From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E2XNQ-0003tf-Cx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 16:54:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j79GpsQ4007930; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 16:51:54 GMT Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j79GprCV025636 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2005 16:51:54 GMT Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1E2XJA-0007gP-2p for gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:50:32 +0200 Received: from ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.230.97.182]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:50:32 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 09 Aug 2005 18:50:32 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-amd64] Re: Re: Re: file type not allowed in /usr/lib Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2005 09:48:46 -0700 Organization: Sometimes Message-ID: References: <42F53B6D.1080908@burnieanglican.org.au> <42F66B78.1030708@gentoo.org> <42F7B071.7060603@gentoo.org> <42F7E516.2030103@erols.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-230-97-182.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.14.2.91 (As She Crawled Across the Table) Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: ce14102d-a1d4-4b78-b982-e8182fae57c1 X-Archives-Hash: e9df163885a23ececf214f7a6d9a4ddc Matt Randolph posted <42F7E516.2030103@erols.com>, excerpted below, on Mon, 08 Aug 2005 19:04:54 -0400: > Simon Stelling wrote: > >> First, I didn't really want to offend you, although I have to admit that >> a few statements were rather harsh. I didn't feel offended, and I know >> you didn't want to say my answer was incompetent. However, if I *were* >> the questioner, I'd feel offended, since I don't need everything >> explained twice, and if I don't get it, I ask further questions. >> Generally explaining it a second time somehow implies that I didn't get >> it the first time, but perhaps that's just me. > > > Google "Active Listening." Basically, active listening means that you > repeat everything another person says but you put it in your own words. > This shows the other person that you're actually paying attention, and it > helps to reveal any miscommunication the instant it occurs. It's a > management technique and a tool used in conflict resolution/avoidance. I'm > NOT saying that's what happened here, but your words suggest to me that > you _might_ be unprepared if someone used active listening on you. Hmm... I've seen "active listening" described before, and even participated in exercises where we were supposed to /do/ it. However, that always seemed frustratingly artificial, to me, and I had difficulty moving it out of the book/classroom/exercise and into the real world, in part because the idea seemed natural on the one hand, but, I'm guessing because of the artificial emphasis on the single technique, something that really doesn't happen in the real world, entirely artificial in all the examples and exercises. Thus, it's very instructive to see someone bring it up in a "real world" (OK, Gentoo list ) situation I was involved in, in post-analysis, so I wasn't trying to focus on it at the time, only later. You are correct, it wasn't /exactly/ what was happening here, because it was a three-party exchange with a fairly large known audience in the form of the rest of the list, but are also correct in pointing out the parallels, as, looking back in post-analysis myself, I can see that I was instinctively using some of the same principles. While not direct active listening because it was my own separate response, I did repeat and acknowledge some of the same concepts, with the implicit understanding that not only was I reinforcing them as I earlier claimed, but that, should I get something wrong, I'd be called out on it. Actually, it's a bit more than that, because at the same time, there's also the check on the effectiveness of my delivery, that I wouldn't necessarily get, if I wasn't paralleling someone else. Every once in awhile, something happens to make me aware that the received message from one of my posts isn't quite what I intended. In this case, that's rather an understatement of what happened . However, in any case, while the experience isn't usually all that pleasant (another understatement ), the result is a better awareness of how my communications are received, ultimately resulting in changes to what I send. It may not be pleasant, but the end result, therefore, is, I believe/hope, better and more effective communication from my end. Anyway... what's really interesting to me about your comment, is how I was doing this and wasn't really aware of it, nor could I have been, because I had never been able to successfully translate the book/classroom knowledge of "active listening" into something approaching reality. Thus, your comment provoked a personal Ah-ha! "lightbulb goes on" type moment, for me. I was finally able to make that real-world connection, and hopefully, can now benefit from it, as the consequences of that linking sink in. I don't know if the above really makes sense to anyone else or not, but what it all means is that I got something unexpected out of your comment, that should be of help to me in the future. So... THANKS! =8^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-amd64@gentoo.org mailing list