[Fi] INFP/ENFP: Do you feel "safe" to openly & freely share your thoughts about Fi here?

[nolla]

I read through several pages, but then just got a bit bored.

Voted "yes". I don't remember if I ever really had any trouble expressing myself here. I see my Fi as something so personal that I always try to make sure that people get that it is my subjective experience I am talking about. Of course we could say that in a perfect world I wouldn't need to mention this, but hey, objectivity is worshipped in this society, so I just adapt to that. And even if it wasn't like that, it would still be polite of me to take into consideration that there are people who think that subjectivity has no value at all.

 

[Amargith]

Very insightful observations. I agree.


Yeah, this is hard for me and I could easily imagine that many other Fi-doms feel the same way. The best reasons I can think of as to why this is:

- Fi is about harmony - we don't like to rock the boat. Also we have it in our heads that we can deal with the issue ourselves either by turning the situation around or controlling our reactions to it (eg. ignoring it).
- we are aware of our subjective view of the world and are cautious about inflicting consequences on others because of it. I have gone for the report button several times only to back down. I don't want anyone to be unfairly banned because I got a bit huffy in the moment. My Te tells me that these are messy situations and frankly no hate speech was used nor any laws or clear cut rules broken, so I leave it be.
- we are reluctant to engage with a depersonalised system/authority to deal with problems in basic human interaction. This may sound stupid, but I cling to the idea that people should be self-monitoring of their behaviour or at least back down when others call them out. I don't want them to be punished, I just want them to cut the crap. Sadly, punishment appears to be the only language some people understand.
- I don't know about the others here, but I've had a lifetime of dealing with crappy behaviour toward me. I've come to kinda accept that this happens no matter what I do. In other words, I've been conditioned to endure it, even if it makes me miserable.

Possible solutions:
- I need this stuff to be spelled out Te style guidelines; too much uncertainty can be paralyzing. Fi users are very subjective thinkers and want to know when something is objectively considered inappropriate behaviour according to the rules. My rules are not the same as the forum rules; I find it hard to know when someone has genuinely crossed the line and when its considered that I'm just being "whiny".
- I am extremely reluctant to report if I think something will directly result in a ban (unless it is something clear cut like hate speech). If I knew they would be simply warned and that only a certain number of warnings would result in a ban, I would feel better about it. I'm uncertain as to what sort of feedback you get when you report something and I'm uneasy about what would happen.

Its likely some of this already exist in the rules but frankly I'm too lazy to read and analyze them. But basically, if I'm uncertain about whether something has crossed the line, I'm going to err on the side of caution.

This.

I've been here over 2 years, and not *once* have I reported someone. And I have had my share of personal attacks tossed at me...or rather, what I experienced as personal attacks. So why didn't I report them? Because experience has taught me that most people don't share my views on what constitutes an attack, because I didn't want to burden the mods and because I didn't see the point. Also, coz I've seen some of these people do this all over the forum with others and it seemed...well, to be part of 'social etiquette'. I don't mean to offend anyone with this or imply the mods don't do their job, I mean to demonstrate that sometimes social ettiquette befuddles me and I've come to the realization that I'm a lousy judge of it, so therefore I feel rather insecure 'judging' someone's post as offensive..to then report that person means 'judging' that person's post. Sure, it hurt my feelings, but then I've always been 'sensitive', or so I've been told all my life, so I've learned not to trust that 'judgement' as something that's considered universal.

I don't like to create waves. I've also found that it gets you mocked when you are 'oversensitive' and I rather not draw unwanted attention like that as it leaves me feeling unsettled. I enjoy harmony, and I try at all times to give people the benefit of the doubt. I don't trust my own judgement when it comes to 'social agreed on protocol' and the rules of that protocol don't make sense to me, and I will fully admit to often not 'getting' typical banter/teasing/hazing styles that play with these rules. So I opt to shut up and ignore it. Better safe than sorry. And next time, I'll just bolster myself when talking to this person in order not to get burned again. Problem solved.

I'm thinking about something skylights said earlier (was it this thread or the other one?). Do you feel that when Fi senses others distancing themselves, it tends to either try to spark some reaction to get to the bottom of things or pursue connection more vigorously?

Something she said made me wonder if that was more universal Fi reaction than only in cases of conflict. If so, does it feel like rejection of you yourself when people take a break and put some space between you? All of this is just being considered as I go, so I have no idea if this is true or not.

