Gifted Bulletin Board

Welcome to the Gifted Issues Discussion Forum.

We invite you to share your experiences and to post information about advocacy, research and other gifted education issues on this free public discussion forum.
CLICK HERE to Log In. Click here for the Board Rules.

Links


Learn about Davidson Academy Online - for profoundly gifted students living anywhere in the U.S. & Canada.

The Davidson Institute is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting profoundly gifted students through the following programs:

  • Fellows Scholarship
  • Young Scholars
  • Davidson Academy
  • THINK Summer Institute

  • Subscribe to the Davidson Institute's eNews-Update Newsletter >

    Free Gifted Resources & Guides >

    Who's Online Now
    0 members (), 239 guests, and 35 robots.
    Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
    Newest Members
    streble, DeliciousPizza, prominentdigitiz, parentologyco, Smartlady60
    11,413 Registered Users
    March
    S M T W T F S
    1 2
    3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    10 11 12 13 14 15 16
    17 18 19 20 21 22 23
    24 25 26 27 28 29 30
    31
    Previous Thread
    Next Thread
    Print Thread
    Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    Member
    OP Offline
    Member
    Joined: May 2011
    Posts: 741
    By the way, in case anyone is wondering...I don't feel censored. I really do appreciate the feedback.

    I admit I sometimes need help with social "niceties" and will likely come off sounding snooty or idiotic more than my fair share.


    Pru #110097 08/23/11 04:58 PM
    Joined: Dec 2010
    Posts: 1,040
    A
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Dec 2010
    Posts: 1,040
    Originally Posted by Pru
    Speaking of offensive, are there any gifted child jokes floating around, like How many gifted children does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

    None. They look at the darn thing once, and the lightbulb just goes on.

    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 260
    A
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 260
    Originally Posted by MidwestMom
    Originally Posted by DeeDee
    My favorite possibly offensive gifted child joke is the Gary Larson cartoon, "Midvale School for the Gifted," with a kid pushing on a door that says "pull." Every time I push on the pull door, I think of this one.

    http://petitpoulailler.tumblr.com/post/1674073315/proud-alum

    That's my favorite Gary Larson cartoon. It fits me as a child all too well.

    LOL us too!

    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 260
    A
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    A
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 260
    i personally get really annoyed when i see "my kid beat up your honor student" type bumper stickers. it makes me crazy on so many levels!

    i propose we make a car ribbon magnet thingy for Gifted Awareness, or at least a retaliation bumper sticker!

    Joined: May 2010
    Posts: 46
    T
    Junior Member
    Offline
    Junior Member
    T
    Joined: May 2010
    Posts: 46
    You didn't ofend me. Could't read the yellow. My child was the elephant that could tap dance in 98% nationally at 13, and in VMI score at 10 yrs. was in 99% nationally. Creative genuis. Read NAGC new Position Statement on Gifted Children and Education. smile Twice Exceptional! FYI, read NASP information on Resiliency and how all people who are sucessful in life have this quality. All parents who support and encourage their children deserve praise and admiration as parent involvement is key factor in your childs success! Did enjoy your elephant comment, always made me smile really big. (Question? How do you know the elephant can't tap dance if he never tries?) smile

    Joined: Dec 2005
    Posts: 7,207
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Dec 2005
    Posts: 7,207
    Originally Posted by Ametrine
    By the way, in case anyone is wondering...I don't feel censored. I really do appreciate the feedback.
    Love your new sig line! Glad to hear you aren't feeling censored. To me there is always more to learn about communication.

    Smiles,
    Grinity


    Coaching available, at SchoolSuccessSolutions.com
    Joined: Jun 2010
    Posts: 1,457
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jun 2010
    Posts: 1,457
    I have to respectfully disagree. I don't think the OP learned anything about communication; she knew the ideas that her signature line was communicating, and desired to communicate them. She has simply bowed to pressure from a vocal minority of users. Regardless of what she says to be polite, she has been censored, and apparently not by a group that represents how most people here use and view this board.

    There's an important free speech aspect of discussion boards like this one. Not in the constitutional sense, but in the sense that people need to feel free to speak their minds within reason, or the basic purpose of the forum is thwarted.

    The standard simply can't be whether one or a few people are worried that a statement made by another user might offend a third party who hasn't happened along yet. There has to be a limitation of reasonableness.

    In addition, I doubt that more than one person in this case originally viewed the OP's signature line as potentially, theoretically offensive. A few people agreed after being directly, publicly asked that the signature might theoretically offend-- but in the context of the forum guidelines thread, I read those people's comments more as votes for a softer, more "considerate" forum.

    A goal here is to avoid (needless) offense (by a reasonable person), but the main goal is to discuss. Otherwise this board is worthless.


    Striving to increase my rate of flow, and fight forum gloopiness. sick
    Joined: Apr 2010
    Posts: 2,498
    D
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    D
    Joined: Apr 2010
    Posts: 2,498
    Lucounu, in what sense is this situation different from your earlier remarks to the person who was putting her links everywhere?

