[tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Rob Weisskirch]

TIPSizens,

I also very much appreciate TIPS and all who choose to answer.  I have
learned a lot from the discussions and enjoy the community of scholars
helping one another.  I also appreciate the lightheartedness of the regular
posters, who can find humor in any post.  I prefer the folks on TIPS to
PSYCHTEACH because they are far less formal.

In reading the problems with one person--I look at it as self-resolving.
Treat those messages as spam.  If it comes from the particular one person,
imagine it asks for penis enlargement or solicits information about riches
in Nigeria awaiting you.

This is nothing more than a bully, enjoying the rise from the victims.  If
there is no response over time, his posts will go away.

Rob

Rob Weisskirch, MSW. Ph.D.
Professor 90.77% Furlough 9.23%
Associate Professor of Human Development
Certified Family Life Educator
Liberal Studies Department
California State University, Monterey Bay
100 Campus Center, Building 82C
Seaside, CA 93955
(831) 582-5079
rweisski...@csumb.edu

This message is intended only for the addressee and may contain
confidential, privileged information.  If you are not the intended
recipient, you may not use, copy or disclose any information contained in
the message.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the
sender by reply e-mail and delete the message.

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Patrick Dolan]

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

Patrick

-- 

Patrick O. Dolan, Ph.D. 
Associate Professor and Chair of Psychology 
Drew University 
Madison, NJ 07940 
973-408-3558 
pdo...@drew.edu 


>>> On 10/21/2009 at 3:11 PM, "Christopher D. Green"  wrote:
> In my humble opinion, this is a ridiculous thread that should be ended 
> immediately. First of all, it only gives he who shall not be named more 
> list attention than he could have possibly dreamt of. Second, things are 
> not all that bad, given that this is the wild and woolly world of 
> non-moderated listservs. The occasional (even daily) message that one 
> finds silly, or even offensive, can be easily ignored. It takes, what?, 
> two seconds to hit the delete key. The address of anyone who is a 
> chronic offender can be put in a "kill file" so that their messages are 
> not even received (as several people on TIPS have done with various 
> other TIPSters). 
> 
> Anyone so overly sensitive that the traffic one typically sees here 
> literally drives them off the list would be driven off practically any 
> non-moderated list. I like the fact that this list is non-moderated (one 
> of the reasons I post here rather than psychteach, with its arcane rules 
> and arbitrary gatekeepers). The price one pays for non-moderation is the 
> occasional ridiculous post. The benefit one gets is an actual discussion 
> rather than a formal "Roberts Rules" meeting. Every community has its 
> share of clowns and fools. We are no different. Stand tall. Set your 
> eyes in the horizon. Keep you upper lip stiff. And be prepared to use 
> you delete key before your send key.
> 
> Regards,
> Chris


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

RE: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Marc Carter]

Where I work the psych department has been at the cutting edge of assessment 
work.

I mean, we're the measurement people, aren't we?

m

PS.  No kids, one cat.  I'm safe.

--
Marc Carter, PhD
Associate Professor and Chair
Department of Psychology
College of Arts & Sciences
Baker University
--

> -Original Message-
> From: William Scott [mailto:wsc...@wooster.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 2:14 PM
> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
> Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>
> >>>  10/21/09 3:04 PM >>>
> ... things like student learning outcomes, how best to effect
> assessments, and [why] are psychologists NOT at the forefront
> of this work?
> >>>
>
> And psychologists should have well behaved dogs and children, too!
>
> Bill Scott
>
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>

The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments thereto ("e-mail") 
is sent by Baker University ("BU") and is intended to be confidential and for 
the use of only the individual or entity named above. The information may be 
protected by federal and state privacy and disclosures acts or other legal 
rules. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are 
notified that retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail 
is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please 
immediately notify Baker University by email reply and immediately and 
permanently delete this e-mail message and any attachments thereto. Thank you.

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[William Scott]

>>>  10/21/09 3:04 PM >>>
... things like student learning outcomes, how best to effect assessments, and 
[why] are psychologists NOT at the forefront of this work?
>>>

And psychologists should have well behaved dogs and children, too!

Bill Scott


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Christopher D. Green]

In my humble opinion, this is a ridiculous thread that should be ended 
immediately. First of all, it only gives he who shall not be named more 
list attention than he could have possibly dreamt of. Second, things are 
not all that bad, given that this is the wild and woolly world of 
non-moderated listservs. The occasional (even daily) message that one 
finds silly, or even offensive, can be easily ignored. It takes, what?, 
two seconds to hit the delete key. The address of anyone who is a 
chronic offender can be put in a "kill file" so that their messages are 
not even received (as several people on TIPS have done with various 
other TIPSters). 

