MU Peeves Thread

[Testament]

@IoleRae I agree with this to an extent. But there is a level of frustration when you see this person every day at work. I think there’s a particular different dynamic going on when you have to interact with someone in as professional a way as possible without knowing what you did you upset them. Especially in an every day setting. In a mush you can just leave the mush and go play somewhere else. Your job is a bit different.

You’re right, you’re not owed an explanation, but in that same token, that same thing shouldn’t be consistently held against you, especially when you don’t know what was said or done.

Granted, this is also why we have HR departments to deal with these situations. And mushes distinctly lack that, because I don’t believe that’s a role that staff should have.

In the end, I hold to my original point. If someone can’t or won’t talk to you about something you may of said or done, and specifically using an instance when you don’t know or aren’t aware of what you said or did, it’s on the offended to deal with that. You can not hold someone accountable or expectations to change or improve if they are not even aware of what caused the difficulty.

[Pavel]

@Testament said in MU Peeves Thread:

Granted, this is also why we have HR departments to deal with these situations.

In theory, yeah. In practice… they certainly seem more like extensions of a company’s legal department to cover their asses.

[Testament]

@Pavel said in MU Peeves Thread:

@Testament said in MU Peeves Thread:

Granted, this is also why we have HR departments to deal with these situations.

In theory, yeah. In practice… they certainly seem more like extensions of a company’s legal department to cover their asses.

Also agree with that. HR is usually out there to make sure that the company’s interests and image is protected. I should’ve stated that in a ‘ideal situation’ type thing. At the same time, I’ve also had some good exchanges with some HR people that specialize in conflict resolution, so I won’t say all, I’ll say most.

[Pavel]

@Testament Apparently there’s a big drive, at least in some corners of Corporate Australia, for HR people to have psychology degrees/experience. So that they actually can help in these situations.

It’s slow going, obviously, but it’s apparently a thing.

[IoleRae]

@Testament said in MU Peeves Thread:

In the end, I hold to my original point. If someone can’t or won’t talk to you about something you may of said or done, and specifically using an instance when you don’t know or aren’t aware of what you said or did, it’s on the offended to deal with that. You can not hold someone accountable or expectations to change or improve if they are not even aware of what caused the difficulty.

I don’t disagree; what I disagree with is labeling people immature or otherwise problematic because they’ve chosen to not engage with you. It’s a self-defense mechanism, and you don’t know what’s happened in their life. I absolutely know it’s frustrating; it’s never not going to be – as humans, we WANT to fix things, and it messes with us when we can’t. But the only thing to do is let it go – and if it interferes with getting your job done, you go to your boss for help with getting your job done, and then HR if your boss can’t help.

Is it your problem? No, absolutely not, and it’s not something you need to address/deal with/engage with in any way. I don’t think it’s your responsibility and I don’t think they should hold you accountable for not knowing, that’s not reasonable.

‘Do not engage’ is not holding somebody accountable, it’s just self-defense.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

@IoleRae I agree – to an extent.

When somebody ghosts you out of the blue while simultaneously harping on to mutuals about how they still want to be friends and pretending everything is a-okay except that they refuse to share a space with you – then no, that’s not okay. That’s when you do owe an explanation for the way you’re behaving.

If somebody steps away quietly from someone else and doesn’t want to tell them why, it can indeed be that they have tried and the person they are stepping away from just can’t or won’t hear it.

But sometimes, it’s a matter of the narcissist discard for a new and better toy, too.

[IoleRae]

@L-B-Heuschkel

That’s a bunch of other problematic behavior being conflated with ‘do not engage’. ‘Do not engage’ isn’t the problem; ghosting and ending contact isn’t the problem. In the described instances, melodrama is the problem.

[Solstice]

I’m going to make a mess of this and hopefully it doesn’t come across as word-salad. I think this is a difficult topic to broach. Everyone has a differing level of what makes them comfortable to engage with when it comes to conflict, and sitting down to discuss things can often be more than someone can handle.

Is this “fair” to both parties? No, it’s not. One party can be severed from contact and have no idea why, while another party turtles out of self-preservation.

It’s not fair, but it also doesn’t have to be.

It’s not incorrect for the party who can’t handle the conflict resolution to just straight up drop it like a hot potato because they emotionally can’t (or don’t want to) handle it.

