# Are you an anonymous internet user, or a living, breathing virtual companion?



## Guest

In another thread, a couple of members suggested that TC members don't need to feel hurt or insulted since we're all just anonymous users. Presumably, if you don't 'know' the people you're conversing with, you can't be hurt by them (or, if you are, you've a very thin skin.)

And yet, from another couple of posters, a call for 'common courtesy' and we all know there is in place a set of Ts and Cs for using this service that expects us all to be polite.

I'm not looking to resurrect the issue that prompted these comments, or ask for a debate about what the Ts andCs should be. I'm just interested to know what your attitudes are to meeting people online. Just how anonymous are you? How anonymous are those you talk with, poll with, argue with about Beethoven, Bach, The Beatles and Hip-Hop?

Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


----------



## Vesteralen

MacLeod said:


> I
> 
> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


I'd love to answer this question, but it would take more time than I have right now. I'll check it out later to see if I can add anything after other people have commented.


----------



## moody

I feel as if I am actually talking with these members,unfortunately sometimes. I don't look upon them as anonymous most certainly.


----------



## MagneticGhost

To say you can't be hurt is to misunderstand human behaviour. 
It's from the same school of thought that states 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me'

The very fact that we are seeing prosecutions for extreme trolling or unguarded twitter attacks proves that it's real people who are being hurt by other real people. 
Why have t and c's if all interaction is of no consequence.

Thick or thin skin - I think the golden rule applies when you are communicating with others. 
Unless you are a masochistic sociopath and then it's probably best if you say nothing


----------



## Kieran

Nobody is anonymous. If I post under the moniker, "Wolfie's Gang", then that's my identity here. It's an extension of my actual identity. If a person is rude or abusive, I don't shrug and say, "we'll, I'm really only a non-existent fictional entity called Wolfie's Gang, therefore I'm immune from the effects of abuse."

Likewise, if I was so minded that I'd attack a poster who is writing under a pseudonym, then that's a personal abuse to that person and their presence here. The personal element can't be ignored. It exists. So even if a poster passes themselves off a lot differently to how they are away from their screen, it's irrelevant, unless they've come here to troll and cause trouble. My own view is, I don't know you, other than how you want me to. I don't know if you're happy or sad in life. And I don't want to make you sad, because maybe it's the last thing you need. I said it before, if you can't say something nice, say nothing...


----------



## PetrB

MacLeod said:


> In another thread, a couple of members suggested that TC members don't need to feel hurt or insulted since we're all just anonymous users. Presumably, if you don't 'know' the people you're conversing with, you can't be hurt by them (or, if you are, you've a very thin skin.)
> 
> And yet, from another couple of posters, a call for 'common courtesy' and we all know there is in place a set of Ts and Cs for using this service that expects us all to be polite.
> 
> I'm not looking to resurrect the issue that prompted these comments, or ask for a debate about what the Ts andCs should be. I'm just interested to know what your attitudes are to meeting people online. Just how anonymous are you? How anonymous are those you talk with, poll with, argue with about Beethoven, Bach, The Beatles and Hip-Hop?
> 
> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


The internet is an infamous venue, whether the users are anonymous or declaring their real name, using their picture as avatars (actually not advisable).

It is the remoteness which has people being rude, or downright mean, in a way many of those same people would not dream of if interacting with the same party _in person_.

If there is just a figure without a face, it must be "easier" to be a sniper, like it must be easier, from fifty thousand feet above, to push the button that drops the bomb on the town filled with people -- the town and its inhabitants looking like a small topographic squib in an aerial photo.

Ergo: similarly many (or perhaps those more callous by nature?) internet users can readily forget there is an actual person on the receiving end of their comment.


----------



## Crudblud

I don't treat the internet and the physical as separate worlds, they are extensions of each other from my perspective. People I meet and like on the internet I aim to make my friends in a genuine sense, and I now have good friends all over the world as a result of not relegating the internet to a position of not being "real."

My level of anonymity is in some ways proportionate to my level of trust of a given party, there are some people on the internet I have known for five or six years, never met in person, whom I trust implicitly and who show me the same level of trust. Someone I just met who is curious will be allowed access to information I don't think is particularly worth hiding, I don't make any effort to hide such information from the general public but I don't broadcast it either. I don't really mind what titbits (or tidbits or whatever) people wish to tell me about themselves, minutiae like GCSE results and hair colour aren't going to affect my opinion of them, but rather I observe how they act and respond and that is how I determine whether or not I like someone.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

The internet shouldn't be taken as seriously as "real life," nor should it be seen as anything like real life. But at the same time, when I see people emphasize how they put 0 stock in who or what they're interacting with online, and how people on forums might as well be robots, I have to wonder why they bother. Boredom? Well why try to cure boredom with something you couldn't care less about?

I dunno. It's like people are afraid of coming off as nerdy if they admit they project their real personalities out there online _a little_ in a way that presses social buttons in the brain.

Anonymity is another matter, I think. I do value anonymity because I value my safety, and it's stupid to leave too good a breadcrumb trail.

Basically: 


> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share..?


_potentially_, but not guaranteed


----------



## Wood

I'm from the analogue generation & I find this all a bit bewildering.

I think it is a toss up as to whether you are all living, breathing, vulnerable human beings or in fact just created from within the bowels of my laptop.

Nevertheless, courtesy and integrity are the key principles behind my posts.


----------



## Guest

I think the OP here misunderstood some of what I had said in a previous thread on this topic. 

I think that we should be civil on here, and I attempt to be so. I think everybody should abide by the terms of service, as well as the basic standards of good behavior that make human interactions net positives. 

That being said, I recognize that there are those who don't try that hard to be civil. Some people are more caustic than others, whether by nature or intentionally. If it is somebody that I personally know, this would probably upset me. But I find it hard to get too excited by impolite comments from people I don't know from Adam and who have absolutely zero hold on my life. That said, I have gotten to know some people on these forums more than others, to the point where I have gotten upset when they have made comments that I didn't like.

But that is less than 10% of my interactions on here. Just to pick on the OP, I don't really know MacLeod at all. I have not had many interactions with him up until this point. So if he (and I am not even sure if he is a he) said something that I thought unkind, I would not be very likely to put much stock in it. I'm more likely to parry his comment with some snide comment or with sarcasm. I'm not looking to get upset here. The second this place gets to be anything less than enjoyable, I leave.


----------



## EricABQ

The Eric you talk to hear is exactly like the Eric you would talk to in person. I'm no more or less argumentative here than I would be in person. If I type something here, it is safe to assume I would say the same thing to someone's face. And the reason for that is I'm generally not a confrontational, obnoxious, or hostile person. I've had a few "arguments" here but I didn't take those any further than I would in real life.

