holy maceral why i waste my time.
not him understanding, hehe he doesnt .
no its pretty clear in my post what i meant
maybe you should go ahead and re-read it.
or dont bother cuz it doent matter to me
Am I a heartless asshole?
-
[xeno]Julios
- Posts: 6216
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am
Dr. Watson:
read my last reply to wabbit.
And I can see how my line of questioning could be seen as abusive, but believe me that is not the intent.
YGP clearly stated his opinion on the matter, and seems to think it's well founded.
It may indeed be well founded, but I want to examine it. It has absolutely nothing to do with dominance or ego - I am perfectly willing to learn something new and change my mind. In fact, I haven't even made up my mind on whether YGP's values are well founded, since he hasn't even defended them.
I've often found that if you perservere in these sorts of lines of questioning long enough, you finally arrive at the source of your disagreement, and have a much better understanding of each other at that point.
It's rare to be able to do this, since many people are defensive - but it's not something that people should fear.
read my last reply to wabbit.
And I can see how my line of questioning could be seen as abusive, but believe me that is not the intent.
YGP clearly stated his opinion on the matter, and seems to think it's well founded.
It may indeed be well founded, but I want to examine it. It has absolutely nothing to do with dominance or ego - I am perfectly willing to learn something new and change my mind. In fact, I haven't even made up my mind on whether YGP's values are well founded, since he hasn't even defended them.
I've often found that if you perservere in these sorts of lines of questioning long enough, you finally arrive at the source of your disagreement, and have a much better understanding of each other at that point.
It's rare to be able to do this, since many people are defensive - but it's not something that people should fear.
Last edited by [xeno]Julios on Wed Feb 14, 2007 8:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What are good reasons in your opinion? Just something we haven't heard yet.YourGrandpa wrote:7zark7 wrote: How bout being a team player
How about it? That's not what I'd call being a team player. When you call in to take unplanned time off, you've let down the team.
That's why you don't call in sick when your tummy hurts or you have a slight cough. That's why it doesn't take an entire day to fix a flat tire or charge your car's battery. It's also why you don't shit-can the day because fluffy died.
None of those are good reasons to let down the "team".
i can see that your intent was not to be agressive; but most drunk drivers don't indend to run over a 5yr old on their way home either.[xeno]Julios wrote:Dr. Watson:
read my last reply to wabbit.
And I can see how my line of questioning could be seen as abusive, but believe me that is not the intent.
YGP clearly stated his opinion on the matter, and seems to think it's well founded.
It may indeed be well founded, but I want to examine it. It has absolutely nothing to do with dominance or ego - I am perfectly willing to learn something new and change my mind. In fact, I haven't even made up my mind on whether YGP's values are well founded, since he hasn't even defended them.
I've often found that if you perservere in these sorts of lines of questioning long enough, you finally arrive at the source of your disagreement, and have a much better understanding of each other at that point.
It's rare to be able to do this, since many people are defensive - but it's not something that people should fear.
Also, I don't see how the hitler comment has anything to do with psychiatry... Hitler's values were entirely rational given his philosophical presuppositions, and beliefs about certain features of genetic reality.
they just don't realize they're doing it until they have a bloody tinky-winky doll hanging from their fender.
but; if your goal is to probe deeper into a given situation... why not alter your approach a bit; rather than continuing to point to the chart on the wall that everyone is ignoring due to it not being effective in the current situation?
-
[xeno]Julios
- Posts: 6216
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am
point taken - i do try to be honest and respectful in my approach -Dr_Watson wrote: but; if your goal is to probe deeper into a given situation... why not alter your approach a bit; rather than continuing to point to the chart on the wall that everyone is ignoring due to it not being effective in the current situation?
if you look at the post I made to YGP on page 6, i even thanked him for replying.
I get a bit frustrated when, after engaging in "high resolution" discourse, someone just opts out without even seeing where the journey could go - and I strongly feel that it is this unwillingness to engage in dialogue that prevents a real meeting of minds to occur.
maybe i could be a bit softer...
Jules, about point #4. I think your point should be reworded:
4) A manager should recognize this possibility, and, in looking out for the well being of her employees, should respect the decision of an employee to take the day off because they are in a state of severe emotional suffering.
Reworded, because a manager may personally feel taking a day off for a dead pet is 'to be looked down upon', but, because they accept point #3, they are forced to at least respect an employee who is in this state of severe emotional suffering and has made the choice to take a day off. You cannot force the manager to change their personal opinions, but you can force them to act according to how a 'good' manager should act.
That is, if we assume that YGP wants to act as a 'good' manager should act... I hope I am not assuming too much.
In other words, the BIG question is NOT whether a manager should 'look down upon' an employee who is in a severe emotional state because of pet loss, but instead the BIG question is "what is the proper RESPONSE of a good manager in this situation." Regardless of the opinion the manager holds of people who take a day off for their dead pet, a good manager will always keep in mind and only consider the total worth of an employee, distinct from isolated incidents that are not accurate reflections of their total worth. A good manager is someone who, confronted on one side with the fact that a valued employee needs pet mourning time, and on the other side with their own opinion that such an action is womanly, puts their opinion aside and continues to judge the employee on the basis of their total worth. The employee's action may hold a small chance of negatively affecting their total worth, but if this is an isolated incident, an emergency, and does not occur every other week, then they shouldn't have anything to worry about.
And here I have just regurgitated the thoughts of 20 other people in this thread but just said it in a different way.
