Think it’s quite plain as it stands, Wozza, but will happily oblige.
If you want to criticise somebody, don’t call it feedback. Bad-mouthing a guy ‘cos you don’ t like his opinion, or disagree with him, isn’t feedback. It gets no-one anywhere worthwhile, and it often causes friction, upset, and deters others from posting. By “you” I don’t mean you personally, just the general “you”, as in “y’know”.
In systems theory feedback is built into a mechanism to show performance, to highlight problems, and to suggest corrective action. It is emotionally neutral.
In human affairs feedback has the same effect, but to work properly it has to be two-way, and built on a contract of mutual trust. Otherwise it can poison relations and harm business.
A bit more long-winded perhaps, but you did ask and I wanted to be clearer.
Peter,
Many thanks. I asked this of you, as in the past I have done the same, & not been fully understood. Though what I had said, or wrote, was in French or English? others didn’t understand. After all we haven’t all had the same education. Either formal or in life.
Woops I think (?) my comment about feedback (see #409) has been taken out of context. Essentially I was being sarcastic - so my fault!
To be clear, my point, directed at @Codfanglers (not the now defunct John Wood), was to highlight the fact that he appears very adept at giving unsolicited behavioural feedback on this discussion. A quick use of the ‘search’ facility using keyword ‘bob’ will display the ‘feedback’ in question - quicker than trawling through 400+ posts !
You can choose to be an active participant or simply a voyeur. I’m personally not keen on voyeurs who simply criticise others without constructively adding anything to the discussion.
There we are - much longer than my original post where I obviously shot myself in the foot by using sarcasm - phew
PS (oh heck!) I do think feedback is a gift but you should, where possible, always ask permission before giving it.
Thanks to you Wozzer. Replies like your last are a pleasure to read and IMO and add value to everyone’s experience of SFN.
I am often gob-smacked and humbled by the depth of human experience and general nouse of people who write here, as well as the huge technical, scientific, professional talent on offer.
I would mourn the loss of anyone on the lists. We’ve lost far too many genuine diamonds over spats and misunderstandings, and I’ve come within a hair’s breadth of getting the heave-ho myself more than once.
My remark was not feedback, but a reply giving my view on what I’d read.
Whether I’m good at it, or not is irrelevant…
When I said I couldn’t be arsed to comment earlier on in the thread, it was because I thought it would be futile, given that John’s views didn’t meet with general approval.
I think the word “voyeur” is a little out of context, but everyone has their own interpretation.
I made the mistake of omitting the word “arrogance” in my earlier remark; that was also present, as well as the sarcasm, etc.
It’s disappointing when a clique forms & the remarks become more & more personal…
A forum like this should encourage new people & new opinions, otherwise it’s just the aforementioned “clique” & eventually becomes a self-congratulatory, back slapping, mutual appreciation socety.
Just to be clear, this is not feedback.
You see I don’t think this forum is cliquey compared to a lot. There are some very contrasting views,personalities etc but…there are times the majority agree and give an opinion
I got the sense that the recently departed market gardener was just killing time during his slack winter period and thought he’d have a bit of fun by stirring people up, he certainly didn’t give the impression that he was interested in discussing anything else other than the merits of the GJ’s protests.
Bob S’s remark is kind of correct in that most established forums have a core of regular posters which to some might seem like a clique but I think that if you are going to participate and try and put your opinion across you should at least consider what others have said in return which I don’t believe Mr Wood ever did so it was hardly surprising things ended as they have.
As far as I’m concerned (being a new arrival here), I don’t feel like the responses to John the Farmer were in any way unwarranted or exceedingly personal. Yes, I told him I thought he was an idiot with a steel plate in front of his head that blocked any sort of clue from penetrating - but that’s my opinion. I have many of those, the majority could be considered unpopular, or even outright mean.
He more or less threw the first stone with his lovely “de mes deux” comment, and in my personal not so humble opinion, that signals that the gloves are off and we’re done observing the niceties - if he had issues taking it as well as he dished it out, I feel that that really isn’t my problem
I think that if someone comes and puts down a polarising opinion that it’s not more than normal that it gets debated, even heatedly, because it’s… well, polarising. And John’s opinions certainly were.
I have just realised reading back that Farmer John said early in the thread he had always received a friendly wave and a welcome from the GJs he had met,and not felt intimidated, Then he said he had been joining them from day one . So they would make him welcome wouldn’t they
