Am I just naive or what? (Sorta political but not really)

Marguerite

Active Member
All politics aside, because frankly this issue is outside politics, it is much bigger - Mutt, you did what husband & I do. I actually do it even more than he does, but I've learned that I have to be gentle when I do this. People get offended not only when you show them up to have been misled, but also take away their belief in "at last I've got some dirt on my political nemesis!"

I have a similar 'sort-of' friend who does the same thing. Or used to, until she finally got the message (or I thoroughly offended her - not sure which actually happened). She would send me consensist, jingoistic, narrow-minded bigotry to EVERYONE and it was often either incorrect or had been 'tweaked' to seem like it was Australian-based. Sis-in-law often does this too, and WON'T check the stuff out first. Virus warnings, hoaxes, scams, political garbage that is untrue about whoever - we get a lot of it. And I firmly believe that if you;re big enough to send it out, you have to be big enough to get it back, with corrections. Anyoone getting offended - I've decided to not let their anger get to me, they have to learn that I WILL respond this way, always.

But I try to be kind about it. I also try to tailor my reply to the politics of the sender. Not that I say anything about agreeing with them, but I also don't openly disagree. I stay away from the risk of offending. However, I will point out the 'tell-tale signs' that the content of what they forwarded was a hoax and then I walk them through the process of checking things out for themselves.
For example, a regular correspondent of ours is politically somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun. We are not. But when replying to a recent email of hers, I knew how much I could joke gently and get away with, then I backed off from the topic and got more analytical about the clues that the email, purporting to be about Australia, had originally been written about the Us and someone had simply swapped "Mexican" for "Indian" and tried to make the same 'joke' work. Which, of course, it doesn't. The email text also talked about the huge unemployment figures which actually we don't have in Australia. Another tell-tale.

I talk people through my process. I say to them, "When I got tis message, I suspected it was a hoax because..." and I explain why (as in the Indian/Mexican substitution clue I just mentioned). I then tell them which block of distinctive text I copied and then pasted in to Google. That way they can duplicate what I have done - standard research paper techniques, you set things up so your work can be duplicated and therefore verified.

I then discuss the findings and give the links.

I might even finish with, "Don't feel badly if you got caught by a scam - it happens to the best of us. I am explaining it to you this way so you can recognise the signs next time."

I know I'm being very nice, but the reason for it is because it reduces the nasty responses from people who say, "I only sent you a joke, you didn't have to make a federal case out of it; where is your sense of humour?"

In other words, I'm setting them up for a sharper response if, after my gentle reply, they still get snaky.

I mentioned my reactionary sort-of friend who would send out the most appallingly bigoted diatribes. The crunch came with her when she sent out a classic bit of propaganda (which of course wasn't even true) to everyone in her mailing list. It was really offensive, even by her standards. So I replied, very gently I thought, that it was an interesting viewpoint but there were other issues as well which had not been covered. I also pointed out the source of her email (I found it via Snopes - and yes, Snopes is still highly deserving of respect for their accuracy and political impartiality) and that it was, by it's own origins, biased.

She emailed back with considerable venom that I must stop shoving my left-wing views down her throat - she had sent the email out as "FYI - that means you're not supposed to reply."

Excuse me? I hadn't expressed my views at all, merely indicated that in this world a wide range of views exists. And I'm not allowed to even say anything about what I believe? (which I hadn't anyway) While she can send out whatever she likes, known to be offensive to all but a 5% minority, and NOT be accused of pushing her views onto people who don't want to hear it?

We blocked her. I also had to stop answering the phone to her. I remember posting about this here at the time, she really upset me. It was about 3 years ago. I was really shocked by the vitriol, although now I've had time to think about it, I realise the problems went way deeper than merely email. She has other issues with me which have since surfaced, she sees herself in competition with me and I have to be really careful to not trigger her feelings of rivalry. She will sabotage to gain an advantage and I don't want to cop it any more. Life is too short to waste on such nonsense.

But it hasn't stopped me. I figure if someone wants to send me stuff, I will correct it (if it is wrong) and send it back.

So the result of this - we have friends who now send the emails to us first (and don't broadcast it) to ask us to verify it for them. OK, they're making work for me, and I do try to show people how to do it themselves (but some people are klutzes). But at least they're asking first before they broadcast it.

I actually find the research interesting, I find out some fun stuff.

But if someone gets offended - then, idiot, you shouldn't have sent me the ammunition in the first place. Don't load up the cannon and aim it t yourself, then hand me the little string, if you don't want me to fire the cannon...

Mutt - you go for it. Don't let anyone put you off what you do. And Step, if you kept copies of those emails and you worded your reply politely and gently, then I don't think anyone can accuse you of insubordination. You actually have the evidence that you were trying to stop someone wasting work resources and workers time.

Marg
 
Top