4 ms·

Including someone who interrupts and talks over everyone else and doesn’t change in response to feedback?

llao 8y ago
Of course not, just like my forum would not be open for people who post flame-bait like yours. Behaving like a decent human being is an implicit, obvious rule.
- slyall 8y ago
  " I'm sorry why are you kicking me out? I read the book and I'm not doing anything wrong! I guess I'm talking a bit more than some other people but they are just quiet and I'm an outgoing guy. " "Are you seriously implying that I'm not a decent human being because I talk a little more than Bob? "
  - cf498 8y ago
    Which can be answered with a simple "get lost". edit: Since some people seem to disagree, why not? I fail to see how its any more complicated then those two words. You put in the effort to organize the bookclub, you have the prerogative to say who can participate. If you dont like that make your own bookclub. Forums have thrived on this concept for decades and it only got complicated once they became business enterprises. Maybe to phrase it more broadly outside of the organization aspect and for general social interaction. You dont have a right to be part of a social group or go to a certain party. If I dont like you I likely wont spend time with you.
    - slyall 8y ago
      Now I realise there are multiple people in this thread but the bookclub went from: "My book club will not be a safe space, it is open to everyone who reads the book" to: "Behaving like a decent human being is an implicit, obvious rule." to: "a simple 'get lost' [..] you put in the effort to organize the bookclub, you have the prerogative to say who can participate "
      - TeMPOraL 8y ago
        Yup. This is a way any and all small-scale social interactions work, and have worked since forever. Pushing a CoC onto this is trying to override the natural way small groups of people form, replacing it with a formal structure that's not fun for anyone except people better at lawyering and - to borrow FakeComments's excellent term - social LARPing, than actual interpersonal skills.
- afarrell 8y ago
  EDIT: oh, you are a different commenter than black-tea. Well, the points still stand. Your position is different than his. ——— > flame-bait I’m not trying to divert the conversation to pointless angry arguments. I’m trying to direct attention to the core thesis of the post. Genuinely. I don’t know how to persuade you that I’m not trolling, but I’m not. I care deeply about this topic. > implicit, obvious rule The rules which people call obvious are often very hard to learn because people are unwilling to give clear feedback about them. If someone grew up in a boisterous family from New Jersey and who learned that people speaking over each other is fine, why would it be obvious to them that what they were doing was rude? Getting kicked out without clear feedback just conveys “people don’t like me”. Nothing obligates you to teach them, but its nice to. And I think “this person isn’t willing to listen to/adjust their behavior in response to feedback” is a very reasonable line to draw for kicking someone out. But I’d ask you to you recognise the differences among “everyone who in my honest judgement isn’t rude”, “everyone who is open to feedback”, and “everyone who has read the book”
black-tea 8y ago
Common sense is a thing, you know.
- afarrell 8y ago
  So... can you explain more what you mean by “my book club will not be a safe space. It will be open to everyone who has read the book” means in practice? Do you mean, “we’re going to discuss Huck Finn and not worry about which words offend the sensibilities of liberals and be annoyed at those who want to prohibit certain words. We expect you to bring $10 for your share of the barbecue.”? Cause thats still kinda a code of conduct, its just a different one than the author would have.
  - black-tea 8y ago
    It means that if someone says something controversial and you get upset, it's your problem, not theirs. Basically, it will be the type of discussion that adults have always been having together.
    - pjc50 8y ago
      "Today we're going to discuss whether people like you should be allowed to exist. If you get upset, that's your problem"? (You have not explained what you mean by safe space and why you want your book club to be unsafe)
      - black-tea 8y ago
        Jesus Christ. You're on hacker news. Grow up and stop behaving like retarded kid. You know what I mean.
        dang 8y ago
        We've banned this account for posting uncivil and unsubstantive comments and ignoring our numerous requests to stop. Could you please not create accounts to break the site guidelines with? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

llao 8y ago

Of course not, just like my forum would not be open for people who post flame-bait like yours. Behaving like a decent human being is an implicit, obvious rule.

slyall 8y ago
" I'm sorry why are you kicking me out? I read the book and I'm not doing anything wrong! I guess I'm talking a bit more than some other people but they are just quiet and I'm an outgoing guy. " "Are you seriously implying that I'm not a decent human being because I talk a little more than Bob? "
- cf498 8y ago
  Which can be answered with a simple "get lost". edit: Since some people seem to disagree, why not? I fail to see how its any more complicated then those two words. You put in the effort to organize the bookclub, you have the prerogative to say who can participate. If you dont like that make your own bookclub. Forums have thrived on this concept for decades and it only got complicated once they became business enterprises. Maybe to phrase it more broadly outside of the organization aspect and for general social interaction. You dont have a right to be part of a social group or go to a certain party. If I dont like you I likely wont spend time with you.
  - slyall 8y ago
    Now I realise there are multiple people in this thread but the bookclub went from: "My book club will not be a safe space, it is open to everyone who reads the book" to: "Behaving like a decent human being is an implicit, obvious rule." to: "a simple 'get lost' [..] you put in the effort to organize the bookclub, you have the prerogative to say who can participate "
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      Yup. This is a way any and all small-scale social interactions work, and have worked since forever. Pushing a CoC onto this is trying to override the natural way small groups of people form, replacing it with a formal structure that's not fun for anyone except people better at lawyering and - to borrow FakeComments's excellent term - social LARPing, than actual interpersonal skills.
afarrell 8y ago
EDIT: oh, you are a different commenter than black-tea. Well, the points still stand. Your position is different than his. ——— > flame-bait I’m not trying to divert the conversation to pointless angry arguments. I’m trying to direct attention to the core thesis of the post. Genuinely. I don’t know how to persuade you that I’m not trolling, but I’m not. I care deeply about this topic. > implicit, obvious rule The rules which people call obvious are often very hard to learn because people are unwilling to give clear feedback about them. If someone grew up in a boisterous family from New Jersey and who learned that people speaking over each other is fine, why would it be obvious to them that what they were doing was rude? Getting kicked out without clear feedback just conveys “people don’t like me”. Nothing obligates you to teach them, but its nice to. And I think “this person isn’t willing to listen to/adjust their behavior in response to feedback” is a very reasonable line to draw for kicking someone out. But I’d ask you to you recognise the differences among “everyone who in my honest judgement isn’t rude”, “everyone who is open to feedback”, and “everyone who has read the book”

black-tea 8y ago

Common sense is a thing, you know.

afarrell 8y ago
So... can you explain more what you mean by “my book club will not be a safe space. It will be open to everyone who has read the book” means in practice? Do you mean, “we’re going to discuss Huck Finn and not worry about which words offend the sensibilities of liberals and be annoyed at those who want to prohibit certain words. We expect you to bring $10 for your share of the barbecue.”? Cause thats still kinda a code of conduct, its just a different one than the author would have.
- black-tea 8y ago
  It means that if someone says something controversial and you get upset, it's your problem, not theirs. Basically, it will be the type of discussion that adults have always been having together.
  - pjc50 8y ago
    "Today we're going to discuss whether people like you should be allowed to exist. If you get upset, that's your problem"? (You have not explained what you mean by safe space and why you want your book club to be unsafe)
    - black-tea 8y ago
      Jesus Christ. You're on hacker news. Grow up and stop behaving like retarded kid. You know what I mean.
      - dang 8y ago
        We've banned this account for posting uncivil and unsubstantive comments and ignoring our numerous requests to stop. Could you please not create accounts to break the site guidelines with? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html