Re: email etiquette | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: Malcolm Eva (malcolm![]() |
|
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:57:22 -0800 (PST) |
I like that. I'll try to introduce that here at Springhill. Sent from my iPad If reply needed, please address to malcolm [at] m-eva.co.uk > On 24 Feb 2014, at 17:30, Don Benson <benson6451 [at] aol.com> wrote: > > > 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/ >> >> > > _________________________________________________________________ > Cohousing-L mailing list -- Unsubscribe, archives and other info at: > http://www.cohousing.org/cohousing-L/ > >
- Re: email etiquette, (continued)
-
Re: email etiquette Sharon Villines, February 23 2014
-
Re: email etiquette Malcolm Eva, February 24 2014
- Re: email etiquette Diana Carroll, February 24 2014
- Re: email etiquette Don Benson, February 24 2014
- Re: email etiquette Malcolm Eva, February 25 2014
- "Good of the Community" [was email etiquette Sharon Villines, February 25 2014
- Re: "Good of the Community" [was email etiquette Moz, February 25 2014
- Re: "Good of the Community" [was email etiquette Don Benson, February 26 2014
-
Re: email etiquette Malcolm Eva, February 24 2014
-
Re: email etiquette Sharon Villines, February 23 2014
- Re: email etiquette Malcolm Eva, February 24 2014
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.