Anyone so overly sensitive that the traffic one typically sees here 
literally drives them off the list would be driven off practically any 
non-moderated list. I like the fact that this list is non-moderated (one 
of the reasons I post here rather than psychteach, with its arcane rules 
and arbitrary gatekeepers). The price one pays for non-moderation is the 
occasional ridiculous post. The benefit one gets is an actual discussion 
rather than a formal "Roberts Rules" meeting. Every community has its 
share of clowns and fools. We are no different. Stand tall. Set your 
eyes in the horizon. Keep you upper lip stiff. And be prepared to use 
you delete key before your send key.

Regards,
Chris
-- 

Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, ON M3J 1P3
Canada

 

416-736-2100 ex. 66164
chri...@yorku.ca
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/

==



Claudia Stanny wrote:
>
>
> I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated 
> in response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use 
> offensive language.
>
>  
>
> I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and 
> semi-abusive posts.
>
> I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.
>
> I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads.
>
> I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.
>
> I may yet regret this response.
>
>  
>
> However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore 
> civility and purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.
>
>  
>
> Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has 
> been a beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. 
> If I can help contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what 
> I can.
>
>  
>
> At present, I've adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that 
> this strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences.
>
>  
>
> Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. 
>
> Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
>
> Associate Professor, Psychology   
>
> University of West Florida
>
> Pensacola, FL  32514 -- 5751
>
>  
>
> Phone:   (850) 857-6355 or  473-7435
>
> e-mail:csta...@uwf.edu 
>
>  
>
> CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/
>
> Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
>
>  
>
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>   



---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[taylor]

I think you are referring to Richard Hake and I have been reading his posts 
avidly. I thought it was more of a taking to task than an attack and I thought 
it was right on. He is still posts regularly on POD and I enjoy his posts 
there. He promotes a better level of assessment of our outcomes. I think it's 
right on but as part of the assessment team at my university, I know that it's 
a 10-letter dirty word. However, I believe the potential for improvement is 
tremendous and we as psychologists should be in the forefront of the movement, 
and not willingly and avidly placing it in the hands of the education and 
ed-psych people. We will have no one to complain to but ourselves. 

I'm a bit sorry that we were so narrow-minded about his posts. They could have 
readily been tolerated just like Louis' posts as they were not inflammatory nor 
prejudicial. They were simply taking psychologists to task for not putting 
their efforts where their mouths are when it comes to things like student 
learning outcomes, how best to effect assessments, and who are psychologists 
NOT at the forefront of this work?

Annette
 
Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D.
Professor of Psychology
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
619-260-4006
tay...@sandiego.edu


 Original message 
>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:06:41 -0400
>From: Steven Specht   
>Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS  
>To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>
>Well we did have that one other individual who was attacking the entire 
>enterprise of psychology. Remember, he was "found out" because of his 
>well-publicized attacks elsewhere and "moved on" pretty quickly. But 
>that's all I can remember in the past 15 years.
>
>On Oct 21, 2009, at 1:20 PM, ku...@plymouth.edu wrote:
>
>>
>> True true. I have been on for about that long too. thanks beth for 
>> giving me somerthing more to ponder.
>>
>> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device from U.S. Cellular
>> From:  Beth Benoit 
>> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:06:51 -0400
>> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences 
>> (TIPS)
>> Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>>
>>
>>  John, 
>>
>> I appreciate your Zen wisdom, and can appreciate the 
>> next-year-it-may-be-someone-else concept, but since 1993 (my first 
>> year on TIPS), no one on TIPS has ever made the suggestion that 
>> someone be removed.  I think that's a pretty good record of tolerance.
>>
>> Beth Benoit
>> Granite State College
>> Plymouth State University
>> New Hampshire
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM, John Kulig  
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02
>>>
>>>  I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am 
>>> pretty sure scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. 
>>> When you study scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene 
>>> Girard) you realize scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more 
>>> or less), they are never randomly drawn from the population ... so 
>>> the group is also a participant.
>>>
>>>  While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should 
>>> be excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups 
>>> end up with someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I 
>>> would rather try to buck Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts 
>>> with other threads. I think it's a signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do 
>>> not want to start a tradition of voting on exclusion. I think it is a 
>>> bad road to start down. Also, the internet is inherently open and 
>>> that will not change unless TIPs becomes a gated community which I 
>>> would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY group will tick 
>>> others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely tick off 
>>> most everyone. It's the nature of the medium.
>>>
>>>  FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares 
>>> at YOU in the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in 
>>> particular, it is - electronically - diffused across all members of 
>>> the group. Remember the old zen habit of visualizing a person's 
>>> comments as an arrow that may be aimed at you, but then flies past 
>>> you. One more finally: maybe there is something in human nature that 
>>> always itches for a fight. I am (half) mystified why people cannot 
>>> resisting responding to posts they want extinguished. If one person 
>>> is voted on, ther