And, for the most part, I give the people I'm conversing with the benefit of the doubt that they are having a good faith discussion and presenting themselves honestly. It occasionally becomes obvious that certain people are not in fact having good faith discussions (Sharik for example,) but I've found on this board that that is fairly uncommon.

So, I guess I am only "anonymous" in the sense that you don't know my last name or phone number, but otherwise you are getting the real me.


----------



## Guest

As to how I am in real life versus on this forum, I would say about the same. Just ask my wife - I am just as argumentative and opinionated as mild-mannered, real life DrMike as I am as classical music freak DrMike. One major difference is that I don't discuss classical music nearly as much outside of this forum. I don't know that many people, personally, who care enough about classical music that I can carry on a conversation with them - and that is why I come on here.


----------



## Tristan

I'm actually a program on a server somewhere. Throw a logical paradox my way and I'll implode.

But seriously, communication is different online, but that doesn't mean people can't still be hurt by something someone says. Anonymity online is, to some degree, an illusion. People think that because they don't have to look someone in the eye and insult them or worry about a physical altercation, that they can say whatever they want. I'm not that way, but I recognize that some people are. I admire people who are able to get past the "anonymity yay!" stage and remain civil online.


----------



## Guest

DrMike said:


> Just to pick on the OP, I don't really know MacLeod at all. I have not had many interactions with him up until this point. So if he (and I am not even sure if he is a he)


He's a he. There's a picture of the real he on his TC page, although he admits to being less than forthcoming in the bits where he could tell the (TC) world all about him. However, his preference is to chat, not write a bio.


----------



## regressivetransphobe

DrMike said:


> As to how I am in real life versus on this forum, I would say about the same. Just ask my wife - I am just as argumentative and opinionated as mild-mannered, real life DrMike as I am as classical music freak DrMike. One major difference is that I don't discuss classical music nearly as much outside of this forum. I don't know that many people, personally, who care enough about classical music that I can carry on a conversation with them - and that is why I come on here.


That's the complex thing. Some people are transparent and more or less type how they talk, some online personalities are borderline performance art, and there's a whole range in the middle.

Problems emerge when people fail to see the internet as its own medium. Face-to-face socialization is intuitive and organic. The internet's the opposite: a big, context-free sterile canvas that nobody sees in quite the same way.

When I was dumb enough to have a facebook (before it was common knowledge the site is for the convenience of advertisers and homeland spooks), it didn't take long to realize I don't want my aunt, my wannabe socialist buddy and my gun-nut good ol' boy ex-professor "in the same place."



> I'm actually a program on a server somewhere. Throw a logical paradox my way and I'll implode.


cud jesus heat a burrito so hot that even he cudn't eat it???


----------



## moody

DrMike said:


> As to how I am in real life versus on this forum, I would say about the same. Just ask my wife - I am just as argumentative and opinionated as mild-mannered, real life DrMike as I am as classical music freak DrMike. One major difference is that I don't discuss classical music nearly as much outside of this forum. I don't know that many people, personally, who care enough about classical music that I can carry on a conversation with them - and that is why I come on here.


Well I'm sure your wife is right.


----------



## Ondine

PetrB said:


> The internet is an infamous venue, whether the users are anonymous or declaring their real name, using their picture as avatars (actually not advisable).
> 
> It is the remoteness which has people being rude, or downright mean, in a way many of those same people would not dream of if interacting with the same party _in person_.
> 
> If there is just a figure without a face, it must be "easier" to be a sniper, like it must be easier, from fifty thousand feet above, to push the button that drops the bomb on the town filled with people -- the town and its inhabitants looking like a small topographic squib in an aerial photo.
> 
> Ergo: similarly many (or perhaps those more callous by nature?) internet users can readily forget there is an actual person on the receiving end of their comment.





MagneticGhost said:


> To say you can't be hurt is to misunderstand human behaviour.
> It's from the same school of thought that states 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names can never hurt me'
> 
> The very fact that we are seeing prosecutions for extreme trolling or unguarded twitter attacks proves that it's real people who are being hurt by other real people.
> Why have t and c's if all interaction is of no consequence.
> 
> Thick or thin skin - I think the golden rule applies when you are communicating with others.
> Unless you are a masochistic sociopath and then it's probably best if you say nothing


I want to highlight this posts because I agree with them completely.

The golden rule is very important. Personally I don't care about 'thick or thin'. To be rude -pretending to be a clever member or to be rude because a member is like that- eventually will hurt somebody that we do not know for real.

We can not be the measure for others. If somebody is thick skin that do not mean that everybody is or should have.

Personally I experience a lot of difficulties to interact in internet forums simply because I can't see the person for real. It takes for me a lot of time to truly know a person in his entire dimension. In internet I can't see the face, eyes, voice, mannerisms, body language, the context, the background, the daily life as it is and not as it seems to be through a screen; the sadness, the happiness. All this is impossible to have through a screen in a computer. If somebody makes a rude comment that rudeness lacks all this aspects and thus can harm feelings.

To resume, as Kieran said:



Kieran said:


> [...] if you can't say something nice, say nothing...


----------



## Tristan

regressivetransphobe said:


> cud jesus heat a burrito so hot that even he cudn't eat it???


"Well, I suppose...he _could_, but...wow, as far as melon-scratchers go, that one's a honeydoodle."

-Flanders


----------



## mmsbls

I value other members and what they share. Actually I'm thrilled that so many people come here to share their insights, knowledge, joy, humor, and love for classical music. I have learned an enormous amount from this forum and greatly enjoyed my experience here, and the community of TC members is wholly responsible for my positive response.

I understand that some people do not think much of the various lists and joint projects at TC, but for me, I feel that the TC members who participate in these games/projects are in some sense a team. I love the feeling of camaraderie I get with those who have participated for a long time or played many of the games. I want to say "Thank you, thank you, thank you" to them, but perhaps that's a bit over the top.


----------



## arpeggio

*Impossible*

I have been a veteran of many forums, not just classical music. I currently spend most of my time with this forum because I have made many great new friends here and I have learned a great deal from them.

I have been accused of being many things. In other forums I have been accused of being an elitist and crazy. I was also accused many times of being overly sensitive. People have told me that if one participates in Internet discussion groups they should have a thick skin. When I adopted a more thick skin attitude I was accused of being contemptuous. It appears that if one is critical of your musical esthetic's it does not matter what you say to defend yourself, they will find fault with it. I have better things to do with my time than trying to convince the world I am not a crazy, contemptuous elitist. If a person believes that because of the type of music I like to listen to I am a deranged fool and do not belong here, I doubt that there is anything I could say to dissuade them.

My guess is that it will only be a matter of time before the mudslinging begins and this thread will be closed down as well.