Also, something I've been wondering - I realize that Fi users (at least NFPs) tend not to divulge anything deep and dark until a certain point, at which it feels like the floodgates have opened unequivically. Fe users (NFJs anyhow) tend to let it happen as it happens, but do have a series of stages that the other person works through with them. Very few people are in my inner circle, but others are at various stages along the way. Some of them will never advance further, while others most likely will at some point. I'm gathering that with Fi, you're either in or you're out. What criteria allows you to let people in? Do you have varying stages of what you share once people are in? In some ways I find you guys a little closed off initially. In other ways, I find almost a childlike vulnerability and trust that I would myself be reluctant to extend to many people. Can you explain this better from a Fi standpoint?

The criteria are...wouldn't you know it...highly personal
The thing is, those floodgates open because you touched something...a sensitive spot. And those tend to be, due to our environment and past, highly individualistic. It usually happens when something is stilll 'fresh' (recent emotional wounds), or when there's a certain feeling of recognition..of understanding between the two people involved, causing a surge of intimacy.
Why does it happen in floodgates? Coz it's hard to control. Fi tends to be rather intense, and, since it scares and spooks most people, and is often kept under wraps out of fear of being judged since it's that frail, it doesn't get to blow off a lot of steam often. So imagine the sheer joy when you finally click with someone..connect, and feel safe enough to let it out. Unfortunately, it's kinda like a starving dog. It hasn't eaten in so long, that it starts gorging stuff, only to throw up later. You have to take away the bowl in order to make sure they don't overeat. Same thing with Fi. It takes an incredible amount of willpower and awareness, to realize that your own starvation is causign you to overload the person in front of you...to realize that just coz you bonded over one thing, doesn't mean you've found your lifelong soulmate. That takes experience, wisdom, and emotional awareness, not to mention enormous willpower to control yourself in the moment.

Since there is no real satisfaction to be gained from the whole 'group' thing, or rather, it can be nice, but you can still be starving for affection while surrounded by a loving group, and since protocol isn't really inherent in the way Fi works, it kinda acts like a child...there are no rules or boundaries. It needs Te to pace itself. Before Te is learned in order to channel it properly, it's impetuous, raw, instinctual and well...annoyingly genuine and in the moment. As I said, childlike. So, in terms of being in or out, either the person in front of us has pushed the right button...or has yet to discover the button. Either way, once that wall comes crashing down, you'd better hold on to something, coz the tidal wave coming is unstoppable in most cases.

 

[sculpting]

The criteria are...wouldn't you know it...highly personal
The thing is, those floodgates open because you touched something...a sensitive spot. And those tend to be, due to our environment and past, highly individualistic. It usually happens when something is stilll 'fresh' (recent emotional wounds), or when there's a certain feeling of recognition..of understanding between the two people involved, causing a surge of intimacy.
Why does it happen in floodgates? Coz it's hard to control. Fi tends to be rather intense, and, since it scares and spooks most people, and is often kept under wraps out of fear of being judged since it's that frail, it doesn't get to blow off a lot of steam often. So imagine the sheer joy when you finally click with someone..connect, and feel safe enough to let it out. Unfortunately, it's kinda like a starving dog. It hasn't eaten in so long, that it starts gorging stuff, only to throw up later. You have to take away the bowl in order to make sure they don't overeat. Same thing with Fi. It takes an incredible amount of willpower and awareness, to realize that your own starvation is causign you to overload the person in front of you...to realize that just coz you bonded over one thing, doesn't mean you've found your lifelong soulmate. That takes experience, wisdom, and emotional awareness, not to mention enormous willpower to control yourself in the moment.

you are so good at describing this stuff.

 

[skylights]

on potentially-Fi-related issues with groups

One problem I can see happening is that Fi users continue to be reticent to report, but those that do get branded as "whiny" ... for reporting. [...] Seriously, we already know that people find some Fi users "sensitive" and "whiny" so one tries to be stoic and independent for the most part. The last thing I am interested in is being in a situation where I report bad behaviour and the mods feel like, "Oh look, another post reported by 'Fi Person X' :rolli:"

Whoa, wait a sec - where did we ever say that those Fi users who report posts get branded as whiny? I don't see them that way, and I don't think the modstaff does. Now reporting something isn't an absolute guarantee that action will be taken for every reported post, but it certainly isn't disregarded either. It really bothers me to think that there would be an assumption that anyone really believes that I would immediately discredit someone reporting something just because I'm a Fe user. I've tried especially to participate in these threads because I DO want to understand Fi perspective and take it seriously.