    Genuinely asking, not sarcastically,
    DeeDee

    Joined: Jun 2010
    Posts: 1,457
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    Joined: Jun 2010
    Posts: 1,457
    DeeDee, I could probably sit here for quite some time pointing out differences, but I have to leave for work soon. I'm guessing that you are asking about the speech itself, not so much the context. Some differences that jump out at me:

    The other person was engaged in self-promotion in the body of her posts, while the OP was communicating a concept in a pithy way in her signature line. Using the board for self-promotion was seen by me and some others as misuse of the board itself, while communicating an idea, where the idea itself is not offensive, cannot be. I attempted to censor use of the board for self-promotion, which directly offended me and some others; this thread discusses censorship of an idea that didn't actually offend anyone, and which a majority agree shouldn't.

    I would like to add that on this board we have a spectrum of ideas about what should be allowed to be discussed here. At one end I would probably place Grinity (as an example, not suggesting that she is alone). I believe that she has a goal of avoiding offense to anyone, and sometimes even avoiding disagreements in discussions, in order to make this as welcoming a place as possible. At the other end are people who err on the side of absolute freedom in speech (I might be seen as an example of this, when I would see myself as someone who is not at the extreme in the context of a discussion board, while still leaning towards free speech, but is perhaps prone to an occasional faux pas).

    I'm a person who believes in fairness and rules, but unfortunately, with speech it's hard to draw hard-and-fast rules about what is offensive, so ruling on borderline cases takes judgment. The thing that bothers me about this thread is that, in my opinion, what's happened is that the OP has bowed to pressure to change from one side of the spectrum, even though I really think her statement was quite innocuous.

    This sets a bad precedent, in my opinion. This thread is regrettable for multiple reasons: not just that one user morality-policed another, but also the fact that many here then engaged in a thought exercise to search for theoretically offended future people. The whole focus is wrong.

    I think that the upcoming rule/guidelines changes will be a great addition to the forum. I also think that everyone's concerns have a place: we need to avoid offense and make this a welcoming place, but we also need to have a reasonable amount of freedom. We need a happy medium so that everyone can use the forum peacefully and productively. In my opinion, this thread isn't close to that happy medium, even though the OP willingly changed her signature after some public pressure. If the climate were a bit different, she would have felt free to leave her signature in place, after double-checking that it wasn't unreasonable.

    The rule simply can't be that the soft end of the spectrum (whom I will lovingly call the Softies) can veto the speech of the others (whom I will appeasingly call the Nasties) at will. That means that the Softies can make everyone else into Softies, taking us far away from the happy medium. The Nasties might occasionally say things that make the Softies worry, but the Nasties often say many useful and interesting things in the balance.

    I can't speak for Mark or Julie, but I don't think most moderators of discussion boards would have asked the OP to change her signature line. Maybe at mothering.com, but probably not even there.


    Striving to increase my rate of flow, and fight forum gloopiness. sick
    Joined: Sep 2008
    Posts: 1,898
    C
    Member
    Offline
    Member
    C
    Joined: Sep 2008
    Posts: 1,898
    Iucounu, I disagree completely. If the OP doesn't feel censored, you don't get to say that she has been! That's patronising of you at the least. She had the option, after all, of telling whoever PMed her that she disagreed, and leaving it at that. As you say, it's unlikely the moderators would have taken action, and if they had, we'd have had a different position. She chose instead, as was her right, to ask what people thought. She chose, on hearing a variety of points of view, to change her signature; there too, she could have respectfully disagreed and kept it as it was. You disagree with her choice, but that doesn't make her coerced.

    You lay great stress on the idea that we have no evidence that anyone was in fact offended. That's true, but neither do we have evidence that nobody was. We don't know. [Incidentally, you hypothesise that it hadn't occurred to anyone that the signature might be a problem until this thread. That's not true: it had occurred to me on multiple occasions, although I hadn't felt so strongly as to say anything about it until I was directly asked.]

    The trouble with a signature, in general, is that it lacks context, and is too short to provide its own context. There's clearly an art in choosing signatures that add value to one's posts.

    I strongly want this forum to remain a place where people can say what they think, thoughtfully and politely, even if many others will vehemently disagree. I think discussion about whether what someone says is really what they mean goes along with that, rather than contradicting it. Discussions in which people may change their minds tend to be the interesting ones.

    Last edited by ColinsMum; 08/24/11 06:36 AM.

    Email: my username, followed by 2, at google's mail
    Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10

    Moderated by  M-Moderator 

    Link Copied to Clipboard
    Recent Posts
    Testing with accommodations
    by aeh - 03/27/24 01:58 PM
    Quotations that resonate with gifted people
    by indigo - 03/27/24 12:38 PM
    New, and you'd think I'd have a clue...
    by astronomama - 03/24/24 06:01 AM
    For those interested in astronomy, eclipses...
    by indigo - 03/23/24 06:11 PM
    Son 2e, wide discrepancy between CogAT-Terranova
    by astronomama - 03/23/24 07:21 AM
    Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5