control can also be an element in responses. Or the initial piece of an interaction (although I suppose that could be viewed as a response to the end of the last interaction). **Shrugs** So, part of your intent in posting the Biden meme is to attempt to control the content of our future interactions? If that's the case, I didn't perceive it that way. Do you think that made it easier for me to respond rather than react? Put another way, I didn't feel the things I would normally feel if I felt threatened in some way. Maybe that helped me to take a beat and think about how to respond?

Hypothesis: most interactions involve some attempt to assert control over something. Using the same lens as we did for your posting of the meme, part of the intent of my response was to control the form of your next response (as opposed to some interaction down the road). I wanted an explanation of the meme to avoid misinterpreting it. Or maybe it was something else -- perhaps an attempt to control perceptions of our interaction. In other words, the performative part of my response was something like "I'm the reasonable guy in this conversation." Interesting frame of reference. Maybe helpful.

Running with this notion for second. I don't think we really had a conflict in our interaction. Could that be due, in part, to the fact that we were attempting to assert control over different things? Is a control battle over the same thing a significant contributor to conflict and failure to communicate? Hmm. Grab another pin.

I'm getting tripped up by your comments in the form "Aggression is meant to hurt, that is the point." In the model, aggression is a reaction. Something having a point sounds to me like intention. If I amended your sentence to "The function of aggression is to hurt, that is its effect", would you consider that simply another way of describing the model, or have I changed it in some material way?

I think I grok the concept of submission as a method of control. I'm still having a hard time with imitation. How does imitation function as control? I do get the harmful part.

I'm going to stop there for today. Your next section addresses the two axes on which the four categories are based, so that feels like a natural breaking point. And my brain is tired. You don't have to stop on my account. I'll catch up sometime. Or i won't. Who knows?
he/him
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see."
– Rene Magritte
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 5483
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Searching for the missing pieces of the Bothell Codex

Re: Memes and Stuff

Post by Res Ipsa »

Binger wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:08 am
These are the conditions as he feels it:
for 1) the reasons you articulated above, and 2) for my personal situation, and 3) because he's a moderator. It's a no-win situation and I know it,
This is his reaction:
I'll be reading because it's an interesting exchange to watch but I will not be further participating in this thread.
This conversation is the trigger and the reaction we see here is to state one's grievances and bail. Anyone who has invested any amount of time or effort into a forum has certainly been in this situation. God knows I have.

This has all the motivations and priorities of a victimized dick. Again, that is not a pejorative or an insult. This is about him, his feelings, his experience, his status below the moderator. We are not maligning any of it, it just is what it is. It is about his personal situation. The priority here is him. Selfish. No problem at all with that. This is about him, he has a grievance with another poster so he is out of here. Goodbye.

This too is a form of control. Maybe he wants us to change the tone or maybe he does not want Res to be a moderator. Maybe he just wants us to grovel and beg him to stay. Hell, we have no idea. But this is communication by pouting and victimization to influence or control. No big deal.

We pointed this out before. In the extreme, this combination of selfishness and conscientiousness can be damn mean. In this case, it is just a breakdown or termination of communication, and the forum goes on. No big deal here. In real life, when we pull this stunt and pout and withdraw and refuse to communicate or engage because it is not going our way, well, that is a bigger deal.

Has anyone read, for amusement and S&G's or otherwise, Men are from Mars Women are from Venus? It is cringe crap bad. But this pulling away and withdrawing is a big part of the man's story in that book. The man gets to go away, to his cave, with his misunderstood grievances, and woman must wait it out and know he is misunderstood. Feels gross just typing that out.
I'll comment on the substance later. I just want to interject a brief comment on the model. Each of the corresponding reactions-responses also has an archetype. All the four archetypes are generally used as pejoratives. The form of the model is a circle divided into four quadrants. No matter which archetype a reaction or response falls into, the label for the archetype is a term that, in normal use, is derogatory. I found it off putting at first, but it does discourage one from thinking of some archetypes as "better" than others. Thanks for playing, but we're all losers. Something like that. The model uses them as terms of art, so that's how I think about them. My mod brain can't help wondering if if the labels qualify as G rated. Binger, Would it take anything important away from the model if we relabeled them as, I dunno, kinds of fish or trees or butterflies?
he/him
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see."
– Rene Magritte
User avatar
Binger
God
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am

Re: Memes and Stuff

Post by Binger »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:15 am
Binger wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 4:08 am
These are the conditions as he feels it:


This is his reaction:


This conversation is the trigger and the reaction we see here is to state one's grievances and bail. Anyone who has invested any amount of time or effort into a forum has certainly been in this situation. God knows I have.

This has all the motivations and priorities of a victimized dick. Again, that is not a pejorative or an insult. This is about him, his feelings, his experience, his status below the moderator. We are not maligning any of it, it just is what it is. It is about his personal situation. The priority here is him. Selfish. No problem at all with that. This is about him, he has a grievance with another poster so he is out of here. Goodbye.

This too is a form of control. Maybe he wants us to change the tone or maybe he does not want Res to be a moderator. Maybe he just wants us to grovel and beg him to stay. Hell, we have no idea. But this is communication by pouting and victimization to influence or control. No big deal.

We pointed this out before. In the extreme, this combination of selfishness and conscientiousness can be damn mean. In this case, it is just a breakdown or termination of communication, and the forum goes on. No big deal here. In real life, when we pull this stunt and pout and withdraw and refuse to communicate or engage because it is not going our way, well, that is a bigger deal.