4) A manager should recognize this possibility, and, in looking out for the well being of her employees, should respect the decision of an employee to take the day off because they are in a state of severe emotional suffering.
Reworded, because a manager may personally feel taking a day off for a dead pet is 'to be looked down upon', but, because they accept point #3, they are forced to at least respect an employee who is in this state of severe emotional suffering and has made the choice to take a day off. You cannot force the manager to change their personal opinions, but you can force them to act according to how a 'good' manager should act.
That is, if we assume that YGP wants to act as a 'good' manager should act... I hope I am not assuming too much.
In other words, the BIG question is NOT whether a manager should 'look down upon' an employee who is in a severe emotional state because of pet loss, but instead the BIG question is "what is the proper RESPONSE of a good manager in this situation." Regardless of the opinion the manager holds of people who take a day off for their dead pet, a good manager will always keep in mind and only consider the total worth of an employee, distinct from isolated incidents that are not accurate reflections of their total worth. A good manager is someone who, confronted on one side with the fact that a valued employee needs pet mourning time, and on the other side with their own opinion that such an action is womanly, puts their opinion aside and continues to judge the employee on the basis of their total worth. The employee's action may hold a small chance of negatively affecting their total worth, but if this is an isolated incident, an emergency, and does not occur every other week, then they shouldn't have anything to worry about.
And here I have just regurgitated the thoughts of 20 other people in this thread but just said it in a different way.
you mistook plained's post for one of your own? :icon28:CaseDogg wrote:i never once said i was smart cuzzo.riddla wrote:but you're not smarter, you're a fucking mong who cannot seem to spell the simplest of wordsplained wrote:you asked me a question i see
no, its my way of saying that maybe if i was "smarter" i'd natually agree with jules
because the only reason you will not agree is cuz u doen grasp it ey
ive always been under the impression that someone who knows what theyer doing, can do it easily and clear for others to see
-
[xeno]Julios
- Posts: 6216
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am
good point mjrpes:
1) Some people form legitimate, genuine, bonds with non human companions.
2) For some of these people, the death of this companion causes intense emotional suffering.
3) This emotional suffering is so severe, that they could really use a day in their own space to come to terms with their new reality.
I still think YGP doesn't agree with 1), even though he says he does.
Or if he does, he doesn't think that the intense emotional suffering is warranted by 1).
1) Some people form legitimate, genuine, bonds with non human companions.
2) For some of these people, the death of this companion causes intense emotional suffering.
3) This emotional suffering is so severe, that they could really use a day in their own space to come to terms with their new reality.
I still think YGP doesn't agree with 1), even though he says he does.
Or if he does, he doesn't think that the intense emotional suffering is warranted by 1).
[xeno]Julios wrote:point taken - i do try to be honest and respectful in my approach -Dr_Watson wrote: but; if your goal is to probe deeper into a given situation... why not alter your approach a bit; rather than continuing to point to the chart on the wall that everyone is ignoring due to it not being effective in the current situation?
if you look at the post I made to YGP on page 6, i even thanked him for replying.
I get a bit frustrated when, after engaging in "high resolution" discourse, someone just opts out without even seeing where the journey could go - and I strongly feel that it is this unwillingness to engage in dialogue that prevents a real meeting of minds to occur.
maybe i could be a bit softer...
i think you dont try enough respectfulness.
you should try and understand the root of your frustrations towards others who do not agree with you.
yea being speechless/unwillingness to people after they make valuable points you wont acknowledge isnt condusive to discussion.
Julios: I agree with your line of reasoning, but I think you missed something:
YGP didn't say that he agreed with #3. He said he agreed with 1 and 2.
[xeno]Julios wrote:
1) Some people form legitimate, genuine, bonds with non human companions.
2) For some of these people, the death of this companion causes intense emotional suffering.
3) This emotional suffering is so severe, that they could really use a day in their own space to come to terms with their new reality.
4) A manager should recognize this possibility, and, in looking out for the well being of her employees, should not look down upon him when he asks for an emergency day of leave due to point 3).
YourGrandpa wrote:I agree with 1 and 2. 3 and 4 is where my opinion differs.
YGP didn't say that he agreed with #3. He said he agreed with 1 and 2.
-
[xeno]Julios
- Posts: 6216
- Joined: Fri Dec 10, 1999 8:00 am
-
YourGrandpa
- Posts: 10075
- Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2000 7:00 am
Wow, all that typing to get to here and all we were missing was a little reading.[xeno]Julios wrote:ah! Thanks - i totally missed that.R00k wrote:
YGP didn't say that he agreed with #3. He said he agreed with 1 and 2.
makes a lot more sense now - he wasn't being inconsistent.
BTW, I got busy at work. Sorry.
-
YourGrandpa
- Posts: 10075
- Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2000 7:00 am
It's really amazing how some people can do more than 1 thing at a time, isn't it?
Though I must be doing something right. I've only been with the company 3 years and have went from assistant superintendent to project manager/senior estimator. They've also given me a 2006 Toyota Tundra to drive, $16,000.00 in pay increases and increased my bonuses.
I think they like what I'm doing for them. :icon26:
Though I must be doing something right. I've only been with the company 3 years and have went from assistant superintendent to project manager/senior estimator. They've also given me a 2006 Toyota Tundra to drive, $16,000.00 in pay increases and increased my bonuses.
I think they like what I'm doing for them. :icon26: