![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hazliyaPlease, please, please tell me what gets accomplished in a situation where everyone involved separates into cliques and points fingers, saying "You're stupid" really loudly. Seriously, how is that moving forward in any way, shape, or form?
---
It's starting to get to me. I'm friends with enough people and closer to more than enough to be bothered and (in some cases) annoyed with the way a lot of people are conducting themselves. It's gotten to the point where a lot of new people are being introduced to me through this conflict, and even though I give people the benefit of the doubt when meeting under less-than-ideal circumstances, I have met/heard the words of some people who have killed any interest I ever may have had in getting to know them in five sentences or less.
And as always, the line between club politics and personal politics is the grayest shade of gray that ever did gray. Why does this surprise people? Why does it upset people? This is not an actual government, and very few people have proven themselves truly objective in the club. Everyone has emotional ties to the group and the different people in it, and so are affected. This is inevitable. This is human nature. Yes, I agree that people's personal feelings should not be their main source of opinion on political issues. But these also happen to be true:
People can be sympathetic, emotional, loving, loyal, compassionate, honest, and genuine.
But people can also be immature, spineless, rude, needy, selfish, and egotistical.
And, sadly, times like these are where all of the latter qualities come out.
There are a lot of people who feel shut out of this, like they don't have a say. And a few are acting like children, from what I've seen. From the people on a power trip telling everyone else how to act, and the people who (after being told that there would be a time and place for discussion to be arranged) continue in public to declare that they want the world to hear their all-important opinion and they want to be heard now.
I like the idea of having a discussion meeting. I don't like the way it was brought about or communicated.
I also think people should read definitions of words before going off the hilt on what they think they mean or using them in sentences where the misused word changed everything entirely.
And I also think it's ridiculous and counterproductive on SO many levels to overdramatize something that needs to be handled in a respectful and official manner.
The basics:
1. A person voices concern about someone's performance in a way that others feel could have been done better.
2. People start lashing out in all directions, factions are being recruited, the proverbial mud is slung, and all attempts at intervention are comparable to lemon juice on a papercut.
Since this whole thing has started, let me give you an idea as to some of the things being said. These are quotes, no word of a lie and taken entirely IN CONTEXT, that I have heard in regards to what's going on:
"This is the loss of the club's innocence."
[Um, sorry? Innocence? The club was no stranger to drama. Or officers having to change. Innocence to what, exactly?]
"Anyone on his side is like trying to start a mutiny and make the club an anarchy or something."
[Why does anyone need to pick sides? Where did anarchy come from?]
"Besides, it's been years since we've had a decent flame war on the list."
[Drama for drama's sake - productive?]
"You clearly haven't substantiated your claim that 'the club has gone to hell.'"
[Turns out the quote isn't real. Made up for dramatic emphasis.]
"Just because he doesn't like him."
"But he didn't do _______, he doesn't _____________, and there's been a lot of ___________ before. You don't think someone could've been concerned?"
"No. People don't get concerned unless they don't, like, LIKE the person."
"So you're saying people don't question the government as long as they're friendly?"
"Um, yeah. Everyone liked Hitler, right? He did stupid shit and everyone still followed him."
"Because he was a good public speaker."
"Right."
"And you wouldn't have impeached Hitler."
"Right."
[...Dear lord.]
Looking back at those, I can't even believe it. No, if you weren't there for the conversation, I will not tell you who said what. Every person who has stepped in, taken a side, or done anything in any part to perpetuate angst and drama and hold up what should be going on to deal with it is responsible for what happens as a result.
And I mean everyone. Both 'sides.' Both have valid points and concerns, which deserve to be represented. But there's a grand canyon separation between "represented" and "screamed in someone's face." Typing versus fingerpaint here, people. Which one's clearer?
There are some things that I have come to understand about clubs in general:
1. When you get a large group of people interacting for long periods of time, there is going to be drama. Whether it's dating, personality conflicts, or just angst in general, it happens. People do this.
The extreme: People who love to facilitate drama will egg on others and jump into the fray, making everything ten kinds of worse. A lot of people love a good fight, and there will be cries for blood. They will often accuse people trying to debate/discuss (rather than incite) of trying to add more drama just to keep progress from being made, whether consciously or not. This is horrific and happens like a train wreck and makes everyone involved look like a dick. Therefore, anyone who could calm down the situation and make any sense of it thinks better of helping out and sits back. It's a lose-lose situation. Unfortunately, every group has their drama queens.
2. Interpersonal dynamics can, and often will, change. Groups that attract the same kinds of people with the same temperaments can be stagnant for a good long while, but chances are that at some point or another, friendships are going to shift.
The extreme: This makes good fodder for hostilities and renders nearly everyone quite partial in situations where a good, unbiased opinion is needed. This also makes politics awful - whether you know something and keep your mouth shut to stay well-liked or don't know anything and talk incessantly to be in the spotlight. In short, friendships and politics don't mix. But a lot of people can't (or won't) separate the two and see how certain things affect the group rather than their individual lives.
3. When a social group has resources like money and general-use items, as well as a structure, it will have people in charge.
The extreme: People have their responsibilities to the positions they have committed to. But it's very difficult to step back and see what kind of a job you're doing - or, for that matter, what kind of job your friends are doing as officers. I'm of the mindset that if you're becoming what you consider to be an unfit officer, you should either step up or step down. And the people in the club should respect that. I'm not saying no questions asked, because the people you're supposed to be representing have the right to be curious, but they also shouldn't make it hard for you (when you're trying to do the right thing) by playing middle-school drama games or accosting you. And we're having issues on both ends of the spectrum here, since there are voids to be filled: who has the job of social moderation in a club, really? The people who know how to defuse a situation like this one are hanging back, and the people who don't know what they're doing are jumping in and going for a power trip. Yes, it's nice that people want to help - but if you only think you know what you're doing, it's doing no one any favors here.
The worst sides of everyone are coming out in an issue like this. I think a lot less of a lot of people, I have more respect for a few others (very few, mind you), and I've come to feel like I really don't know others like I thought I did. There have been many moments of "Wow. I can't believe you just said/did that." and "Do you think before speaking?" and "I'm sorry, WHAT just came out of your mouth?!" for me recently.
What needs to happen right now is the drama needs to stop. People need to stop insulting, whispering behind backs, plotting, whining, moping, etc. and forgive, forget, and move the hell on. Everyone's saying that all they really care about is the welfare of the club. Even though I seriously doubt that as a major motivation, I'll give out some credit here.
You want what's best for the club? Debate it in a civilized, adult manner, and settle this so that a definite outcome is found and the group can move on. Clinging and hemming and hawing is unhealthy, counterproductive, and resembles a tantrum. Find something that works so that the social structure of the group doesn't collapse.
I'm sorry, but right now a lot of people fail.
-Haz
---
It's starting to get to me. I'm friends with enough people and closer to more than enough to be bothered and (in some cases) annoyed with the way a lot of people are conducting themselves. It's gotten to the point where a lot of new people are being introduced to me through this conflict, and even though I give people the benefit of the doubt when meeting under less-than-ideal circumstances, I have met/heard the words of some people who have killed any interest I ever may have had in getting to know them in five sentences or less.
And as always, the line between club politics and personal politics is the grayest shade of gray that ever did gray. Why does this surprise people? Why does it upset people? This is not an actual government, and very few people have proven themselves truly objective in the club. Everyone has emotional ties to the group and the different people in it, and so are affected. This is inevitable. This is human nature. Yes, I agree that people's personal feelings should not be their main source of opinion on political issues. But these also happen to be true:
People can be sympathetic, emotional, loving, loyal, compassionate, honest, and genuine.
But people can also be immature, spineless, rude, needy, selfish, and egotistical.
And, sadly, times like these are where all of the latter qualities come out.
There are a lot of people who feel shut out of this, like they don't have a say. And a few are acting like children, from what I've seen. From the people on a power trip telling everyone else how to act, and the people who (after being told that there would be a time and place for discussion to be arranged) continue in public to declare that they want the world to hear their all-important opinion and they want to be heard now.
I like the idea of having a discussion meeting. I don't like the way it was brought about or communicated.
I also think people should read definitions of words before going off the hilt on what they think they mean or using them in sentences where the misused word changed everything entirely.
And I also think it's ridiculous and counterproductive on SO many levels to overdramatize something that needs to be handled in a respectful and official manner.
The basics:
1. A person voices concern about someone's performance in a way that others feel could have been done better.
2. People start lashing out in all directions, factions are being recruited, the proverbial mud is slung, and all attempts at intervention are comparable to lemon juice on a papercut.
Since this whole thing has started, let me give you an idea as to some of the things being said. These are quotes, no word of a lie and taken entirely IN CONTEXT, that I have heard in regards to what's going on:
"This is the loss of the club's innocence."
[Um, sorry? Innocence? The club was no stranger to drama. Or officers having to change. Innocence to what, exactly?]
"Anyone on his side is like trying to start a mutiny and make the club an anarchy or something."
[Why does anyone need to pick sides? Where did anarchy come from?]
"Besides, it's been years since we've had a decent flame war on the list."
[Drama for drama's sake - productive?]
"You clearly haven't substantiated your claim that 'the club has gone to hell.'"
[Turns out the quote isn't real. Made up for dramatic emphasis.]
"Just because he doesn't like him."
"But he didn't do _______, he doesn't _____________, and there's been a lot of ___________ before. You don't think someone could've been concerned?"
"No. People don't get concerned unless they don't, like, LIKE the person."
"So you're saying people don't question the government as long as they're friendly?"
"Um, yeah. Everyone liked Hitler, right? He did stupid shit and everyone still followed him."
"Because he was a good public speaker."
"Right."
"And you wouldn't have impeached Hitler."
"Right."
[...Dear lord.]
Looking back at those, I can't even believe it. No, if you weren't there for the conversation, I will not tell you who said what. Every person who has stepped in, taken a side, or done anything in any part to perpetuate angst and drama and hold up what should be going on to deal with it is responsible for what happens as a result.
And I mean everyone. Both 'sides.' Both have valid points and concerns, which deserve to be represented. But there's a grand canyon separation between "represented" and "screamed in someone's face." Typing versus fingerpaint here, people. Which one's clearer?