Has anyone read, for amusement and S&G's or otherwise, Men are from Mars Women are from Venus? It is cringe crap bad. But this pulling away and withdrawing is a big part of the man's story in that book. The man gets to go away, to his cave, with his misunderstood grievances, and woman must wait it out and know he is misunderstood. Feels gross just typing that out.
I'll comment on the substance later. I just want to interject a brief comment on the model. Each of the corresponding reactions-responses also has an archetype. All the four archetypes are generally used as pejoratives. The form of the model is a circle divided into four quadrants. No matter which archetype a reaction or response falls into, the label for the archetype is a term that, in normal use, is derogatory. I found it off putting at first, but it does discourage one from thinking of some archetypes as "better" than others. Thanks for playing, but we're all losers. Something like that. The model uses them as terms of art, so that's how I think about them. My mod brain can't help wondering if if the labels qualify as G rated. Binger, Would it take anything important away from the model if we relabeled them as, I dunno, kinds of fish or trees or butterflies?
We can post it here without the archetype labels. And post the full model in Paradise.

You are getting it. You are so getting it. You even hit it spot on with assertiveness as a controlled response. The extreme behaviors are forms of control. They are reactions. They can be things these characters do when they are triggered, or things they do to trigger others. There are balanced behaviors of these motivations. For example, like you said, a balanced application of shamelessness and selfishness is assertiveness. And of course, we have to be assertive and be in control sometimes.

Here is the unlabeled version with the care axis, the self axis, and the perimeter behaviors. I will add the other parts as we move along.
Image
User avatar
Binger
God
Posts: 2408
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2021 12:34 am

Re: Memes and stuff

Post by Binger »

I will deal with imitation in the morning. That is a very important and extreme form of behavior too.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 4271
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Memes and Stuff

Post by canpakes »

From two posts back:
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:15 am
The model classifies reactions into four categories: aggression, submission, imitation, and victimization. Each reaction is a form of control. Each category of reaction has a corresponding category of response, which we haven't gotten to yet.
… and from your last post;
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:15 am
I just want to interject a brief comment on the model. Each of the corresponding reactions-responses also has an archetype. All the four archetypes are generally used as pejoratives. The form of the model is a circle divided into four quadrants. No matter which archetype a reaction or response falls into, the label for the archetype is a term that, in normal use, is derogatory.
I was also left wondering why this process of personal interaction constrains the intent of the claimed 4 possible response types with an arguably negative connotation. Is the discussion solely about the combative/aggressive (provocation) aspect of ‘personal interaction’ as intended by one of the participants? It leans in that direction but I’m curious if you are seeing it the same way.
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 5483
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Searching for the missing pieces of the Bothell Codex

Re: Memes and stuff

Post by Res Ipsa »

Binger, I punted the full diagram to the other mods. I like your version that incorporates only what we've talked about.
he/him
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see."
– Rene Magritte
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 5483
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Searching for the missing pieces of the Bothell Codex

Re: Memes and Stuff

Post by Res Ipsa »

canpakes wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:23 am
From two posts back:
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:15 am
The model classifies reactions into four categories: aggression, submission, imitation, and victimization. Each reaction is a form of control. Each category of reaction has a corresponding category of response, which we haven't gotten to yet.
… and from your last post;
Res Ipsa wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 5:15 am
I just want to interject a brief comment on the model. Each of the corresponding reactions-responses also has an archetype. All the four archetypes are generally used as pejoratives. The form of the model is a circle divided into four quadrants. No matter which archetype a reaction or response falls into, the label for the archetype is a term that, in normal use, is derogatory.
I was also left wondering why this process of personal interaction constrains the intent of the claimed 4 possible response types with an arguably negative connotation. Is the discussion solely about the combative/aggressive (provocation) aspect of ‘personal interaction’ as intended by one of the participants? It leans in that direction but I’m curious if you are seeing it the same way.
So, Binger's posted two graphics that illustrate the model. The simpler incorporates only what we've discussed. The other is the full meal deal. You'll see that the complete graphic has an inner circle with labels for the response in each quadrant. That's where the model addresses the non-combative aspects of personal interaction. When I first saw the graphic, I had a really hard time wrapping my brain around it. And I still don't think I have completely. So, when we moved our discussion from private to public, I started out making sure I understood the concepts before tackling the graphic. Purely selfish choice on my part. The graphic sometimes got in the way of me understanding the model. Somebody else might glance at it and get it.

It's the archetypes on the outer ring I was trying to avoid. I haven't actually asked Binger why he chose the terms he did. I just have some wild ass guesses. For my purposes, we could call them Maple, Birch, Aspen and Cedar. But I do intend to ask.

I should also note that Binger and I see the issue of control as kind of permeating the whole model. But I'm not sure the way I'm seeing it is the way he sees it. We'll find out. Or not. Luckily, I have an infinite supply of pins. ;)
he/him
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see."
– Rene Magritte
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 4271
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Memes and stuff

Post by canpakes »

Res - I understand the general thrust of the discussion. I guess a simpler rewording of my question would be to ask if this model/graphic intends to define all interpersonal communication, or if it just attempts to break down aggressive communication.

The former seems highly unlikely. But I’d rather not assume where your thought process is on this.
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 5483
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Searching for the missing pieces of the Bothell Codex

Re: Memes and stuff

Post by Res Ipsa »

canpakes wrote:
Sat Jan 29, 2022 6:44 am
Res - I understand the general thrust of the discussion. I guess a simpler rewording of my question would be to ask if this model/graphic intends to define all interpersonal communication, or if it just attempts to break down aggressive communication.

The former seems highly unlikely. But I’d rather not assume where your thought process is on this.
Ah, got it. I think the answer is all. I may be overcomplicating things by injecting control into the discussion before we've discussed the responses. I wouldn't define an attempt to control as necessarily aggressive. I think it would depend on what I am trying to control. And that probably leads into a discussion of boundaries, which may go beyond what the model is intended to address.
he/him
"Everything we see hides another thing, we always want to see what is hidden by what we see."
– Rene Magritte
Post Reply