I've noticed a lot of times where Fi users make some generally comment about the mods. When I follow up on it, they say, "Well, you aren't like that" or "I forgot about you" and yet we're all often maligned publicly to the forum [...]

EDIT: Perhaps this is an example of skylights admonition to look for the feeling tone instead of the words themselves. In that case, I will try to take that under advisement.

yes!! though i see why you would react the way you did. anyway, the feeling is of frustration, being caught between the rock and the hard place of either (a) not reporting, and not getting you issue attended to and then having someone tell you later that you should have reported, or (b) of reporting, it being a non-issue and you being embarrassed and perhaps branded as crying wolf. the frustration that there may be others feeling the same who haven't spoken up because we each individually are trying to weigh between public devaluation and addressing an issue. sometimes it's not worth it. when i read this post, i don't feel any animosity directed towards any individual mod, just towards the tension of the situation, so i wouldn't interpret it as an attack on the mods.

-

fidelia, i agree that Fi users tend to make feeling blanket statements about groups that are perhaps unfair, but perhaps that's linked to there being a big difference in dealing with the chaos and anonymity of a group versus dealing with with an individual. "the mods" in my mind conjures a group of kind of blurred anonymous figures who are more powerful, more knowledgeable people who enforce rules. you all have relationships and interactions with one another that are on a different level than yours with me, which is a bit confusing because i don't know where i stand in relationship to the group of you. within "the mods" there are a few individuals i've interacted with but also a lot of relative strangers that i have no read on. the concept of "the mods" does not conjure much sentimentality.

"fidelia", on the other hand, conjures our history of interaction, your warmth and stability and kindness, your attention and dedication, your pretty avatar, etc. it's all very positive. i wonder if it's not got something to do with how much Fi looks at each individual. with an individual, it's easy to see all the positives there, and it's easy to feel comfortable interacting. but once you're looking at many individuals, especially ones you don't know, it's harder to feel that fuzziness and warmth. with the large groups that i associate with and think positively of, the positivity comes mostly from the group's mission, goals, history, values, etc., more than any people themselves (though i might and often do love the people very much.) i do not have much information like this on "the mods", so it's hard to feel close to "the mods". i don't really know why each person is moderating or what they stand for until i get acquainted with them on an individual level, which is when i gain respect for and positively relate to mods. i don't mean to be disrespectful, but "the mods" is just a group of people who enforce rules. it's a very nebulous thing to me.

-

and, no offense meant at all, but Fe users sometimes extrapolate a criticism of a group as being a criticism of an individual, which is very, very different. like even if PB was complaining about "the mods" directly, that doesn't necessary mean you, at all, fidelia. it could well be that it's just certain people in the group, or someone in power, or just an accidental result that happened due to synergistic interaction that really isn't the fault of anyone in particular. i've ended up accidentally offending Fe users quite a few times because of this.


the funny thing about being in any relationship is that the other persons' characteristics start blending with yours, because you're labeling yourself as a unit. this was a big PR emphasis in one of the student groups i participated in - if any one person acts poorly, it reflects on the group. so like, even if only one mod acted dismissive of a Fi user, that becomes a reflection on the group, and then a complaint against the group could be made, if that makes sense. the immediate reaction in my head if i'm part of a group that's been criticized is "who?", instead of "that's not true for everyone." i guess the way i see it is that i identify with myself first, then the group - and if certain individuals in the group aren't acting in resonance with what the group should be, then i don't really consider them as part of the group either - so it doesn't really offend me to face a criticism against a group - unless it's completely untrue, in which case, i'll fight hard to dismantle the claim.

-

and lot of Fi users have had bad relationships with groups in the past, especially as kids and teens when we weren't mature enough to understand how to deal with many people who are already linked. i mean, when i approach a group, it's like a circle of people holding hands. i'm on the outside and they're all on the inside. i haven't even interacted with any of these people yet but there are already wispy negative feelings of ostracization, of being "weird", of being singled out or left behind. it's intimidating.