----------



## Taggart

MacLeod said:


> Just how anonymous are you? How anonymous are those you talk with, poll with, argue with about Beethoven, Bach, The Beatles and Hip-Hop?


About as anonymous as I would be in a bar on holiday. I say things about me so that you can understand me and where I'm coming from. Part of the problem is that on the internet it is very difficult to judge your tone and the tone of others. Smileys can help but don't always cut it. Luckily my wife is on the forum and will shout through if she thinks I'm being too abrasive, allusive, indirect, impolite whatever. There are, for example, obvious cultural differences which can make some references incomprehensible to anyone not from Britain, or of a certain generation or even can be potentially offensive as in different usages of "knock up".



MacLeod said:


> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


I value all members, I have learnt a great deal from the forum. Part of this is the sense of community engendered by people honestly sharing their thoughts, feelings and daily lives. I do it because I hope it will help people understand me and I know it helps me understand other people and value them.

When it comes to opinions, we are on much more difficult ground. I respect other people's opinions even though I may not agree with them. If the difference is a matter of taste the arguing may tend to be futile. If it a question of fact, then people may interpret facts differently. If they are prepared to argue rationally, then I will argue in as reasonable a manner as possible. If they are rude, offensive, ill mannered or ill educated or simply persist stubbornly in their position and avoid any argument then I would hope that I would have the grace to walk away quietly and not sling any more mud. I would add that this is a very rare occurrence on this forum.


----------



## Ingélou

I try to be honest & I think that people who read my posts will not be misled, though certainly I exaggerate traits for effect.

I do think of the posters as real people but I am constantly surprised when someone with a male avatar or name turns out to be female, or someone I thought of as an adult is really only 13. I ought to remind myself that I don't know other posters, unless it's someone I've exchanged quite a few letters with. 

But I don't think I treat people differently on here to how I would in real life. Having grown up in an unhappy quarrelsome home with five siblings, I want to have peace & love for the rest of my life. I am very sensitive. So I try to be nice & to think how I'd feel if I read my own message. As Kieran says, one would hate to think one had made someone else's life worse for them. Sometimes I'm stung & lash out a bit - like tonight, for instance, not realising Hayd was joking because I'd just come off a thread that *had* been closed down & where people were arguing. I am always sorry afterwards. 

I kept some things quiet about myself at first, but then I saw that people were taking me 'the wrong way', so now I have been open on my profile about being a Catholic (a convert). One of my favourite quotes is 'If Christianity were made a criminal offence, would there be enough evidence to convict you?' It doesn't mean I'm not interested in the views of others, even if I don't agree; if it's honestly expressed or well put, I'll probably still 'like' it. But you won't find me sharing my innermost thoughts about religion and morality. The contents of the tin are much as you'd expect.


----------



## Ukko

Question addressed to nobody in particular:

Would your real-life friends recognize you from the self-description you provide here?


----------



## Taggart

Hilltroll72 said:


> Would your real-life friends recognize you from the self-description you provide here?


I hope so .


----------



## Ingélou

Personally, I think they would recognize me. 
And Taggart too is being genuine, in my opinion.
It does, of course, depend on how well a person knows him-or-herself. 

Hilltroll, are you going to answer this yourself?


----------



## Ondine

Ingenue said:


> But I don't think I treat people differently on here to how I would in real life.


I know that Inguene but nothing can be compared with having coffee with you and Taggart -or any other suitable member- knowing each other and having great time dating in order to become close friends. Sadly, an internet forum can't give me that


----------



## Ingélou

Ondine said:


> I know that Inguene but nothing can be compared with having coffee with you and Taggart -or any other suitable member- knowing each other and having great time dating in order to become close friends. An internet forum can't give me that.


You're right, of course. One of my problems even in 'real life' is talking about anything & everything with new acquaintances (because I love talking!) with the result that we both think we know each other better than we do.

And as has been pointed out, people can deceive much more easily on the internet, and I am very easily taken in.

All the same, I do try to apply the same standards as far as possible. It's all you can do, really.


----------



## Ingélou

I think it would be possible for people who'd known each other for years on TC & then met up to feel as if they knew each other.

I got onto computers through Friends Reunited & later Facebook. I tracked down ten girls that I'd been at school with. One I hadn't known well but we were Facebook Friends & wrote a lot to each other. We'll call her J. Since we'd been at school, she'd become an avid Tangoista. Last year she organised a meeting in York, our home town, & brought along another friend, again, not one I'd known well, though I'd been told a lot about her by my first friend. After 45 years apart, we all got on fabulously well.

This isn't the same, of course, because we already had been 'real-people' friends in childhood; but still, the 'virtual acquaintance' added quite a lot. I did indeed know J, my Tango friend, better than I'd known her in childhood because of all the posts & messages we'd exchanged.


----------



## Ondine

Ingenue said:


> [...](because I love talking!) with the result that we both think we know each other better than we do.


Yes. And I love talking, too!



> people can deceive much more easily on the internet, and I am very easily taken in.


I have an hypothesis about that. I think internet, as a context of interaction, promotes that. Different environments produce different outcomes for people relating in groups. Behaviour is -in some degree- shaped by social created or natural given environments.



> All the same, I do try to apply the same standards as far as possible. It's all you can do, really.


Agree Ingenue


----------



## Cheyenne

I am not the same, I fear: here I must appear more pertinent, sacrificing impulse and spontaneity: somewhat solemn and restrained: sometimes charmless, invariably less humane. All the same I avoid unnecessary aggravation and discussion, and present more precise and concise pictures of what I mean to say. It is, in essence, the trade of evident humanity for improved rigor: this account is often but a portrait of my knowledge, not of myself. Combining the two is, I suppose, wholly possible, but I have yet to reach that point, I believe; and so I must conclude that it is unlikely all of my friends could identify me out of the other posters - not without considerable difficulty, at least. 

Perhaps it is the burden of the internet that is still remains a solitary activity: I may be messaging someone, but I alone rigorously and extensively develop of my responses, without any inclination to impulsiveness: I witness, judge and process everything alone. If I were to tell this very same story to someone in front of me, his or her bodily responses would be visible immediately, and many mistakes and errors - typical, telling and sometimes cute - would invade the language. More important is that, though it will be peer-reviewed, it will be so delicately and from a distance, so that it is not a conflict between the written word and speech, but between much time and little time: but yes, too one, I suppose, between the unavoidable warmth and humanity and depth that a real life person will show, and the limited capabilities of one's writing skills. 

I was, in fact, planning to delete this message, believing it perhaps too personal and undefined and messy, but the irony did not escape me: so here I am unfiltered! Do I read this and see myself? No, I just can't say I do: therefore I have failed. 