It’s also not incorrect for the party who has been ghosted to feel lost, hurt, or confused by this behavior. It’s one of those unfortunate situations where (I stress that in this situation we’re assuming good intent and a misunderstanding from all parties) it’s very easy to reach an impasse where no one is really wrong, but an uncomfortable situation has arisen that simply won’t be remedied.

The mediator in me wishes there were a way around these impasses, but there’s no practical way to do so without encroaching on the boundaries of one party. Until or unless both parties are willing to discuss it, there’s nothing further to be done.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

@IoleRae said in MU Peeves Thread:

@L-B-Heuschkel

That’s a bunch of other problematic behavior being conflated with ‘do not engage’. ‘Do not engage’ isn’t the problem; ghosting and ending contact isn’t the problem. In the described instances, melodrama is the problem.

Alright, I’ll buy that.

Either way, it sucks to suddenly have somebody you thought was a friend give you that kind of treatment. That said, there’s nothing you can do about it but move on because if they don’t want to approach you with whatever the issue is, then it’s a choice that’s been made for you.

[Testament]

@IoleRae I’ll admit, the immature commentary was mostly directed at a particular situation I dealt with. But I should clarify in that what I’m describing is when problems crop between people who’re established friends. Not necessarily rando mush people that you have, at best, a surface level connection with. Which is mostly by context of you play on the same game and your characters interact. In instances where you barely know that person, I would absolutely agree with you. You don’t know this person, they made you uncomfortable, if you wanna bounce and not give a reason, have at it. We’re probably all done this, even if we didn’t realize it.

I’m talking about relationships and friendships that are more deeply established. I’m leery to say online friendships because I think some context is lost, but eh, sure, let’s include those too. I think there has to be a certain measure of respect offered of “Hey, what you said made me feel like this. I respect and care about you, but I need you to know that that wasn’t really okay.”

Now, yes, I understand that not everyone is going to do this, and I suppose in that regard, I’m speaking for myself. For me, if I respect you as my friend, I’m going to tell you this(albeit in as nice a way as possible), because I respect you as a person.

Not everyone is going to operate or function like that, and that’s okay. There are times where I think open communication is really important to me because being clear about intent and words is just a thing for me.

[IoleRae]

Yeah, I don’t think anyone is wrong for having Feels about it, and I apologize for saying it in a way that could imply such. It’s completely natural to feel hurt and rejected and confused and who knows what else; the problem is, though, as @Solstice called it.

My view though is – giving everybody the right to walk away (so to speak) is how you protect the people who really need it.

@Testament

I think it’s more important to respect the boundaries of people we once were close with, not less. If somebody that loves me (or loved me) no longer wants to speak with me, I need to respect that. Otherwise, this is where stalking and shit comes in. My ex husband DEMANDED and DEMANDED and DEMANDED that I sit down and have a conversation with him to try and work out some of our problems. I was pressured intently by what was our former group to stop being immature about it and be an adult and “talk to him”.

“Ghosting is immature” feeds into the narrative that made people think that was OK.

“Please leave me alone.” is not cruelty, even though it can hurt very terribly to hear. Not all things that hurt are because somebody is being cruel.

[Testament]

@IoleRae I respect that outlook, and again, I agree with some points and disagree with others.

So, yes, if someone actively says and wishes to go no contact, for whatever reason, that’s their right. And the dialogue should end at that point.

At the same time, I think every instance is different and so is the context associated with it. I do believe that open communication is something that we as a culture specifically lack, to the point that it makes us insular for whatever reasons one could prescribe. A lot of interpersonal issues we sometimes deal or contend with could be stopped we just spoke more, before they snowballed out of control and turned into these long-running animosity games where grudges last years.

Does it matter if one side doesn’t want to talk? I suppose not, but it does make me look at that regret.

But, not every situation is the same, and while I’m looking at small disagreements and nothing so sinister as stalking or controlling or manipulation, because it goes without saying that those things are bad. Yes, we don’t know what everyone is dealing, and there is likely very legitimate and understandable reasons for a person to go no contact, regardless of the reasons why. As @Solstice said, it’s not always fair, and that in particular takes a bit of wrapping my head around(if only because I’m the sort of person that is obsessed with fairness for all as a concept and I struggle when there’s instances that fairness isn’t going to happen). You have to be okay with that.

