Re: email etiquette
From: Don Benson (benson6451aol.com)
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 09:30:19 -0800 (PST)
I have found that individuals and groups discover an interesting value in 
developing their relationships, when they are made aware of the potential 
difference between and value of describing their perceptions of both  
1.  what I want; and
2.  what we need.
Some have taken this practice so far as to presenting both in discussion of any 
issue, not just those that are high energy and conflictual.  

Don Benson
503.296.7249 office
510.701.9784 mobile

Ubuntu - I am because we are.

On Feb 24, 2014, at 8:33 AM, Diana Carroll <dianaecarroll [at] gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> That's interesting.  That seems to mean that one's strong personal views,
> opinions and feelings should not be discussed on email unless the goal is
> for group, rather than personal, benefit.
> 
> My question then is: in what forum *should* one's strong views, opinions
> and feelings be discussed?  Is that limited to meetings?  Or are such
> expressions considered inappropriate entirely in the group setting, and
> should just be discussed with one's personal support network instead?
> 
> I would have a hard time with that, personally.  I certainly think it is
> reasonable that I be required to discuss such things respectfully and
> civilly, but I'd chafe with the idea that my personal opinions should only
> be discussed if the discussion was for group benefit.  I would want to
> reserve the right to say "You know what?  I know you all want to paint the
> common house green, but I have to say I just hate the color green.  I won't
> block it is that's what everyone wants but...ew."
> 
> (Hypothetical example chosen.  Our CH is in fact green and I have no
> problem with the color!)
> 
> D
> 
> 
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Malcolm Eva <malcolm [at] m-eva.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I think it implies that posts, especially if expressing strong
>> views/opinions, should be addressing the common good rather than an
>> individual's private concern.  Sounds good and noble, but actually would be
>> harder to follow; when we fiercely disagree with somebody's perspective we
>> think we are concerned with the common good, and miss that in fact we just
>> don't personally want to go through change.   I think the phrase is an
>> exhortation to step back and check our own motives before hitting 'send'.
>> 
>> Sorry not to be more positive about the interpretation, but having missed
>> the meeting I've relied on people's report backs and these notes from the
>> meeting.   That phrase appeared in the notes, but no one relayed that part
>> of the discussion to me.
>> 
>> Malcolm
>> On 23 Feb 2014, at 14:18, Sharon Villines wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Feb 21, 2014, at 11:25 AM, Malcolm Eva <malcolm [at] m-eva.co.uk> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Here is a brief extract from the notes afterwards.
>>> 
>>> Thank you for sharing this. I think it is a very helpful list of values
>> and aims. One question:
>>> 
>>>> Altruistic not individualistic
>>> 
>>> What does this mean?
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>>> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at:
>> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
>> 
>> 
>> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: 
> http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/
> 
> 


Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.