(Incidentally, I have met in real life quite some people with whom I originally became acquainted through the internet without too much hassle.)


----------



## Ukko

Ingenue said:


> Personally, I think they would recognize me.
> And Taggart too is being genuine, in my opinion.
> It does, of course, depend on how well a person knows him-or-herself.
> 
> Hilltroll, are you going to answer this yourself?


I yam who I yam, and the same guy out in the world as at TC. So everyone who has been here awhile knows me. The only caveat is that my avatar is related to my sense of humor, but not to any resemblance between me and Zoroaster or Ptolemy.


----------



## Vesteralen

This has been an amazing thread. Thanks to everyone for sharing.

I've tried for the last half hour to put down some thoughts of my own, but I've erased them all. (I'm a lot more cautious after my nine-month absence.)

Maybe I'll have an inspiration tomorrow.


----------



## Guest

Hilltroll72 said:


> Question addressed to nobody in particular:
> 
> Would your real-life friends recognize you from the self-description you provide here?


Yup, except that I now talk less politics on here than I do in real life.


----------



## Guest

moody said:


> Well I'm sure your wife is right.


She usually is .


----------



## Rapide

I wonder if there is much correlation between members who have "a lot" of real world interaction with friends and family and how less easily offended they tend to be, versus those who have much less interaction with real world people and how more easily offended they tend to be here.


----------



## moody

Ondine said:


> I know that Inguene but nothing can be compared with having coffee with you and Taggart -or any other suitable member- knowing each other and having great time dating in order to become close friends. Sadly, an internet forum can't give me that


I'ts not supposed to and what's a suitable member ?


----------



## moody

Vesteralen said:


> This has been an amazing thread. Thanks to everyone for sharing.
> 
> I've tried for the last half hour to put down some thoughts of my own, but I've erased them all. (I'm a lot more cautious after my nine-month absence.)
> 
> Maybe I'll have an inspiration tomorrow.


Coward,I'll be watching for you.


----------



## Vesteralen

moody said:


> Coward,I'll be watching for you.


Yeah....I know...............


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Do you count the undead, I'm not living or breathing - maybe just call me HAL, if that works for you.

(inserted comma- I now Ingenue is watching- just like Hal hey)


----------



## Taggart

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Do you count the undead, I'm not living or breathing - maybe just call me HAL, if that works for you.
> 
> (inserted comma- I now Ingenue is watching- just like Hal hey)


"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that"


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

I think you know what's the problem is just as well as I do


----------



## Ukko

Rapide said:


> I wonder if there is much correlation between members who have "a lot" of real world interaction with friends and family and how less easily offended they tend to be, versus those who have much less interaction with real world people and how more easily offended they tend to be here.


That's worth wondering about. Seems like there must be a correlation, but 'seems like' may be as close to an answer as we can get. Just finished reading a book titled "Proofiness". From that I get the suspicion that the systematic error involved in such a study is probably very large.


----------



## Vesteralen

It's much easier for me to avoid confrontation in real life than in is on the Internet. I'll admit that I haven't developed the attitudes or skill set necessary to deal with it. I left the site for nine months - not because I was offended, but because I needed to get away from my own outsized emotions when I was "attacked" - it wasn't good for my heart (literally - not figuratively). I actually thought I was shortening my own life by staying.

Of course, some people assume that just because you're older, you must, of necessity be gruff, opinionated and thick-skinned. It doesn't always work that way. Some may think me too sensitive, and I daresay I am, but it's far too late in my life to change my nature even if I wanted to.


----------



## moody

Vesteralen said:


> It's much easier for me to avoid confrontation in real life than in is on the Internet. I'll admit that I haven't developed the attitudes or skill set necessary to deal with it. I left the site for nine months - not because I was offended, but because I needed to get away from my own outsized emotions when I was "attacked" - it wasn't good for my heart (literally - not figuratively). I actually thought I was shortening my own life by staying.
> 
> Of course, some people assume that just because you're older, you must, of necessity be gruff, opinionated and thick-skinned. It doesn't always work that way. Some may think me too sensitive, and I daresay I am, but it's far too late in my life to change my nature even if I wanted to.


Ah,poor little flower aren't you ! you just tell me if those nasty boys pick on you.


----------



## Ramako

My online persona is very different to my real life one, I'm afraid. My friends may recognise me because some of the tics are the same, but there are also a lot of differences.

However, I find online interaction if not easier than face-to-face, then often less stressful (unless I know the person well). I could ask myself, "Would I say this if I were speaking in real life?", and I'm afraid it really wouldn't help me.

I find the ability to review the thing I'm about to post invaluable, and usually when I have posted something I regret its because I haven't bothered to do so, for whatever reason.


----------



## Vesteralen

moody said:


> Ah,poor little flower aren't you ! you just tell me if those nasty boys pick on you.


Yeah, moody...I'll be sure to let you know.


----------



## Ingélou

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Do you count the undead, I'm not living or breathing - maybe just call me HAL, if that works for you.
> 
> (inserted comma- I now Ingenue is watching- just like Hal hey)


Ooh, thanks, Eddie, I'd missed it - but I got the missing 'k' in know! 

I find talking to people face to face much easier. You can see if they've taken you up wrongly and vice versa & you have the chance to put things right or explain what you meant. If you post or pm someone here and they don't reply, you have no idea whether they're angry or just off to eat their steak and chips.


----------



## Ukko

Vesteralen said:


> Yeah, moody...I'll be sure to let you know.


I think _moody_ just did his Tac NCO imitation. Some boots hear that just before the "Drop and give me twenty".


----------



## Vesteralen

It's all about timing .


----------



## Mahlerian

In real life, I don't let people know about my opinions quite as readily as I do here. There are many people whom I've met who have no idea I regularly listen to modern classical music...

I'm quieter in real life than on a forum like this, I suppose. I also don't resemble my avatar very much. In the end, I feel that I should treat others with respect no matter how much or how little I know about them, both here and there. If they give me a hard time, it could be for any number of reasons other than myself, so I really don't have any need to get angry.


----------



## aleazk

Mahlerian said:


> In real life, I don't let people know about my opinions quite as readily as I do here. There are many people whom I've met who have no idea I regularly listen to modern classical music...
> 
> I'm quieter in real life than on a forum like this, I suppose. I also don't resemble my avatar very much. In the end, I feel that I should treat others with respect no matter how much or how little I know about them, both here and there. If they give me a hard time, it could be for any number of reasons other than myself, so I really don't have any need to get angry.