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Paul C Bernhardt]

One way to reclaim TIPS is to do it for yourself. I set up my email client
to filter out posts by particular persons who regularly offend me by
searching the from line to see if it contained  any of their names. That was
helpful, but others who could not resist the urge to set offenders straight
meant I continued to see offending posts, responses, etc. But, I figured out
that, too. I now also have my email client set to filter out posts if an
offender¹s name appears within the post (because they are being quoted).
That has fixed nearly all of it. I now only see posts with contents by an
offending person if I am reading my email using a web interface.

I know I¹m probably missing some useful writing by responders. But, I¹m OK
with the trade-off given I don¹t ever see anything by offenders.

It may be possible for me to set up the filter so emails are intercepted
prior to them appearing even on the server¹s in-box. That might be a project
for holiday break. For now, I only have to worry about it in the evenings
and weekends when I am liable to see email using the web interface.

How to accomplish this: In Entourage (and I think Outlook operates
similarly) you select from the tools menu the ³Rules² item. You select the
appropriate sever situation, for me it is Mail (Exchange) but you might be
using a POP or IMAP server. Ask your IT folks for help on that if you need
it. Then, I click to create a new rule in which I will put two criteria.  In
that rule I have it examine each email to see if an offender¹s name is
contained in the From field of the email. Then, I add another rule, to
examine each email to see if an offender¹s name is contained in the body of
the message. If either are true (because I set it to use the rule if ³any
criteria are met², the message is routed to the Deleted Items folder. You¹ll
need to name the rule, also. Be creative here if you like because the rule
name is not meaningful to the computer.

While your email client may have different specifics and terminology for
accomplishing filtering, automatic routing rules, etc., every modern client
has that capability. Use it and your blood pressure should drop.

What I fear happening if we can¹t figure out how to manage these situations
for ourselves is the death of TIPS, literally if not figuratively.

Paul Bernhardt

On 10/21/09 10:58 AM, "Claudia Stanny"  wrote:

>  
> 
>  
>  
> 
>   
>  
> I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in
> response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive
> language.
>  
> I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and
> semi-abusive posts.
> I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.
> I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads.
> I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.
> I may yet regret this response.
>  
> However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility and
> purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.
>  
> Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has been a
> beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If I can help
> contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what I can.
>  
> At present, I¹ve adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that this
> strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences.
>  
> Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D.
> Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
> Associate Professor, Psychology
> University of West Florida
> Pensacola, FL  32514 ­ 5751
>  
> Phone:  (850) 857-6355 or  473-7435
> e-mail:   csta...@uwf.edu 
>  
> CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/ 
> Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
> 
>  
> 
>  
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
> 
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>  


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Steven Specht]

Well we did have that one other individual who was attacking the entire 
enterprise of psychology. Remember, he was "found out" because of his 
well-publicized attacks elsewhere and "moved on" pretty quickly. But 
that's all I can remember in the past 15 years.

On Oct 21, 2009, at 1:20 PM, ku...@plymouth.edu wrote:

>
> True true. I have been on for about that long too. thanks beth for 
> giving me somerthing more to ponder.
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device from U.S. Cellular
> From:  Beth Benoit 
> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:06:51 -0400
> To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences 
> (TIPS)
> Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>
>
>  John, 
>
> I appreciate your Zen wisdom, and can appreciate the 
> next-year-it-may-be-someone-else concept, but since 1993 (my first 
> year on TIPS), no one on TIPS has ever made the suggestion that 
> someone be removed.  I think that's a pretty good record of tolerance.
>
> Beth Benoit
> Granite State College
> Plymouth State University
> New Hampshire
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM, John Kulig  
> wrote:
>>
>>  Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02
>>
>>  I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am 
>> pretty sure scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. 
>> When you study scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene 
>> Girard) you realize scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more 
>> or less), they are never randomly drawn from the population ... so 
>> the group is also a participant.
>>
>>  While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should 
>> be excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups 
>> end up with someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I 
>> would rather try to buck Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts 
>> with other threads. I think it's a signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do 
>> not want to start a tradition of voting on exclusion. I think it is a 
>> bad road to start down. Also, the internet is inherently open and 
>> that will not change unless TIPs becomes a gated community which I 
>> would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY group will tick 
>> others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely tick off 
>> most everyone. It's the nature of the medium.
>>
>>  FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares 
>> at YOU in the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in 
>> particular, it is - electronically - diffused across all members of 
>> the group. Remember the old zen habit of visualizing a person's 
>> comments as an arrow that may be aimed at you, but then flies past 
>> you. One more finally: maybe there is something in human nature that 
>> always itches for a fight. I am (half) mystified why people cannot 
>> resisting responding to posts they want extinguished. If one person 
>> is voted on, there may be another next year and that's not a 
>> tradition I want to see started.
>>
>>
>>  ------
>>  John W. Kulig
>>  Professor of Psychology
>>  Plymouth State University
>>  Plymouth NH 03264
>>  --
>>
>>  - Original Message -
>>  From: "Claudia Stanny" 
>>  To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
>> 
>>  Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:58:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada 
>> Eastern
>>  Subject: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post 
>> initiated in response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts 
>> that use offensive language.
>>
>>
>>
>>  I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and 
>> semi-abusive posts.
>>
>>  I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.
>>
>>  I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these 
>> threads.
>>
>>  I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.
>>
>>  I may yet regret this response.
>>
>>
>>
>>  However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore 
>> civility and purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this 
>> risk.
>>
>>
>>
>>  Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has 
>> been a beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. 
>> If I can help contribute to sustaining th

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[William Scott]

quote"I appreciate your Zen wisdom, and can appreciate the 
next-year-it-may-be-someone-else concept, but since 1993 (my first year on 
TIPS), no one on TIPS has ever made the suggestion that someone be removed. I 
think that's a pretty good record of tolerance."unquote.

And so we should end it now? The day after the action we can change the sign in 
the parking lot to read "One day without an expulsion".

Bill Scott




---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

RE: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Lilienfeld, Scott O]

John - I suspect the answer is largely benign...we are all educators and find 
it difficult to resist the urge/temptation to set someone straight.  This is by 
itself an admirable impulse, and it stems largely from our desire to influence 
others in a positive direction.  But as my one of Ph.D. mentors Paul Meehl 
liked to say, "Sometimes one has to figure out whether someone is educable. If 
he or she isn't, it's not worth spending time on them."

 I don't know the person in question, so I don't know whether he is 
educable. But it does seem to me that he is not interested in curbing his 
behavior or trying to make a good faith effort to do so.  If I saw such a good 
faith effort, I might well feel differently.  Scott


Scott O. Lilienfeld, Ph.D.
Professor
Editor, Scientific Review of Mental Health Practice
Department of Psychology, Room 473 Psychology and Interdisciplinary Sciences 
(PAIS)
Emory University
36 Eagle Row
Atlanta, Georgia 30322
slil...@emory.edu
(404) 727-1125

Psychology Today Blog: 
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-skeptical-psychologist

50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology:
http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-140513111X.html

Scientific American Mind: Facts and Fictions in Mental Health Column:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciammind/

The Master in the Art of Living makes little distinction between his work and 
his play,
his labor and his leisure, his mind and his body, his education and his 
recreation,
his love and his intellectual passions.  He hardly knows which is which.
He simply pursues his vision of excellence in whatever he does,
leaving others to decide whether he is working or playing.
To him – he is always doing both.

- Zen Buddhist text
  (slightly modified)




-Original Message-
From: John Kulig [mailto:ku...@mail.plymouth.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 1:01 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS


Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02

I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am pretty sure 
scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. When you study 
scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene Girard) you realize 
scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more or less), they are never 
randomly drawn from the population ... so the group is also a participant.

While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should be 
excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups end up with 
someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I would rather try to buck 
Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts with other threads. I think it's a 
signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do not want to start a tradition of voting on 
exclusion. I think it is a bad road to start down. Also, the internet is 
inherently open and that will not change unless TIPs becomes a gated community 
which I would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY group will tick 
others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely tick off most 
everyone. It's the nature of the medium.

FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares at YOU in 
the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in particular, it is - 
electronically - diffused across all members of the group. Remember the old zen 
habit of visualizing a person's comments as an arrow that may be aimed at you, 
but then flies past you. One more finally: maybe there is something in human 
nature that always itches for a fight. I am (half) mystified why people cannot 
resisting responding to posts they want extinguished. If one person is voted 
on, there may be another next year and that's not a tradition I want to see 
started.


