The DIP Process

[Walter Bright]

On 3/4/2019 5:03 AM, Jonathan Marler wrote:
> Because of your concern, I've also added a statement that these are not rules to 
> be followed to the letter and included a list of "goals" to describe the "sprit 
> of the guidelines".  I'm not sure what these goals are so I just included one 
> and am hoping for it to be filled in by the leadership.

I don't wish to get into any debate that nitpicks about what is and is not 
professional conduct. It's a hopeless debate, as hopeless as trying to codify 
the difference between art and porn. As far as the forums go, the decision will 
be made by the moderators. It's usually pretty clear, and we'll discuss among 
ourselves any problematic cases.


>> I suggest anyone looking for an authority on it to pick out one of the "Emily 
>> Post" books on Amazon.
> 
> At work I have also been known to be "intimidating" at times and can come off as 
> rude and insensitive.  I know you are probably shocked!  I don't want to be this 
> way and I try hard not to be. I take this stuff seriously and I am taking your 
> suggestions seriously.  I see a fair number of books, which ones would you 
> specifically recommend?

For starters, "How To Win Friends and Influence People" by Carnegie is a 
long-standing classic for good reason.

And, "Emily Post's Etiquette".

When I was growing up, I noticed something interesting. I was able to recognize 
people that were less "mature" than I was, but not more "mature". I could only 
see my maturation in hindsight. I think it's similar with manners.

BTW, I think it's very good of you to recognize issues and work to resolve them. 
I have a lot of respect for that. But don't expect to just read a book and get 
better at it. It's a lifelong struggle. I've been working on mine since I first 
read HTWFaIP as a teenager.


> This is very interesting to me. To clarify, you're saying that if you suspect 
> someone has sinister motives that you shouldn't say anything about it. This is 
> very contradictory to my current world view. I've come to believe that if 
> something is wrong then you should bring it out in the open so that it can be 
> resolved rather than letting it simmer and get worse. However, I also believe 
> that the way in which you discuss it is VERY IMPORTANT and is often the deciding 
> factor in whether or not it can be resolved. So if I understand you correctly, 
> you're saying that some things should never be discussed.  Futhermore, if you 
> think someone has bad motives, you're probably wrong, so you should drop it and 
> not ask the person what their motives actually are. This is so fundamentally 
> different to how I think. I will have to think on this more and reconsider my 
> current beliefs I listed above.

Even if you're right about their motives, you'll never resolve it by bringing it 
out into the open. You'll just make them mad at you.


> However, I would 
> stipulate that if you see what appears to be repeated vindictive behavior then 
> at some point it should be addressed and discussed between the parties.

Vindictive behavior is something entirely different from failing to find one's 
argument compelling.