A sordid double life. :lol:


----------



## Mahlerian

aleazk said:


> A sordid double life. :lol:


Well, friends and family know about my horrifying secret.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Mahlerian said:


> In real life, I don't let people know about my opinions quite as readily as I do here. There are many people whom I've met who have no idea I regularly listen to modern classical music...
> 
> I'm quieter in real life than on a forum like this, I suppose. I also don't resemble my avatar very much. In the end, I feel that I should treat others with respect no matter how much or how little I know about them, both here and there. If they give me a hard time, it could be for any number of reasons other than myself, so I really don't have any need to get angry.


Same here, same here. Although I do resemble my avatar in a physical, yet also figurative sense. I don't wear a suit of armor for real, but on the inside I do. 

I'm beginning to be more open in the real world about my feelings, and I think the internet has helped that, so that's good. Why this is happening to me is hard to explain, but I feel it necessary for people to know just what kind of person I am in the real world. Especially since people make judgments of me off the bat that I'm somehow a compatible person with most of humanity, which isn't the case...


----------



## Ingélou

I admit, I made that assumption, Huilu.
Your posts are always full of warmth & humanity. So if you don't harmonise all that well with us, you are a wonderful actress*! 


* or 'actor', for today's generation.


----------



## Sid James

MacLeod said:


> In another thread, a couple of members suggested that TC members don't need to feel hurt or insulted since we're all just anonymous users. Presumably, if you don't 'know' the people you're conversing with, you can't be hurt by them (or, if you are, you've a very thin skin.)...


I think that opinion has its limitations. I'm sorry I don't have the opportunity to read thru the whole thread now. But *cyber bullying *is a huge issue. People have committed suicide due to cyber bullying. Other nasty things have happened. I think its unlikely that TC forum is one of those online places that this would happen, in terms of the worst case scenario of suicide resulting in bullying here. But I have seen bullying here over my years here and its ugly.



> ....
> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


I think people on the first page of this thread said a lot of what I agree with. Without some level of openness, I see no reason to have a forum. If we can't express our opinions openly I see no point in a forum like this. Having said that, common courtesy is very important. To engender an open environment which is accepting of a diverse array of opinions, there has to be some basic courtesy. Its a matter of give and take.

The big thing, which studies have shown into communication, is that people want *validation. *They don't want their opinion to be invalidated, or in effect, they don't want to be feel left out or worthless. So when I say something like "I can understand the point you are making, however my view on this is different" and go to describe my own view of the topic, the first part of that sentence means I am accepting the person's opinion as equally valid as my own, just different. That's the key to many things here and to getting that open vibe. They want their opinions to be validated, not automatically denied - or worse - implied or judged to them having opinions that are not worthwhile.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Ingenue said:


> Ooh, thanks, Eddie, I'd missed it - but I got the missing 'k' in know!
> 
> I find talking to people face to face much easier. You can see if they've taken you up wrongly and vice versa & you have the chance to put things right or explain what you meant. If you post or pm someone here and they don't reply, you have no idea whether they're angry or just off to eat their steak and chips.


Pleased you found the little k I left out for you.

Your''s as ever k-less
Eddie


----------



## Ukko

Sid James said:


> I think that opinion has its limitations. I'm sorry I don't have the opportunity to read thru the whole thread now. But *cyber bullying *is a huge issue. People have committed suicide due to cyber bullying. Other nasty things have happened. I think its unlikely that TC forum is one of those online places that this would happen, in terms of the worst case scenario of suicide resulting in bullying here. But I have seen bullying here over my years here and its ugly.
> 
> I think people on the first page of this thread said a lot of what I agree with. Without some level of openness, I see no reason to have a forum. If we can't express our opinions openly I see no point in a forum like this. Having said that, common courtesy is very important. To engender an open environment which is accepting of a diverse array of opinions, there has to be some basic courtesy. Its a matter of give and take.
> 
> The big thing, which studies have shown into communication, is that people want *validation. *They don't want their opinion to be invalidated, or in effect, they don't want to be feel left out or worthless. So when I say something like "I can understand the point you are making, however my view on this is different" and go to describe my own view of the topic, the first part of that sentence means I am accepting the person's opinion as equally valid as my own, just different. That's the key to many things here and to getting that open vibe. They want their opinions to be validated, not automatically denied - or worse - implied or judged to them having opinions that are not worthwhile.


Hey _Sid_, I read that entire post (yep all of it ), and agree with over 94% of it! I don't wish to scare you, but... there it is.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Ingenue said:


> I admit, I made that assumption, Huilu.
> Your posts are always full of warmth & humanity. So if you don't harmonise all that well with us, you are a wonderful actress*!
> 
> * or 'actor', for today's generation.


:lol:

Well, it's not that I fight with people. I'm not argumentative. But I'm also not very engaging. If there are people around me who aren't talking about what interests me, I shut my mouth or go away. And that's about 90% of the time in real life, that I don't participate in conversations. So, that's also as incompatible as if I _would _argue with people and they wouldn't like me for that reason.

There's a reason I only post maybe 2-3 posts a day here....


----------



## Sid James

Hilltroll72 said:


> Hey _Sid_, I read that entire post (yep all of it ), and agree with over 94% of it! I don't wish to scare you, but... there it is.


Well it maybe shows anything can happen! :lol:

Both those things I focussed on there, cyber bullying and validation, I think they are things that often come up in discussions nowadays. I myself have received replies to my posts, esp. in controversial issues where I felt I was bullied and invalidated, even ridiculed. In a kind of indirect way, the respondent kind of avoiding the breaking the rules (only just, maybe?). I felt pretty horrible as a result of this, but I learnt my lessons with that kind of online conversation. Better not to respond at all, get pulled into that negative spiral. Its how I ended up breaking the rules.

In real life its the same. With some people one cannot go further than a certain point. At one point I have to cut my losses and disengage with that person. Its less a reflection on them and more on my reaction to them. These things came slowly to me regarding TC (how many years have I been here? and it only fully dawned on me earlier this year!). There are ways to solve this myself, I thought, rather than focussing on challenging the decisions of the moderators and so on. I just had to accept their decision, whether I thought it was fair or not, and move on. All I can do is control my own actions here, not that of others.



Huilunsoittaja said:


> :lol:
> 
> Well, it's not that I fight with people. I'm not argumentative. But I'm also not very engaging. If there are people around me who aren't talking about what interests me, I shut my mouth or go away. And that's about 90% of the time in real life, that I don't participate in conversations. So, that's also as incompatible as if I _would _argue with people and they wouldn't like me for that reason.
> 
> There's a reason I only post maybe 2-3 posts a day here....


Well I think that's actually very wise and prudent. Whenever I've restrained myself or thought things throught and avoided shooting my mouth off, I never regretted it. I never hung onto the negativity either. But when I did the opposite, get emotional and judgemental, bitter, well it had potential to ruin my day. This of course not only applies to online but in real life. I've been on quite a learning curve lately and its reflected on my dealings here as well.