I suppose, in the end, in those instances, you wash your hands of that person and move with your life. That said, I still strive to reach out to talk if I have offended people in some way or another. At least when I’m aware of it. And being told not to talk to them? Can’t do much other than respect that decision.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

If somebody tells you not to talk to them then there’s very little you can do besides, well, not talk to them. They’ve made that call and overstepping that boundary would be wrong (whether you feel it’s fair or not, they obviously do).

What gets me in particular is that discard situation, though, where the other person tells everyone else that everything is fine, they have no idea what you’re so upset about, and they can’t read your mind – when they are the one doing the ghosting and saying the hurtful things. That’s classic discard behaviour and gaslighting.

Unfortunately, it’s also the same solution. Walk away and move on.

[Testament]

@L-B-Heuschkel You know, I wanted to touch on that. Because what you describe is very similar to what happened to me. And I’d agree with what @IoleRae said on it. It’s melodrama that’s what’s wrong with that whole thing.

A friend, or at least, someone I perceived as a friend, stopped talking to me, wouldn’t tell me why, and then I had to deal with a number of her co-workers starting this ‘work drama’. This is why I brought up HR earlier. Because sometimes you have no choice but to get them involved in it. It’s crap and I totally feel for what you went through with that. I emphasize, really.

[L. B. Heuschkel]

@Testament said in MU Peeves Thread:

@L-B-Heuschkel You know, I wanted to touch on that. Because what you describe is very similar to what happened to me. And I’d agree with what @IoleRae said on it. It’s melodrama that’s what’s wrong with that whole thing.

A friend, or at least, someone I perceived as a friend, stopped talking to me, wouldn’t tell me why, and then I had to deal with a number of her co-workers starting this ‘work drama’. This is why I brought up HR earlier. Because sometimes you have no choice but to get them involved in it. It’s crap and I totally feel for what you went through with that. I emphasize, really.

Fortunately I don’t have any HR to deal with on top of what’s already a miserable situation. And I agree with you both – it sucks to lose somebody you thought of as a friend but the dramatics are what really makes it awful.

[Pavel]

To me “do not engage” is about total engagement, not just talking to.

Don’t engage with them, don’t engage about them, don’t engage around them. And it works both ways. If you’ve told me to leave you alone, then you leave me alone. Leave my name out of your mouth and out of your mind - unless you’re dealing with things officially. Don’t gossip about me, but do report my behaviour if you feel the need.

[Testament]

@Pavel said in MU Peeves Thread:

Leave my name out of your mouth and out of your mind - unless you’re dealing with things officially. Don’t gossip about me, but do report my behaviour if you feel the need.

This is the part that I think a lot instances have created my outlook on this. Leave my name out of your damn mouth.

If someone wants to hate me for whatever arbitrary(legitimate or not) reason that I may never know or understand, that’s perfectly fine. I don’t have to understand.

But do it honestly.

[IoleRae]

Something else to throw into the consideration mix, as someone who absolutely has drawn lines and gone to my own corner, is that in some cases this is the only route available (that a traumatized person can see) to actually retain the relationship long term.

Sometimes you need a break from a person so that you can calm down, reorient, and then re-engage from a place of compassion and understanding, rather than reaction. Sometimes the only decent thing that’s possible even knowing this is what’s going on is a strangled, ‘please leave me alone’.

I have had at least two of my ‘do not engage with this person’ requests respected that turned into calming down long term and being able to come back to the table and at least behave in civil fashion.

It’s a tool. It’s a tool that absolutely gets misused and can often be problematic, but unfortunately, the only way to guarantee that the people who actually NEED it actually get it is to ensure that everyone gets it, because making a traumatized person justify themselves is actively damaging.

Thus, this is one of those cases where you just have to assume positive intent, and then come down like the hammer of god on anybody who abuses it (baiting somebody who has a no contact request against you, for example).

[Solstice]

@IoleRae said in MU Peeves Thread:

Thus, this is one of those cases where you just have to assume positive intent, and then come down like the hammer of god on anybody who abuses it (baiting somebody who has a no contact request against you, for example).

[tsar]

I can’t decide if this is a peeve or not but there’s someone in r/muds who posts about wanting to be a cannibal on a game to feel part of the game and doesn’t care if it’s the game’s lore or not but can someone point him to a game where it’s allowed???

Ahhhhhhhhh
Hhhhhhhh
Aaahhhh