--
John W. Kulig
Professor of Psychology
Plymouth State University
Plymouth NH 03264
--

- Original Message -
From: "Claudia Stanny" 
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:58:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS









I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in 
response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive 
language.



I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and semi-abusive 
posts.

I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.

I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads.

I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.

I may yet regret this response.



However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility and 
purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.



Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has been a 
beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If I 

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[kulig]

True true. I have been on for about that long too. thanks beth for giving me 
somerthing more to ponder.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device from U.S. Cellular

-Original Message-
From: Beth Benoit 
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:06:51 
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

John,
I appreciate your Zen wisdom, and can appreciate the
next-year-it-may-be-someone-else concept, but since 1993 (my first year on
TIPS), no one on TIPS has *ever* made the suggestion that someone be
removed.  I think that's a pretty good record of tolerance.

Beth Benoit
Granite State College
Plymouth State University
New Hampshire

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM, John Kulig  wrote:

>
> Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02
>
> I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am pretty
> sure scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. When you study
> scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene Girard) you realize
> scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more or less), they are never
> randomly drawn from the population ... so the group is also a participant.
>
> While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should be
> excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups end up with
> someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I would rather try to
> buck Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts with other threads. I think
> it's a signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do not want to start a tradition of
> voting on exclusion. I think it is a bad road to start down. Also, the
> internet is inherently open and that will not change unless TIPs becomes a
> gated community which I would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY
> group will tick others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely
> tick off most everyone. It's the nature of the medium.
>
> FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares at YOU
> in the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in particular, it
> is - electronically - diffused across all members of the group. Remember the
> old zen habit of visualizing a person's comments as an arrow that may be
> aimed at you, but then flies past you. One more finally: maybe there is
> something in human nature that always itches for a fight. I am (half)
> mystified why people cannot resisting responding to posts they want
> extinguished. If one person is voted on, there may be another next year and
> that's not a tradition I want to see started.
>
>
> --
> John W. Kulig
> Professor of Psychology
> Plymouth State University
> Plymouth NH 03264
> --
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Claudia Stanny" 
> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <
> tips@acsun.frostburg.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:58:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in
> response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive
> language.
>
>
>
> I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and
> semi-abusive posts.
>
> I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.
>
> I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads.
>
> I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.
>
> I may yet regret this response.
>
>
>
> However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility and
> purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has been a
> beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If I can help
> contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what I can.
>
>
>
> At present, I’ve adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that this
> strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences.
>
>
>
> Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D.
>
> Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
>
> Associate Professor, Psychology
>
> University of West Florida
>
> Pensacola, FL 32514 – 5751
>
>
>
> Phone: (850) 857-6355 or 473-7435
>
> e-mail: csta...@uwf.edu
>
>
>
> CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/
>
> Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
>
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Beth Benoit]

John,
I appreciate your Zen wisdom, and can appreciate the
next-year-it-may-be-someone-else concept, but since 1993 (my first year on
TIPS), no one on TIPS has *ever* made the suggestion that someone be
removed.  I think that's a pretty good record of tolerance.

Beth Benoit
Granite State College
Plymouth State University
New Hampshire

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM, John Kulig  wrote:

>
> Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02
>
> I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am pretty
> sure scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. When you study
> scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene Girard) you realize
> scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more or less), they are never
> randomly drawn from the population ... so the group is also a participant.
>
> While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should be
> excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups end up with
> someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I would rather try to
> buck Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts with other threads. I think
> it's a signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do not want to start a tradition of
> voting on exclusion. I think it is a bad road to start down. Also, the
> internet is inherently open and that will not change unless TIPs becomes a
> gated community which I would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY
> group will tick others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely
> tick off most everyone. It's the nature of the medium.
>
> FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares at YOU
> in the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in particular, it
> is - electronically - diffused across all members of the group. Remember the
> old zen habit of visualizing a person's comments as an arrow that may be
> aimed at you, but then flies past you. One more finally: maybe there is
> something in human nature that always itches for a fight. I am (half)
> mystified why people cannot resisting responding to posts they want
> extinguished. If one person is voted on, there may be another next year and
> that's not a tradition I want to see started.
>
>
> --
> John W. Kulig
> Professor of Psychology
> Plymouth State University
> Plymouth NH 03264
> --
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Claudia Stanny" 
> To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <
> tips@acsun.frostburg.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:58:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in
> response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive
> language.
>
>
>
> I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and
> semi-abusive posts.
>
> I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.
>
> I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads.
>
> I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.
>
> I may yet regret this response.
>
>
>
> However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility and
> purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.
>
>
>
> Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has been a
> beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If I can help
> contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what I can.
>
>
>
> At present, I’ve adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that this
> strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences.
>
>
>
> Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D.
>
> Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment
>
> Associate Professor, Psychology
>
> University of West Florida
>
> Pensacola, FL 32514 – 5751
>
>
>
> Phone: (850) 857-6355 or 473-7435
>
> e-mail: csta...@uwf.edu
>
>
>
> CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/
>
> Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
>
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>
> ---
> To make changes to your subscription contact:
>
> Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)
>