There are some things that I have come to understand about clubs in general:
1. When you get a large group of people interacting for long periods of time, there is going to be drama. Whether it's dating, personality conflicts, or just angst in general, it happens. People do this.
The extreme: People who love to facilitate drama will egg on others and jump into the fray, making everything ten kinds of worse. A lot of people love a good fight, and there will be cries for blood. They will often accuse people trying to debate/discuss (rather than incite) of trying to add more drama just to keep progress from being made, whether consciously or not. This is horrific and happens like a train wreck and makes everyone involved look like a dick. Therefore, anyone who could calm down the situation and make any sense of it thinks better of helping out and sits back. It's a lose-lose situation. Unfortunately, every group has their drama queens.
2. Interpersonal dynamics can, and often will, change. Groups that attract the same kinds of people with the same temperaments can be stagnant for a good long while, but chances are that at some point or another, friendships are going to shift.
The extreme: This makes good fodder for hostilities and renders nearly everyone quite partial in situations where a good, unbiased opinion is needed. This also makes politics awful - whether you know something and keep your mouth shut to stay well-liked or don't know anything and talk incessantly to be in the spotlight. In short, friendships and politics don't mix. But a lot of people can't (or won't) separate the two and see how certain things affect the group rather than their individual lives.
3. When a social group has resources like money and general-use items, as well as a structure, it will have people in charge.
The extreme: People have their responsibilities to the positions they have committed to. But it's very difficult to step back and see what kind of a job you're doing - or, for that matter, what kind of job your friends are doing as officers. I'm of the mindset that if you're becoming what you consider to be an unfit officer, you should either step up or step down. And the people in the club should respect that. I'm not saying no questions asked, because the people you're supposed to be representing have the right to be curious, but they also shouldn't make it hard for you (when you're trying to do the right thing) by playing middle-school drama games or accosting you. And we're having issues on both ends of the spectrum here, since there are voids to be filled: who has the job of social moderation in a club, really? The people who know how to defuse a situation like this one are hanging back, and the people who don't know what they're doing are jumping in and going for a power trip. Yes, it's nice that people want to help - but if you only think you know what you're doing, it's doing no one any favors here.
The worst sides of everyone are coming out in an issue like this. I think a lot less of a lot of people, I have more respect for a few others (very few, mind you), and I've come to feel like I really don't know others like I thought I did. There have been many moments of "Wow. I can't believe you just said/did that." and "Do you think before speaking?" and "I'm sorry, WHAT just came out of your mouth?!" for me recently.
What needs to happen right now is the drama needs to stop. People need to stop insulting, whispering behind backs, plotting, whining, moping, etc. and forgive, forget, and move the hell on. Everyone's saying that all they really care about is the welfare of the club. Even though I seriously doubt that as a major motivation, I'll give out some credit here.
You want what's best for the club? Debate it in a civilized, adult manner, and settle this so that a definite outcome is found and the group can move on. Clinging and hemming and hawing is unhealthy, counterproductive, and resembles a tantrum. Find something that works so that the social structure of the group doesn't collapse.
I'm sorry, but right now a lot of people fail.
-Haz
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:39 pm (UTC)Can I still be a dramavore? It's where I don't actually participate in any of it, but I sit back with a bowl of popcorn and an avid expression and watch humans suck at life?
Please? I'll be very good!
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:50 pm (UTC)...is it caramel popcorn? With peanuts? I need sugar right now. =(
no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 12:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 12:43 am (UTC)Assuming that the actual outcome of the argument isn't life-threatening and you have the right point of view, the answer is "comedy". From where I'm sitting (ex-SFS-officer, alumnus, minimal contact with the club in the past couple years other than mailing list and attending gaming weekends), this is an absurdly trivial problem that has developed only because key players already disliked each other before it ever started.
As such, for me, it's an entertaining show of watching people airing their childish dislikes of each other.
The SFS has been through almost the same and far worse in the past. In my memory (1995 to present), we've had officers fail out, step down for fear of failing out, simply disappear, and be asked to step down by other officers (not nearly so publicly as this mess, but with just as much drama). Sometimes the club just runs with an officer or two AWOL for a little while. It never really hurts the club, and things survive.
The only times the club has ever really been hurt is when the ball is dropped on upstream responsibilities to the SGA or budgeting in general. We've had a treasurer fail to fill out the SGA budgeting paperwork, resulting in the club having no budget at the beginning of one school year. (Much petitioning was done, and we got an emergency budget much smaller than normal.) Or, if you go before my time, failed conventions in the 80s led to officers of the club personally taking on thousands of dollars of debt.
Really, not attending meetings is trivial by comparison.
And if this argument is tearing friends apart, I have a hard time believing they were really friends to begin with.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 09:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-18 12:34 am (UTC)Particularly a few select alums / elders that decide to bitch out the current officers because we're not responding the way they would back in the 90s.
Me and Rich (despite differing views on how to handle the situation) did what we could to keep things from detonating, I'm hoping it was at least marginally effective (there's only so much one can do to stop people from flaming each other / us via email though) :\