----------



## Sid James

Ondine said:


> ...
> Personally I experience a lot of difficulties to interact in internet forums simply because I can't see the person for real. It takes for me a lot of time to truly know a person in his entire dimension. In internet I can't see the face, eyes, voice, mannerisms, body language, the context, the background, the daily life as it is and not as it seems to be through a screen; the sadness, the happiness. All this is impossible to have through a screen in a computer. If somebody makes a rude comment that rudeness lacks all this aspects and thus can harm feelings.
> 
> ...


I agree, communication in this way is a blunt instrument compared to face to face. Or even on the phone. In some cases that's been my pitfall here, taking something that's not meant to be negative in the wrong way. So now I try to look at what's literally there on the screen and separate that from any impulsive reactions that are more often than not harmful. Of course, with obvious and repeated incidents of nastiness from some people, I just tune out all together.



arpeggio said:


> I have been a veteran of many forums, not just classical music. I currently spend most of my time with this forum because I have made many great new friends here and I have learned a great deal from them.
> 
> I have been accused of being many things. In other forums I have been accused of being an elitist and crazy. I was also accused many times of being overly sensitive. People have told me that if one participates in Internet discussion groups they should have a thick skin. When I adopted a more thick skin attitude I was accused of being contemptuous. ...


I think its just best to be yourself, which is easier said than done. When I joined, I thought differently than now about many things. I have read things that made me reassess my thinking about music and much else. I don't buy into certain things now. In many respects, I am a loner on this forum. I accept it though. I think its better than being in some clique. In terms of what you say, feeling safer or better on this forum than others, I heard that before. Some people come here from other forums that in comparison are much tougher to enjoy. TC is overall a nice forum, its got a good mix of people. It isn't too cliquey, there is a lot of diversity here and that's what I like about it most.


----------



## Guest

Sid James said:


> I agree, communication in this way is a blunt instrument compared to face to face.


And yet once you become aware that all you have to communicate with are your words - no faces, no smiles, no murmurs, no body language and positioning - and that those words need to be typed out in some ordered format - no easy repetition or rephrasing, every post a little more effort with the English language than in real life - it's possible to share thoughts in a purer form, without reinforcement or distraction.


----------



## Wood

Sid James said:


> Well it maybe shows anything can happen! :lol:
> 
> Both those things I focussed on there, cyber bullying and validation, I think they are things that often come up in discussions nowadays. I myself have received replies to my posts, esp. in controversial issues where I felt I was bullied and invalidated, even ridiculed. In a kind of indirect way, the respondent kind of avoiding the breaking the rules (only just, maybe?). I felt pretty horrible as a result of this, but I learnt my lessons with that kind of online conversation. Better not to respond at all, get pulled into that negative spiral. Its how I ended up breaking the rules.
> 
> In real life its the same. With some people one cannot go further than a certain point. At one point I have to cut my losses and disengage with that person. Its less a reflection on them and more on my reaction to them. These things came slowly to me regarding TC (how many years have I been here? and it only fully dawned on me earlier this year!). There are ways to solve this myself, I thought, rather than focussing on challenging the decisions of the moderators and so on. I just had to accept their decision, whether I thought it was fair or not, and move on. All I can do is control my own actions here, not that of others.
> 
> Well I think that's actually very wise and prudent. Whenever I've restrained myself or thought things throught and avoided shooting my mouth off, I never regretted it. I never hung onto the negativity either. But when I did the opposite, get emotional and judgemental, bitter, well it had potential to ruin my day. This of course not only applies to online but in real life. I've been on quite a learning curve lately and its reflected on my dealings here as well.


It can be a fine line between validating a person and invalidating their viewpoint. Some people are unable to take the vaguest hint of criticism, real or imagined. They can only respond with personal attacks.

When I get such a response on here, I just note to myself that the poster involved requires some emotional growth, relocate their past and future communications into my dirt box, and move on.


----------



## Vesteralen

Sid James said:


> I myself have received replies to my posts, esp. in controversial issues where I felt I was bullied and invalidated, even ridiculed. In a kind of indirect way, the respondent kind of avoiding the breaking the rules (only just, maybe?). I felt pretty horrible as a result of this, but I learnt my lessons with that kind of online conversation. Better not to respond at all, get pulled into that negative spiral. Its how I ended up breaking the rules.


I think I remember this (if you're referring to one particular time). It was around the time I was getting ready to leave the site myself. I remember thinking how bizarre it was that you were being attacked for no apparent reason (that I could see), other than that someone had just decided to take a dislike to you. But, the weirdest thing was that, as I remember it, not a whole lot of people (if any) jumped in in your defense (including me, but I was having my own problems at the time).

And, it wasn't because you weren't well liked. Lots of people like and respect you. But, other than Hilltroll's recent defense of Moody (not quite the same, because he was 'defending' him against the mods, not against another poster), it's hard to think of many cases where one poster comes to the defense of another.

I could be completely wrong about that, because there a lot more threads I haven't read than ones I have. But, if there is some truth in that observation, it begs the questions: Should coming to the defense of another poster be more common? Is it possible to do that and stay within the rules? Does the apparent lack of support hurt or help the site as a whole? Do we not jump in to a dispute because to do it implies somehow that we think we should be perceived as someone special ourselves? Does jumping into a dispute have a tendency to escalate the verbal "violence"?

Interesting group psychology questions.


----------



## Wood

Vesteralen said:


> Should coming to the defense of another poster be more common?


Well, maybe, but it depends on who is the innocent party.

By supporting a poster who you like or are close to, regardless of the claptrap that poster is writing, can only make the problem worse.


----------



## Ukko

hayd said:


> It can be a fine line between validating a person and invalidating their viewpoint. Some people are unable to take the vaguest hint of criticism, real or imagined. They can only respond with personal attacks.
> [...]


My analysis of that reaction finds that it often comes when that 'viewpoint' has not been constructed on a reliable foundation. Sometimes however, the foundation is strong but the person holding it is not; adrenaline fueled offense then is not the last-resort defense, it is the only defense available.


----------



## Ingélou

MacLeod said:


> And yet once you become aware that all you have to communicate with are your words - no faces, no smiles, no murmurs, no body language and positioning - and that those words need to be typed out in some ordered format - no easy repetition or rephrasing, every post a little more effort with the English language than in real life - it's possible to share thoughts in a purer form, without reinforcement or distraction.


I agree. It's possible to achieve a clarity in writing that one may 'muff' in speech. But it's best not to post too hastily. My meaning may be clear *to me* - I may *know* that I am *joking*, and/or *innocent* of any desire to provoke - but will it be so obvious to the reader, and especially to the poster that you may be quoting or answering?

I also think that offence could be avoided in some cases if there were more information 'about them' on your addressee's profiles.

Taggart & I often check with each other first, or else we find a surprise post & yell through to the 'other' computer room that this is *ambiguous* or we think that *the allusion won't be recognised* or whatever. And when we used to set exams, in our role as teachers, it is surprising how often questions that had got by our colleagues were misinterpreted by the pupil examinees. 'Illustrate' your answer being a case in point!


----------



## Ukko

hayd said:


> Well, maybe, but it depends on who is the innocent party.
> 
> By supporting a poster who you like or are close to, regardless of the claptrap that poster is writing, can only make the problem worse.


Quite so. Sometimes it helps to remember that your 'claptrap' may be my Glorious Truth.

(Well, maybe not _that_ dramatic...)


----------



## Vesteralen

Ingenue - something about the color scheme of your avatar and Hilltroll's gets me mixed up when you post right after each other. I'll be reading and thinking - "I can't believe Ingenue said that!" and "I can't believe Hilltroll said that!"


----------



## Ingélou

Vesteralen, I see what you mean! So for a moment you think I came out with one of Hilltroll's dry witticisms? I wish....


----------



## Ukko

Vesteralen said:


> Ingenue - something about the color scheme of your avatar and Hilltroll's gets me mixed up when you post right after each other. I'll be reading and thinking - "I can't believe Ingenue said that!" and "I can't believe Hilltroll said that!"


Yeah, I noticed that resemblance too. My avatar has Pride of Precedence. I suspect that _Ingenue_ is hoping to get credit for some of my Brilliant Repartee.


----------



## Taggart

Hilltroll72 said:


> Yeah, I noticed that resemblance too. My avatar has Pride of Precedence. I suspect that _Ingenue_ is hoping to get credit for some of my Brilliant Repartee.


I must get a nice autumnal brown avatar and really confuse matters.


----------



## Ukko

Taggart said:


> I must get a nice autumnal brown avatar and really confuse matters.


Ah, excellent example of a lead-in, of the sort that George provided Gracie. In an 'open' forum, a _flip remark_ would be forthcoming.


----------



## Wood

Hilltroll72 said:


> My analysis of that reaction finds that it often comes when that 'viewpoint' has not been constructed on a reliable foundation. Sometimes however, the foundation is strong but the person holding it is not; adrenaline fueled offense then is not the last-resort defense, it is the only defense available.


Absolutely. Excessive yapping can also be a badge of an unreliable foundation.


----------



## Wood

For a reason that I cannot explain, this thread has got me giggling.

Human beings can be incredibly funny sometimes.


----------



## Ingélou

Huilunsoittaja said:


> :lol:
> I only post maybe 2-3 posts a day here....


I'm green with envy - I only wish I could be as self-controlled!


----------



## Pantheon

To come back to the original questions, I believe that writing something or saying it out loud are the same thing. As long as the post is directed at someone, or to a group it becomes a discussion. Therefore one must be polite, subtle and tolerant. 
There's no point in lying about who you are since your opinions and reactions betray you anyway (although a little fiction can be fun sometimes). As long as you do not expose yourself too much (I don't think it interests anyone, or perhaps it interests the wrong people), then everything is fine. In the case of bullying, I advise to report it or simply leave the Internet alone in that case. Social rules remain applied despite everything and a screen can hardly protect you from feeling offended, nor can it give you an excuse to be mean. On a platform such as the Internet, it is very easy to convey one's thoughts and one should keep an eye on exactly how much is uploaded.
I also believe that things like grammar and spelling should be maintained on Internet as it boosts credibility. (Many of my friends don't bother with this but I think it is crucial, don't you?)
Honestly I think TC is quite civilised and I'm glad to be on this forum !


----------



## Ingélou

This is a very sensible post, Pantheon. Good to read it. :cheers:


----------



## moody

hayd said:


> Absolutely. Excessive yapping can also be a badge of an unreliable foundation.


Did you have anyone in mind ??


----------



## Wood

moody said:


> Did you have anyone in mind ??


:lol:.........................:lol:..............................:lol:


----------



## Ondine

Ingenue said:


> This is a very sensible post, Pantheon. Good to read it. :cheers:


I agree, @Ingenue.



Pantheon said:


> Honestly I think TC is quite civilised and I'm glad to be on this forum !


Yes. From bad experiences in other forums this one is really good.


----------



## Sid James

hayd said:


> It can be a fine line between validating a person and invalidating their viewpoint. Some people are unable to take the vaguest hint of criticism, real or imagined. They can only respond with personal attacks.
> .


Yes, and its all very difficult to do it online, as I said before. I probably try harder now to word criticism of another's viewpoint in a very careful way. Its less about semantic correctness or pedantry and more about developing a kind of tactfulness online. If I am out of time and can't do it properly, I don't do it. Its easy to be misconstrued with reliance on just text. In terms of personal attacks and just nastiness or rudeness, even if its implied, I kind of let it go now. I realise if I focus on that, it just makes things worse.



Vesteralen said:


> ... But, if there is some truth in that observation, it begs the questions: Should coming to the defense of another poster be more common? Is it possible to do that and stay within the rules? Does the apparent lack of support hurt or help the site as a whole? Do we not jump in to a dispute because to do it implies somehow that we think we should be perceived as someone special ourselves? Does jumping into a dispute have a tendency to escalate the verbal "violence"?
> ....


Well you hit the nail on the hear right there. When I was in those difficult situations here, I felt it unjust that I had little support when it mattered, at that crucial moment. I believe that bullies should be put in their place, and firmly at that. However the issue is, as I was talking to hayd above, an angry or bitter reaction can make it worse. So too the pack mentality. In other words, using their methods against them, you become a bully yourself.

I don't know what is the answer to your questions in other words. To back down too much is allowing yourself to be bullied. To overreact and become hysterical yourself is the other extreme.

What I have found is using the ignore option the most useful thing. Okay I learnt those lessons. I had those bad experiences. No use to repeat them and carry on thinking about them more than is necessary. I tried to use them positively, to ensure I don't react in that way and get myself in that situation again, if I can help it.

The thing is trying, just trying to interact in a more productive way. Its the same in life. When I'm put to the test, and come out of it better than the last time, I think of the situation in a more positive light. I tend to let go of things like that now more easily. I think someone said a definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over again and expecting a different result. Well in terms of communication, now I try to turn seemingly negative things into potential positives. But it takes time and effort, as many of these sorts of things do.