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

Re: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[John Kulig]

Claudia .. thanks, you inspired me to throw in $.02

I'm only an amateur when it comes to social psychology, but I am pretty sure 
scapegoating always happens in groups sooner or later. When you study 
scapegoating (e.g. the French anthropologist Rene Girard) you realize 
scapegoats usually bring it on themselves (more or less), they are never 
randomly drawn from the population ... so the group is also a participant. 

While I understand the desire to "vote" on whether one person should be 
excluded, I will not do it. It feels too ugly to me. ALL groups end up with 
someone who we think deserves to be kicked out, but I would rather try to buck 
Girard-like "human nature" and fill posts with other threads. I think it's a 
signal-to-noise ratio issue. I do not want to start a tradition of voting on 
exclusion. I think it is a bad road to start down. Also, the internet is 
inherently open and that will not change unless TIPs becomes a gated community 
which I would oppose. That being said, most posters on ANY group will tick 
others off sooner or later, and some people will routinely tick off most 
everyone. It's the nature of the medium.

FINALLY, let's take advantage of social diffusion. An email stares at YOU in 
the face, but it is actually directed at no one person in particular, it is - 
electronically - diffused across all members of the group. Remember the old zen 
habit of visualizing a person's comments as an arrow that may be aimed at you, 
but then flies past you. One more finally: maybe there is something in human 
nature that always itches for a fight. I am (half) mystified why people cannot 
resisting responding to posts they want extinguished. If one person is voted 
on, there may be another next year and that's not a tradition I want to see 
started.


--
John W. Kulig
Professor of Psychology
Plymouth State University
Plymouth NH 03264
--

- Original Message -
From: "Claudia Stanny" 
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" 
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2009 10:58:28 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: [tips] Reclaiming TIPS









I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in 
response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive 
language. 



I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and semi-abusive 
posts. 

I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads. 

I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these threads. 

I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads. 

I may yet regret this response. 



However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility and 
purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk. 



Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has been a 
beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If I can help 
contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what I can. 



At present, I’ve adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that this 
strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences. 



Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D. 

Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment 

Associate Professor, Psychology 

University of West Florida 

Pensacola, FL 32514 – 5751 



Phone: (850) 857-6355 or 473-7435 

e-mail: csta...@uwf.edu 



CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/ 

Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm 


--- 
To make changes to your subscription contact: 

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu) 

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)

[tips] Reclaiming TIPS

[Claudia Stanny]

I am violating my policy of refusing to respond to any post initiated in
response to an inappropriate off-topic post or posts that use offensive
language.

 

I am saddened that TIPS has devolved into a sandbox of abusive and
semi-abusive posts.

I am offended by the posts that initiate these threads.

I am ashamed of the manner in which some members respond to these
threads.

I have been ashamed of some of my own responses to these threads.

I may yet regret this response.

 

However, if it serves to assist Bill in his efforts to restore civility
and purpose to the culture of this list, I will take this risk.

 

Thanks, Bill, for all you have done to create this community. It has
been a beneficial component of my scholarly community over the years. If
I can help contribute to sustaining that community, I will do what I
can. 

 

At present, I've adopted silence as my strategy, but I realize that this
strategy also creates some unpleasant unintended consequences.

 

Claudia J. Stanny, Ph.D.  

Director, Center for University Teaching, Learning, and Assessment

Associate Professor, Psychology

University of West Florida

Pensacola, FL  32514 - 5751

 

Phone:   (850) 857-6355 or  473-7435

e-mail:csta...@uwf.edu  

 

CUTLA Web Site: http://uwf.edu/cutla/  

Personal Web Pages: http://uwf.edu/cstanny/website/index.htm
 

 


---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly (bsouthe...@frostburg.edu)