| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
| | Author | Messages | |
Avatar of the Irrelevant
Diomedes
Commander
3173 Posts
    
 | | 05/01/2008 2:02 PM |
| I've got an interesting hypothetical.
When, if ever, is it better to have a conflic in public rather than in private?
Previously, I've always thought it was better to have it out in private. People act differently when they have an audience. Moreover I always think back to the Iliad that Achilles' wrath was due to (at least in part) the public nature of his argument.
Now I'm confronted with sort of a new variable. Let's assume for a moment that people are horrible little gossip mongers. Yeah, a weird externality to introduce into our system, but one that I think ends up holding true in a lot of scenarios. Now, pretty much any argument is going to involve >some element< of publicly observable action. Let's say Agamemnon had pulled Achilles aside and said, "Look man, I need the gal". Achilles nabs the lady (I can't recall her name) drags her into Agamemnon's tent and then leaves.
What kind of gossip do you think that would have created? I'd guess it could be immense and range from slader of Achilles, to Ag, to the lady etc. Regardless that no one would have a clear story, I'm sure that rumors and slander would persist.
So, would it have been better to have it out in public where all variables are known and any hostility can be addressed and argued rather than give rise to passive aggressive slander and libel? When you're not even sure who your accusers are to face?
I know the easy answer is, "Just don't listen to gossip//slander//etc". I'm going to insist for the sake of this argument that we can't take that ground as it negates the dilemma. Moreover, I have ample reason to believe that these kinds of slader and rumor will indeed pop up and will indeed come back to effect parties in a real and negative way.
Does that justify a public conflic?
| |
| |
| Duke of Spoils
greyhaze
Warlord
5758 Posts
| | 05/01/2008 2:22 PM |
| It's better to argue in public if you're opponent is physically aggressive... u get witnesses that way.
Personally I prefer to argue in private. Some people like an audience. | |
Greyhaze's DDM Spoilers
Champion of a Medium Dog & then a Darkenbeast , Raistlin Majere, Nightmare WDQ25/60, Warduke WD60/60,
Anti-Champion of Guns, "Knight of Bugbears", and Joke Champion of Venger.
Called Shots: Frost Giant in Demon Web, Darkenbeast in Feywild. | |
| 
Bert the Troll
Commander
3829 Posts
Adelaide
| | 05/01/2008 6:12 PM |
| If it's a touchy bound to be messy conflict, augure in front of a mediator.
Otherwise, kep it in damn private. | |
"Mutton yesterday, mutton today, and blimey, if it don't look like mutton again tomorrer." Bert the Troll - The Hobbit
Semi-Secret sig business: Sometimes the road less traveled is less traveled for a reason. ~ Seinfeld
Champion of Epic Lolth, Orcus, & Demogorgon and bring us Asmodeus! | |
| Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
7055 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 05/01/2008 9:03 PM |
| Posted By Bert the Troll on 05/01/2008 6:12 PM
If it's a touchy bound to be messy conflict, augure in front of a mediator.
Otherwise, kep it in damn private.
I agree, unless you need a third party for some reason (witness, mediator, etc.) it shoud be a private affair. Gossip will always happen, but it's usually far less reliable and easeir to refute.
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
| Knight of the
Round Table
Thenameless
Warlord
8879 Posts
The Fortress of Solitude
| | 05/02/2008 3:04 AM |
| | The gossip thing, itself, has many variables attached. Are the listeners impartial, or do they favour one side? Arguments, when emotions rise, can go off topic really fast and become full of personal attacks - in a public forum, who has more to lose if and when the dirty laundry starts to come out? I'm sure there's more that I can't just think of right now. Strategically, if you're almost sure that you can win the argument with no great loss to yourself, then it might not be a bad idea to have it in public. | |
Over 270 successful online DDM trades. | |
|
Avatar of the Irrelevant
Diomedes
Commander
3173 Posts
| | 05/02/2008 6:43 AM |
| Good point about the variables attached to gossipers.
Here, I'll make this in more concrete terms, and this is what got me thinking about it in the first place. I think a lot of you know that I play World of Warcraft. Anyhow, I'm in a raid guild which means there's a large team of us and we all get together to try and tackle a difficult objective. Sometimes, it becomes clear that a member of your team is not performing well and needs to be either removed (so they can go think about life) or corrected.