----------



## JCarmel

I think it's important to be yourself at all times...and hopefully, that will include being good-mannered, considerate, open-minded and friendly. If you can't be these things, then perhaps this kind of internet forum is not the right place to exhibit characteristics other than those.
Even though most of us wear a cloak of anonymity, it is enjoyable to read of people's personal quirks as well as their choices of music....well, I suppose I would say that wouldn't I...as I seem to find it difficult not to mention my own?!! I do apologise though if I do exhibit this trait a little too often for the likes of some. Truth to tell, I find it difficult not to do so. In fact I've just gotta say, I'm (mentally) back in Durham again today...as the opening overs at Chester-Le-Street loom... for us Ashes-Addicts. So as I watch 'Sky' on the laptop that I 'communion' with Talkclassical upon, I fear that I must depart until the Luncheon break.
I wish you all a Good Morning of Music.


----------



## Vesteralen

Sid James said:


> To back down too much is allowing yourself to be bullied. To overreact and become hysterical yourself is the other extreme.
> 
> What I have found is using the ignore option the most useful thing. Okay I learnt those lessons. I had those bad experiences. No use to repeat them and carry on thinking about them more than is necessary. I tried to use them positively, to ensure I don't react in that way and get myself in that situation again, if I can help it.


I admire you for that, Sid. I come from a slightly different place. I only come on-line in the first place to entertain and to be entertained. If I learn something new along the way, that's just an unexpected plus. (And I have learned a lot of interesting things at this site, by the way.)

It's not that there aren't things that I care about a great deal. There are - but I will never discuss them on the Internet. I reserve those really important things (to me) for real life. That's why there are some threads, even on this site, that I won't even look at because I don't want to be drawn in to something that trivializes what shouldn't be trivialized (IMO).

"Issues" that I discuss on-line are not things that, in the long run really matter. Even if the music world is completely taken over by countertenors singing to an organ accompaniment, or 99 out of 100 people don't believe Schumann was a great composer - my world won't come to an end.

If there are Internet Rottweilers, there are also Internet Beagles. I'm one of the latter. There is no issue I will discuss online that merits going into attack mode. But, when I am attacked or ridiculed, even feeling the way I do, it's really hard to ignore it. Nine months ago, when I felt my heart racing after being attacked, and I was awake at night trying to come up with responses, I reached the conclusion that it wasn't worth it. So I left. I came back with a resolve like yours stated above. Whether I can successfully ignore the garbage in the future will go along way in determining whether I stay or go again.

Some people call that cowardice. I call it figuring out what's really important and what's not.


----------



## Ukko

Vesteralen said:


> [...]
> If there are Internet Rottweilers, there are also Internet Beagles. I'm one of the latter. There is no issue I will discuss online that merits going into attack mode. But, when I am attacked or ridiculed, even feeling the way I do, it's really hard to ignore it. Nine months ago, when I felt my heart racing after being attacked, and I was awake at night trying to come up with responses, I reached the conclusion that it wasn't worth it. So I left. I came back with a resolve like yours stated above. Whether I can successfully ignore the garbage in the future will go along way in determining whether I stay or go again.
> 
> Some people call that cowardice. I call it figuring out what's really important and what's not.


Yeah, I've noticed that being attacked gets the adrenalin going. It takes awhile to get the drawbridge up, so there is apt to be some penetration. It is absolutely a _good_ thing to let that adrenalin subside before deciding on a response; you won't lose any blood here, and time is on your side initially.

At TC, you can always decide to click on that little triangle, and let the mods figure it out.


----------



## JCarmel

I'm sorry to hear about your distress, Vesteralen but I understand how easy it is to get upset. 
You're sensible to keep your own counsel with reference to private matters. There is no substitute to meeting someone 'in the flesh' before you can trust them with personal matters. There are a lot of people out there who have constructed their lives disproportionately around their internet world...for a variety of reasons...and that lack of living in the real world frequently has a distorting effect, I believe. 
I once trusted someone I met on the Net more than I ought-to have & learnt a valuable lesson from that. You really need to see the (bloodshot?!) veins in their eyes at first hand....first?!...before you allow people to seriously impinge on your emotional well-being. But is is human to become engaged at any level.....


----------



## Sid James

Vesteralen said:


> ...
> "Issues" that I discuss on-line are not things that, in the long run really matter. Even if the music world is completely taken over by countertenors singing to an organ accompaniment, or 99 out of 100 people don't believe Schumann was a great composer - my world won't come to an end....


Its true. Our discussions here won't end hunger, war or cure incurable diseases. I have thought this many times but not wrote it here. Again, its as if you read my thoughts.



Hilltroll72 said:


> Yeah, I've noticed that being attacked gets the adrenalin going. It takes awhile to get the drawbridge up, so there is apt to be some penetration. It is absolutely a _good_ thing to let that adrenalin subside before deciding on a response; you won't lose any blood here, and time is on your side initially.
> ....


I've finally, after years learnt to do that, go away and see if I need to respond later. 9 times out of 10 now, I calm down and just forget it the next time I log on. I don't know why I didn't do it before, people advised me to do it for years, but I am happy it has finally dawned on me to do it.


----------



## deggial

Vesteralen said:


> Even if the music world is completely taken over by countertenors singing to an organ accompaniment,


if that ever happens I'll talk them out of using the organ  and maybe singing some Schumann instead.


----------



## SiegendesLicht

MacLeod said:


> In another thread, a couple of members suggested that TC members don't need to feel hurt or insulted since we're all just anonymous users. Presumably, if you don't 'know' the people you're conversing with, you can't be hurt by them (or, if you are, you've a very thin skin.)


It was me who made that comment about thin skin in that other thread. And yet, I am very prone to making online friends. I have a couple of friends that I don't even know the real names of, only their screen names - and yet they are as real to me as any other. I met my man online and fell in love with him before I ever saw him face to face.

I used to have a friend on TC too, a real one, as opposed to twenty-something people who have added me to their contact lists, but never had a meaningful conversation. He was hammered on his head with the Nazi past from day one when he registered, and a few months later the TC lefties succeeded in driving him out - just because he happened to be German, love Wagner and possess some degree of decency. That is why we do need a thick skin.


----------



## Flamme

I always have a good intention cause i m not prone to arguments that lead nowhere...Im interested in persons behind the screen...


----------



## sospiro

MacLeod said:


> ... I'm just interested to know what your attitudes are to meeting people online. Just how anonymous are you? How anonymous are those you talk with, poll with, argue with about Beethoven, Bach, The Beatles and Hip-Hop?


I try to be as honest as I can. I keep some of my life private because of the sort of work that I do. I've met, in the flesh, several members of TC. Some more often than others & they've become really good friends.



MacLeod said:


> Do you value other members, their opinions and their willingness to share, often quite openly and honestly, their thoughts, feelings and daily lives with you?


Very much so.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Anyone want some proof of my... _phenomenal breathing abilities?_  :tiphat:


----------



## mstar

A forum just isn't the same as real, live classical music discussion.


----------