I think the problem with Fi is that it's the absolute most subjective function. It's so hard to describe it's often not worth trying - sometimes you know the other person's just not going to get it. The constant need in our society to justify yourself and everything you're doing has been one of my major stumbling blocks in life, as I'm sure it has been to many other Fi users.

yes. sometimes i feel like there's this assumption that i just do things to do them. which, okay, i'm a Ne dom, sometimes that's true, but almost always i have some good reason to do the things i do, especially when they seem counterintuitive. it's odd to me that many people constantly question the unusual but rarely question the usual.

 

[Fidelia]

Thanks for your comments, skylights. Some of it confirms what my general impressions are now (which is helpful, because I have a way of gauging whether or not those perceptions are accurate or not). Some of it clarified a little bit for me.

I think probably the biggest sticking point is the business of the anonymity of a group. When I think of a group, I see a bunch of separate people. I understand that what one does, impacts how the group at large is perceived. However, if someone calls "the group" out in front of others in a negative way, I feel frustrated at being lumped together, particularly if it is not over some policy issue, if it was only one member of the group, or if the person didn't know the individual members of the group and so made assumptions.

I wish that if it were only one or a few individuals within the group, that that issue would be taken up with them, who actually have the power to change it, rather than putting a black cloud on my name for something that I didn't even know about or that we may be lacking information on. It's like the person is revealing a big scandal, when in fact, it's stating their perspective at that moment in time based on the current information they have. I think Fe/Ti prefers for people to do the sleuthing before making the statement, while Fi/Te maybe prefers to think aloud and get a variety of perspectives and experiences out there, and then adjust their perceptions as new information comes to light.

From a Fe/Ti way of thinking, if the comments are coming from someone that an person may deem as credible, and the person has less knowledge of the situation, this completely sways their assessment of the situation and the individuals within it. I've seen over and over in the threads that start after someone was banned an assertion that no one can know for sure if mods read PMs or not or that theoretically it is possible that they could. To me that feels like an accusation that not only do we do this, but we also lie routinely and publicly to the rest of the membership about it! I'm beginning to see that from a Fi/Te perspective, they feel that if there is some information that can't be made known publicly and if there is no way to check that mods don't read PMs, then no one can know for sure. They are stating fact, rather than casting aspersions and they assume that other people will also do their homework and come to whatever internal judgement they feel to be fair and accurate.

One factor I had not considered before was some Fi users' previous negative group experiences. This is something that I will need to give more thought to and understand better.

Understanding some of the differences of perspective that have been discussed here have helped me enormously in not reacting in quite the same way as I would otherwise be inclined to. I still am not completely sure that I am accurately stating what I see, but that's how it appears from my perspective. If you see some inaccuracies, please point them out!

 

[skylights]

you're welcome, and sounds pretty accurate to me it's very interesting to hear your perspective too. it was only upon coming to typoc that i really learned that not everyone has those same feelings of trepidation and anxiety regarding groups that i do. i wonder what it's like not to! that would be so lovely.

i see why you'd experience the frustration with the lumping. it's like having to take blame for something you didn't do. on the other hand, if you're receiving the benefits of being in the group, it seems only fair that you have to experience the negatives of group membership, too. it kind of sounds like you want to have all the benefits but always be given the benefit of the doubt, too. if members are expected to trust and respect (the mods) as a group - simply because they are mods - then it seems only fair that the whole group has to deal with the negatives...

i think you're very right about the Fi/Te way of thinking. i had to laugh when you mentioned the example of not knowing if mods read PMs - to me that seems like a factual given, and no harm in pointing it out. it's essentially the same as you saying you have no idea if i wear underwear regularly. which, you don't. i guess i could read bad connotations into that, but without knowing your tone of voice, i wouldn't assume that. it might be somewhat of a P/J difference too that Ps feel more comfortable pointing things out at any step of the process, because we don't see clear ends and beginnings as much as continuity. so theoretically we should be able to point out the way things are at any point of the processes, and that should be okay. it's strange and stifling to me to think i should censor myself until a certain point.

 

[sculpting]

and lot of Fi users have had bad relationships with groups in the past, especially as kids and teens when we weren't mature enough to understand how to deal with many people who are already linked. i mean, when i approach a group, it's like a circle of people holding hands. i'm on the outside and they're all on the inside. i haven't even interacted with any of these people yet but there are already wispy negative feelings of ostracization, of being "weird", of being singled out or left behind. it's intimidating.
.

This sounds so familiar to me. Do you think it may have something to do with us walking up to the group and seeing a lot of really subtle signs that we are new-thus unknown-and we interpret that as being unwanted or rejected through an Fi lens?

*****
When an Fi user openly states an Fi value they hold closely.....could it be perceived by an Fe user as someone challenging their Fe values? So the Fi user states something particular to them as an individual, but the Fe receiver may interpret it as an Fe value critique, since they listen with Fe-thus what they hear is a critique of their Fe value?

For example:

Fi: I like purple christmas lights and think they are the best thing to hang from my light fixtures.
Fe hears: Purple christmas lights are what everybody SHOULD be hanging from their light fixtures.
Fe responds: Purple christmas lights are a ridiculous thing to hang from light fixtures.
Fi user: Ummmm, I never said you had to do it??

 

[Fidelia]

I think we take it for granted that, yes, theoretically we could somewhere find a hack and figure out a way to read PMs, despite the fact that it is against policy. Yes, it's also true that there's no real way of anyone knowing if this happens or not. However, because these are givens and because we rarely state something unless it's to try to effect some kind of action or accomplish a goal, it feels like people are either purposefully being obtuse, trying to have the last word by saying, "But you never DO REALLY know, do you now?", or that they are blatantly mistrustful even when no reason has been given to be mistrustful. Keep in mind that we decide whether a person is credible before we believe ANYTHING they say that could be of real import to us. We expect that people are aware that sometime their PMs could be hacked or copied (though we aren't planning to!) and that they should be prudent in what they say. Expect the best, but prepare for the worst. Therefore, if we say something publicly, it is to draw other's attention to something they need to be aware of, or it is to try to correct the situation by enlisting other's help.

I don't actually enjoy the "benefits" of the group either. I don't want respect as a group, so much as I want individual respect. I want people to satisfy their own doubts by digging for their own information, just as Fi/Te does. The difference is at what point they do it! I tend to want them to do to their research up front at the beginning. Then they can decide how deeply they feel it is safe to get involved in an organization or whether they can trust those in charge.

Fi/Te seems to do it along the way (trust until there is reason to withdraw it - although that's not quite right either. Sometimes it seems like there is more paranoia than I see reason for, but I still think it cropped up as concerns crop up, rather than considering all possibilities of the bad that could happen and how trustworthy they are initially). To me that seems foolhardy and naive and sets people up to become disillusioned all the time. I know this can't be completely true, but I think I need more information to sort out why it makes sense to do it that way for you guys.

I do know that in a quest for safety, we are more likely to overnarrow our choices or people we trust at the beginning. Some of the NFPs I know have been helpful to me in this regard. I think Fi/Te sometimes goes the opposite way and needs help narrowing down their range of choices and people.

Just sort of thinking aloud on this.

In any case, one of the reasons that Fi users may not feel safe discussing things here is that both sides do not realize what radically different reasons they both have for discussing an issue. Therefore, they are very likely to mistake each other's motives. Since Fe is more outspoken and consensus oriented than Fi and is less affected by some factors that Fi finds more difficult to navigate, it tends to trump during a public discussion. I would argue though that this is less a matter of Fe users intentionally trying to marginalize and wound Fi users than it is an attempt to create order and also of lack of information about the way that Fi/Te processes ideas. Because Fe users tend to do a lot of preventative protecting for themselves, it may seem that they get hurt less, when really it is that they voluntarily narrow down the possibilities to be ones where they are less likely to suffer lasting injury. This is something that Fi users tend to dislike doing, and so along with the freedom of emotional range and even expression that they experience, they also suffer greater pain because they protect themselves less.

 

[sculpting]

Fi/Te seems to do it along the way (trust until there is reason to withdraw it - although that's not quite right either. Sometimes it seems like there is more paranoia than I see reason for, but I still think it cropped up as concerns crop up, rather than considering all possibilities of the bad that could happen and how trustworthy they are initially). To me that seems foolhardy and naive and sets people up to become disillusioned all the time. I know this can't be completely true, but I think I need more information to sort out why it makes sense to do it that way for you guys.

I tend to trust until I have had a reason not to trust. I assume the best intent from others by default. It doesnt mean I emo connect with them on a dime, but i will assume they are basically honest and not deceptive. This is of course total projection on my part as I am basically honest and nondeceptive, thus I presume the other person is as well.

If something comes up which casts doubt on their integrity....well maybe some of the public noise you guys are seeing...maybe that is trying to place the questionable item out on the open for commentary...to give the person the chance to openly clear their name?

"Did you read my private PMs?" "god no, why would I do that?" "Oh, uh,I'm sorry, I just heard this and I dunno, it seemed weird and I just wanted to run it by you as it didnt seem like something you would do." All very questionable guesses though...but maybe I could see this happening.

In any case, one of the reasons that Fi users may not feel safe discussing things here is that both sides do not realize what radically different reasons they both have for discussing an issue. Therefore, they are very likely to mistake each other's motives. Since Fe is more outspoken and consensus oriented than Fi and is less affected by some factors that Fi finds more difficult to navigate, it tends to trump during a public discussion. I would argue though that this is less a matter of Fe users intentionally trying to marginalize and wound Fi users than it is an attempt to create order and also of lack of information about the way that Fi/Te processes ideas. Because Fe users tend to do a lot of preventative protecting for themselves, it may seem that they get hurt less, when really it is that they voluntarily narrow down the possibilities to be ones where they are less likely to suffer lasting injury. This is something that Fi users tend to dislike doing, and so along with the freedom of emotional range and even expression that they experience, they also suffer greater pain because they protect themselves less.

The way two Fi users exchange Fi ideas is sort of by gently exposing each of their ideas, but not really stepping on the others persons, I think. I show you mine and you show me yours and maybe we both walk away from the encounter with some insights we didnt have before and then later on we can remold our own Fi values as a result??? Little tweaks, almost always done willingly after sharing the wisdom of another. Nobody says-thats wrong, but instead says "well I would have done this in that situation" or "I feel this about that topic"-then the others have a chance to silently mull over the new info and chew the Fi cud so to speak....at least this is what seems to happen among Fi users I observe here and IRL...but some of those Fi things may be pretty sacred at times.

 

[Tallulah]

The thing about the mods, though, is that they are a bunch of people who enforce rules voluntarily to keep the board running smoothly. They do it in their free time, and they don't get paid. So I'm not sure where all the benefits of being in that group are, given that so many people want to mistrust their intentions or "fight the system" or call them unfair or harsh. I always think it's better to assume that the group doesn't have ulterior motives until proven otherwise. The thing is, a lot of people want to call the mods out publicly on things that always seem to me to be purely subjective, or possibly based upon a personal difference or hurt feelings. And then it can create this feeling of unrest, and in some cases, conspiracy, and when it blows over, that feeling is still there. The big deal is made about the whole group in a public way, but the resolution is usually not. But the Fi user might not realize that that thing is still affecting the group, because it doesn't traffic in group dynamics, anyway.

 

[sculpting]

The big deal is made about the whole group in a public way, but the resolution is usually not. But the Fi user might not realize that that thing is still affecting the group, because it doesn't traffic in group dynamics, anyway.

Could also the nature of forgive and forget play a role? Once an error is addressed, clarified or resolved it totally is put in the past and I move on. Total forgiveness-as long as the problem was totally resolved, discussed and will not be repeated. Just throwing it out there..

(also-my above post re mods was just sort of illustrative as to what might be happening, not really my opinion on this topic of mods and PMs. On this forum it would be fairly ridiculous to ever suspect a mod-as each as an individual has always seemed to possess integrity, so it isnt something I would question. I was on another forum in which a mod admitted they read every single VM written...I found that a little odd but I guess it's public stuff.)

 

[PeaceBaby]

Thanks all for the thoughts in the last bunch of posts, but just to bring this back on track, there's nothing in this thread accusing the mods of any deception. Part of the issue is lack of knowledge, and part is mistrust of motivations. I would posit that in general Fi / Te makes comments that reveal the former ignorance, and Fe / Ti the latter ignorance.

The last heated thread on PM's and mod-actions was for prp's banning and although I didn't track it in detail, there was outcry regardless of Fi or Fe orientation.

The forum is a piece of software that retains the information posted in a database, and that includes PM's. The database will have all of your PM's stored in it of course. The mods have publicly stated they don't have access to the database, they only have access through the browser-based forum interface, and the permissions in the forum interface are set such that mods don't have access to the PM system. I've no reason to distrust that.

'Nuff said.

If you have something you need to keep perfectly, utterly private, it should never be shared in any online venue, regardless of how many safeguards are in place to protect your privacy.

 

[Fidelia]

Yeah, sorry about that PB! Back to the matter at hand. I think you summed it up quite nicely.

So what do you see as being the main way to handle this in a practical sense? Obviously, we want all users to feel comfortable saying what's on their mind. At the same time, we know that we don't live in an ideal world either. What ways do you see of balancing these two problems?

 

[stalemate]

I am not sure what this thread is getting at but...

I feel "safe" to discuss Fi as a concept here. I have no perspective on whether I feel safe to discuss my own personal values here.

In the real world, I don't really feel like it goes very well when I express my own personal values that are not held by the group. Even stupid trivial stuff like how I don't respect music unless the lyrics have meaning to me and the person singing the lyrics is the person who wrote them. Boy do I ruffle some feathers with that one. People think I am attacking their favorite bands. Sigh... you shouldn't have asked me if you didn't want to know how I feel... "But Michael Buble puts on a good show!" "I don't care."

 

[William K]

"But Michael Buble puts on a good show!" "I don't care."

So there's nothing he can do to Sway your mind?

On a more serious note, yeah, I don't get why people seem to assume that when I say "I don't like X", it means "I hate X" or "You shouldn't like X"

 

[sculpting]

So there's nothing he can do to Sway your mind?

On a more serious note, yeah, I don't get why people seem to assume that when I say "I don't like X", it means "I hate X" or "You shouldn't like X"

This was part of what I was trying to understand with my silly christmas light question a few posts back.

Sometimes when we simply share a value, can it be mistaken as at attempt at to convince others of a value?

In the context of the thread topic-perhaps sometimes here, when we share our values, they are misunderstood by an Fe user, as a critique of the Fe user's values...thus it precipitates an uncomfortable situation between individuals as a value debate arises and it leaves Fi users less willing to share values openly?

 

[Fidelia]

That might be the case. I usually only show the parts of me that agree with the other person unless I am kind of close to them, or I want to try to change their mind on something. Don't know if all Fe people are like that, but if they are, it would explain why they either see you as being difficult or trying to persuade if you express an opposing point of view or express a very strong like or dislike.

 

[stalemate]

I can't say if it is Fe or what it is, but a lot of people seem to think I am trying to sway them or convince them of things when I state my beliefs. They don't really like this so I keep things to myself a lot.

 

[stalemate]

When an Fi user openly states an Fi value they hold closely.....could it be perceived by an Fe user as someone challenging their Fe values? So the Fi user states something particular to them as an individual, but the Fe receiver may interpret it as an Fe value critique, since they listen with Fe-thus what they hear is a critique of their Fe value?

For example:

Fi: I like purple christmas lights and think they are the best thing to hang from my light fixtures.
Fe hears: Purple christmas lights are what everybody SHOULD be hanging from their light fixtures.
Fe responds: Purple christmas lights are a ridiculous thing to hang from light fixtures.
Fi user: Ummmm, I never said you had to do it??

I missed this example earlier. Again, I don't know if I can narrow it to Fe but I have had almost this exact exchange several times (this is a real scenario from my life)...

Me: I think shoes are harmful to our feet. I am experimenting going minimal or barefoot as much as possible to try and make my feet healthier.
Other: But I NEED support! I have plantar [fasciatis/fallen arches/shin splints/overpronation], etc!
Me: Well, I think the reason you need support is because you have support. If you went without it for a while you probably wouldn't need it anymore. (notice... to me, this is just a theory, i said earlier this is an experiment for myself, I am not trying to convince others to do anything, just stating what I think and why I am doing what I do).
Other: You are going to hurt yourself! What if you step on broken glass or used needles?! (wtf? used needles?)
Me: I have eyes and I don't walk through a lot of used needle areas. I think shoes are doing me more harm than what they are protecting me from.
Other: This is ridiculous! People can't go barefoot! We invented shoes for a reason! I think it is insane that you think we should all be walking around the streets with no shoes on!


And at some point it gets back to me that people heard I am trying to convert the whole society to minimal shoes or barefoot. /sigh

People ridicule me for my ideas, but when I just do things they don't say a word. I went shopping in Target barefoot a while back and no one said a thing. But if I tell people that I think it is better for me to go barefoot, they go ape shit on me.

 

[PeaceBaby]

^ no shirt, no shoes, no service!

pants however, are clearly optional