In my guild (and I've been in about 6 so I see this as almost universal to the culture of the game) everyone is a vicious gossip monger. Everyone has their clique of 5-10 friends but you're forced to group up with a lot of people outside your circle. Hence there will always inevitably be a few people in a group that size who just don't get along. By and large, most of us just suck it up and accept that we can still raid together even if we're not friends and to give each other some wiggle room so that there isn't a constant conflict.
Now, I'm an officer, when I remove people, I tend to do it in a whisper just to them. However I've started to really question that. While some people are removed, others just have to go ("Sorry my wife is screaming at me, I have to bail guys"), others have some weird internet connection issue, and some people told me ahead of time ("I can only raid for 2 hours and then I have to go"). However from the raid's perspective, all they see is someone removed from the raid group. Getting back to cliques, this turns into a negative rumor mill, "So-and-so was removed from raid on Thursday, they just couldn't cut it, we should stop taking them with us altogether and avoid grouping with them." Sounds silly, but that's the sort of thing that can really ruin your game experience.
This is something I'm especially sensitive to since my wife was the victim of it in one guild. She was _always_ in raid doing her job, but started getting attacked constantly only to find out the people spreading rumors were a few folks she never would have guessed.
This has all made me really reconsider the public/private argument. I feel like private arguments not only lead to gossip but allow for a lot of passive aggressive behavior. If I was to go about promoting a culture of openness within my guild, I feel that I'd have to shift all corrects to the public side, not only so that it would identify those who were removed for a performance based reason, but also so that they would have a chance to respond to any accusation. For example, "Yeah, I did screw that up, I'll leave and study the strategy again" lets people in the raid know that a given person recognizes their mistake and is going to work to improve it while a response of, "Whatever" would tend to indicate said individual did not recognize the issue.
But then again, we're back to the public shame deal.
Any thoughts? Should I keep this private? Take it as a given that I can't root out gossipers, so part of my attempts in doing this were to promote a different internal culture and attitude.
| |
| |
| Duke of Spoils
greyhaze
Warlord
5758 Posts
| | 05/02/2008 7:17 AM |
| So, it hasn't made you question playing WoW?
I think if ppl were to announce "I gotta drop because X" it'd be a much much better environment. I'm not sure why it has to be a PM... man, this game sounds a lot like work. | |
Greyhaze's DDM Spoilers
Champion of a Medium Dog & then a Darkenbeast , Raistlin Majere, Nightmare WDQ25/60, Warduke WD60/60,
Anti-Champion of Guns, "Knight of Bugbears", and Joke Champion of Venger.
Called Shots: Frost Giant in Demon Web, Darkenbeast in Feywild. | |
|
Avatar of the Irrelevant
Diomedes
Commander
3173 Posts
| | 05/02/2008 7:54 AM |
| It is, people somehow think that wow players are anti-social. The truth of the matter is I'm dealing with 30+ whiny people each night trying to get a job done. I couldn't be any more social :P
Does it make me question playing it? Sometimes, but I've also got a huge network of friends. It's really tough to walk away when I log on and get a constant barrage of people wanting to talk to me or requesting my help. I feel very compelled to do things since I know a lot of people depend on me.
It's even harder since my wife plays and I think she feels the same way. Even if I don't want to log on some times, she probably does so I do so for her sake.
| |
| |
| Master of the
Awesome Sauce
Teflon Jeff
Warlord
7055 Posts
Idaho. Yes, we have Gamers in Idaho.
| | 05/02/2008 9:32 AM |
| I would say in that instance, it's already a public argument. Provacy is impossible.
So, I would always say, regardless of reason, "X is leaving because they do not have enough time to finish"
then, send a private message (a whisper, I guess?) to the person, explaining the real reason (if different)
However, you'll have to remember, people will gossip regardless of what happens. In the words of Good ol' H.P.
“It is the frank & cynical recognition of the inevitable
limitations of people in general which makes me absolutely indifferent instead
of actively hostile toward mankind.” H.P. Lovecraft, “In a letter to Donald Wandrei, March
27 1927
| |
Official Delegate, Wizards of the Coast
Against The Giants Called Shot: Huge Green Dragon
Icons Called Shot: Gargantuan Prismatic Dragon
"Rejoice, for bad things are about to happen." | |
|
| | You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
| |
ActiveForums 3.7 | You must be signed in to participate in the
games. |