Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: DonnaB shallotpeel <shallotpeel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:05:58 -0400
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 17:54:35 -0700, Shirl <Xmnushal8y@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
DonnaB shallotpeel <shallotpeel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yeah, I hear myself & heard myself before I hit send. You
are the one who is insistent that I am wrong about what I mean.
I never said you were "wrong" about anything. I said that even if you
don't intend for something to be an insult or a put-down or to be
condescending, that doesn't mean it wasn't an insult or a put-down or
condescending if that's how it was heard.
Okay, I don't believe I saw you express this at all. If all you are saying is
that people can mean something one way & people can take it a different way,
sure, of course, and I have mentioned that myself numerous times here.
If I tell you I think you write like a kindergartener (I don't, this is
JUST AN EXAMPLE), I can tell you until I'm blue in the face that I
didn't mean it as an insult -- if you took it that way, it was an
insult, and if I truly only meant that you have a way of expressing
things with the curiosity and wonder of a child, I would then attempt to
explain what I meant...although you would likely be saying, "I don't
want or need any of your explanations...thanks, but no thanks."
It's pretty much a guarantee that if & when you try to characterize me, you
mischaracterize me. But, I recently said that in a post & you took it to mean
something entirely different. Hmm, good example, maybe.
I am not the one with the
complaint about you. That's why one thing is in your corner & one is in mine.
But, no, it's not twisted here at all. If one, the generic one, if you, the
2nd person plural generic, meaning any of us at any times, felt the way you
have stated that you do, yes, any of us in those circumstances would be
blocked from being able to believe the other person, which would be an
impediment to effective communication,
Ya know, as I read these continuing posts, I'm not inclined to respond
until I read something like this. In your many analyses of what's
happening, the "one of us" that has the "impediment to effective
communication" is always the OTHER person -- in most cases, me!...never
you. Despite your detailed -double-talk analyses, you can't see that
your statement -- "there is NO OTHER WAY TO LOOK AT IT" -- is every bit
as much of an "impediment to effective communication" as anything you
have described.
No, that's not true. I always examine myself first. I even have someone else
examine what's been said to verify or refute my take on what's happening with
discussion. I've said this before. I've done it for years & years. I still do
it. And, if and when it's me, I do something about it. One example is changing
my posting style.
You're not trying to make this about some absolute right or wrong,
are you? Because that doesn't work here either.
No. I've been trying to explain how some of your comments come across.
Yeah, we've been there already about you explaining to me. I already told you
that I didn't need you explaining me to me. Thanks, but no thanks.
Again, you can't see YOUR attitude as an impediment to effective
communication.
In this instance about you explaining what is wrong with my communication to
me, beyond what you have already done so, ... no, I don't need any more than
has already been done and/or I will choose my own sources and resources.
You don't want to hear any explanations,
LOL!!!! I don't want to hear any explanations? Of course, I do. I'm the one
who has been laughed at for talking about the importance of being willing to
explain ourselves & clarify, etc. And, yeah, I listen & I interact.
but **I** am the
one with the impediment to communication!
See above.
I never said I was explaining
YOU to you...I was explaining how what you SAY comes across, whether you
chose to believe it or not.
Comes across to you & some people but not all people. And, a place in the road
where I don't agree with you.
I understand now, that you simply don't care
how what you say comes across...if you did, you wouldn't be so stubborn
about the possibility that MAYBE your communication isn't so effective
either.
In other instances my communication may get in the way & be an impediment. I
think I was clear that I was speaking of this instance, or for others,
perhaps. a similar instance.
But, I do care, I care deeply, some say too much. And, I am tenacious, and
thank god/dess I am or I probably wouldn't still be around for this
conversation. <G>
--
: ^> DonnaB Yahoo Msgr: shallotpeel <*> http://www.myspace.com/shallotpeel,
http://youtube.com/profile_videos?user=TonksIsHere,
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=617471854
Tree Pollen: 04/08-2655; 04/09-2787; 04/10-2805; 04/11-3238; 04/14-3327;
04/15-117; 04/16-149; 04/17-348; 04/18-694; 04/21-419
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you.
This is the principal difference between a dog and a man." - Mark Twain
.
- References:
- Re: Y&R/ Writers was/ Breakdown writers
- From: DonnaB shallotpeel
- Re: Y&R/ Writers was/ Breakdown writers
- From: Shirl
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: DonnaB shallotpeel
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: Shirl
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: DonnaB shallotpeel
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: Shirl
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: DonnaB shallotpeel
- Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- From: Shirl
- Re: Y&R/ Writers was/ Breakdown writers
- Prev by Date: Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- Next by Date: Re: GL/ The Zimmer
- Previous by thread: Re: TAN/ Soap Operas & Dialogue
- Next by thread: GL - Did Cassie sleep with someone??
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading