Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

Subject: Curt, I need to clear with you Author: Ken [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 21:53:05 06/19/02 Wed Okay, I was pretty angry, although not so much any more. Initially, when I first read your post "It is funny, because I say so in a wry sarcastic way," where you pretended to be me, I shot off the scale. Pissed, irritated, totally confused. As I have said, I thought the banners were pure corn. I never intended anything more than a few yucks. I was a little irked that you felt the need to go out of your way to tell me that you didn't think the Interchangeable Heads banner was funny. Then when I put up the "We are not amused banner," you flew off the handle and totally took me by surprise. My judgment is that you weren't really pissed off about the banner(s), or at least if you were, it was some kind of misplaced hostility that drove you to attack me. I feel that you've been nursing some latent hostility toward me for some time that you kept bottled up. Then, at the least provocation, you blew up. [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Re: Curt, I need to clear with you Author: Jeff [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:40:15 06/20/02 Thu Alright Curt, Could you please repeat Ken's Feeling, the Data and his judgement?

[> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Curt [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 21:05:59 06/20/02 Thu Mirror: Feeling - I understand you felt pretty angry, although not so much any more. When you read my post "It is funny, because I say so in a wry sarcastic way," where I pretended to be you, you got very angry and irritated and you say you had feelings of confusion in regards to it. Feeling/Data - You also had intended the banners, including the one aimed at me to be just a joke. You relate that you never intended anything more than that. At that point you became irritated more that I responded to your "And if my latest banner didn't make you spray milk out your nose, you must be dead" post by saying that I didn't think them that funny. Then when you put up the "We are not amused banner," aimed at me, you believe that I flew off the handle and that perception totally took you by surprise. Judgment - You feel that I wasn't angry about the banner issue, or that if I was angry about it I was only triggered from perhaps misplaced hostility or a frustration, and that that drove me to take actions that you judge to be an attack aimed at you. Finally, you feel that I have perhaps been nursing some latent hostility or frustration toward you for some time that I keep bottled up which has just now blown up at the most innocuous jibe aimed at me. By the way, I just now noticed that it looked to me that Ken's post "subj: Humor?" seemed that it was posted as me since my picture was shown above the post (when you open the post), even though my pict was only shown because the post was in response to my post which showed my picture. That might lead to my confusion. Look at it again and see what might happen when you're in a hurry. Whoops.

[> [> [> Subject: Correction Author: Curt [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:06:58 06/20/02 Thu Correction again. Boy this board is tricky. In my last post, the post I meant to refer to was Ken's post "Humor (or the lack thereof) -- Ken, 10:19:44 06/19/02 Wed." It looked like it was from me, not the other ones. Aarrgh.

[> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Jeff-Facilitator [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:39:33 06/21/02 Fri Thanks Curt. Alright Ken, is that everything? Has Curt reflected back the feelings, the data and the judgements? Are there other judgements you need to add if Curt did you reflect all of them? Let us know Ken, then we'll move on to the next step.

[> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:32:22 06/21/02 Fri >Mirror: >Feeling - I understand you felt pretty angry, >although not so much any more. When you read my post >"It is funny, because I say so in a wry sarcastic >way," where I pretended to be you, you got very angry >and irritated and you say you had feelings of >confusion in regards to it. Yes, that's right > Feeling/Data - You also had intended the >banners, including the one aimed at me to be just a >joke. You relate that you never intended anything >more than that. At that point you became irritated >more that I responded to your "And if my latest banner >didn't make you spray milk out your nose, you must be >dead" post by saying that I didn't think them that >funny. Then when you put up the "We are not amused >banner," aimed at me, you believe that I flew off the >handle and that perception totally took you by >surprise. Yes, but I wasn't irritated that you didn't think the Interchangeable Heads banner was funny. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. At the time, I never gave it a second thought. After your "wry, sarcastic" post, though, I reread the earlier posts and felt I detected a pattern of testiness that began before the "we are not amused" banner. >Judgment - You feel that I wasn't angry about >the banner issue, or that if I was angry about it I >was only triggered from perhaps misplaced hostility or >a frustration, and that that drove me to take actions >that you judge to be an attack aimed at you. Finally, >you feel that I have perhaps been nursing some latent >hostility or frustration toward you for some time that >I keep bottled up which has just now blown up at the >most innocuous jibe aimed at me. Yes, that's it. Incidentally, it wasn't the 'impostor' aspect that irked me. I felt it was clear that it was you posting and that it was just part of your characterization of me. It's the mischaracterization of me that I object to.

[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Jeff - Facilitator [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 13:25:23 06/21/02 Fri >Yes, that's it. Incidentally, it wasn't the >'impostor' aspect that irked me. I felt it was clear >that it was you posting and that it was just part of >your characterization of me. It's the >mischaracterization of me that I object to. Allright Ken, I believe you've made a few more clarifications to Curt's reflections. I am now going to take a different step here. Ken, I invite you to take a look at the underlying feelings. What is underneath the anger. Anger can be a feeling typically used by men to mask some other hidden feeling. It may be a feeling that you Ken haven't touched upon yet. There is no hurry. I invite you to internalize and look within, explore what other feeling(s) are there. You have agreed with Curt's reflection about how this incident is something that you judge to be an example of Curt's pent up feelings and releasing it in the way he did. So, what is the feeling or feelings underneath the anger?

[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:41:05 06/22/02 Sat >You have agreed with Curt's reflection about how this >incident is something that you judge to be an example >of Curt's pent up feelings and releasing it in the way >he did. > >So, what is the feeling or feelings underneath the >anger? Well, I have already said I was confused. Curt's acid diatribe seemed to come from out of nowhere. Looking back, I can see he was deadly serious when he was saying he was not amused, although I can't get a handle on why a couple of stupid banners would engender such a deadly serious response. At the time, I didn't think he was really trying to say that he had a sense of humor but I didn't, but that's exactly what he was saying. I thought he was just tossing out some dry responses, and I responded with more goofiness (that's just because your head is smaller than everyone else's), totally unaware that I was evidently ratcheting up his anger at me. That bothers me, that my offhand remarks and silly graphics could be perceived as vicious attacks. It bothers me that instead of saying, "please stop," he would resort to attempting to convince me that I am some boorish lout with a propensity for confusing humor with personal attacks. And it bothers me that I so easily lit such a short fuse with such an enormous charge. And, as I have said, I think that there is some issue Curt has with me that caused the situation to spiral out of control. If Curt knew me better, he would say, "oh that crazy Ken. Look at at that goofy shit!" But he immediately came to the judgment that I was trying to force him off this board with an acidic "journalistic slant" when nothing could be further from the truth. So, I don't have a name for any of that, but that's what I felt. I apologize to Curt for whatever discomfort I caused, and I forgive him for his remarks, too. I don't think this little blow-up is anything in and of itself. I do think it is symptomatic of deeper problems, though. Curt has said elsewhere on this board he thinks I have issues with him, and maybe I do. I'm willing to look at that.

[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Jeff - Facilitator [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 15:08:36 06/22/02 Sat >Well, I have already said I was confused.> >That bothers me.... >It bothers me... >And it bothers me that... Ken, your above descriptions were the only other mentions of feelings. The rest of your statement was more judgements and thoughts about Curt and whys and the how comes. I'm asking you to get 'out of your head' of trying to analyze. You can do that later. I need you to focus on your heart. I am also asking you to better identify the feeling of 'bothers'. What is that? Bothers. Its very general and non descriptive. If you need help, look towards the basic five feelings - MAD,GLAD,SAD,AFRAID,SHAME. We know you were originally Mad, so pick another...bothers...is that sad?? Maybe a combination of Sad and Shame or afraid??? We need to focus on the core feelings. I am glad to hear that you are willing to look at what is the underlying issue(s). This will be the beginning of looking at what the REAL issue really is.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 20:46:34 06/22/02 Sat >>Well, I have already said I was confused.> > >>That bothers me.... >>It bothers me... >>And it bothers me that... > >Ken, your above descriptions were the only other >mentions of feelings. The rest of your statement was >more judgements and thoughts about Curt and whys and >the how comes. > >I'm asking you to get 'out of your head' of trying to >analyze. You can do that later. I need you to focus on >your heart. I am also asking you to better identify >the feeling of 'bothers'. What is that? Bothers. Its >very general and non descriptive. If you need help, >look towards the basic five feelings - >MAD,GLAD,SAD,AFRAID,SHAME. We know you were originally >Mad, so pick another...bothers...is that sad?? Maybe a >combination of Sad and Shame or afraid??? >We need to focus on the core feelings. I am glad to >hear that you are willing to look at what is the >underlying issue(s). This will be the beginning of >looking at what the REAL issue really is. I am not an infant. My feelings can not be boiled down to mad, glad, sad, afraid, shame. My feelings and thoughts were both very complex, and I said I did not have a name for it, but explained my state of mind to the best of my ability. Perhaps you feel things that have no relationship to your thoughts, or think things that are totally unrelated to your feelings, but I expect that would be extraordinarily unusual. I think that anyone who takes a moment to read what I wrote will be able to understand what I was feeling without me punching out neat little tags with a labelmaker. Adding more to what I have said would be redundant or pure embellishment. Short answer is, sorry, but that will have to do.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Jeff - Facilitator [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 23:37:16 06/22/02 Sat >I am not an infant. No one said you are Ken. I have not even suggested such a thing. My feelings can not be boiled >down to mad, glad, sad, afraid, shame. Ken, all feelings can be boiled down to the basic five. My feelings and thoughts were both very complex, and I said I did not have a name for it, but explained my state of mind to the best of my ability. Yes Ken, to the best of your ability. But if take a moment and take a step backwards and narrow it down and simply it, its easier to get to the whys. Perhaps you feel.... Ken, your taking the focus off and now focusing on me and adding more of your thoughts and opinions. ...without me punching out neat little tags with a labelmaker. WHoa, starting and ending with, in my judgement, some hostility. Careful Ken. I'm not trying to treat you like a child or an ignorant man. Sometimes it is important to be redundant. This isn't about saying it once and away with it, its about looking at it, holding it, smelling it etc. Which I forgot to ask you to do, so as a facilitator, I apologize for not taking the time to get a better feel of the intensity of your feeling of 'bothered'. Also as a facilitator I need to question and ask you these things...but its your work, you make the final decision. As a guide I'm just showing you different doors you might want to open as we walk down this hallway. (hope that helps) Maybe that would help Ken as you find it difficult to explain bothered. Give it some texture and depth. I invite you to be open to other feelings as you try to describe this bothered feeling. If you still stand with this feeling, I respect that and will ask you to see past Curt. (I see Curt kinds jumped the gun and will ask him to hold so we can focus here and be mindful of who is 'on the floor'.) Ken, who do you see past Curt? As you see, describe the feeling that comes to the surface AS YOU WRITE.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 18:28:59 06/23/02 Sun >If you still stand with this feeling I do. >I respect that >and will ask you to see past Curt. The only person I see past Curt Danhauser is Curtis Nedbal, the kid who thirty or so years ago began putting me down to boost himself up. I responded by putting him down to leapfrog ahead of him, and he came back with more and so on and so forth. This is not to say that Curt began it. In fact, it may very well have been me. The point is that neither one of us has ever stopped. I, for one, am goddamn sick and tired of it. If there is anything I want to get out of this, it is a recognition that Curt and I are frozen in a teenaged competition that has outlived its usefulness and the time has come to bury the hatchet. Before you intercede again, Jeff, remember that it is Curt and I talking, and we do not need to translate everything into Jeff-approved lingo to communicate our feelings. Curt may not agree with what I have said above, but he damn well knows what I mean.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Curt [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 19:26:06 06/23/02 Sun I wish I did know. We did begin to do that some time ago, but I believe it was more recent. We were pretty close from 1973 or so until after 1977. You began to move in a different circle that I did, and I believe that's when you began to become displeased and/or angry with me. But we didn't see much of each other and so the friction wasn't that obvious. I believe we might have hung out at summertime, but I can't remember. Then when you came to work at Mann's (circa 1980-1981) all hell broke loose. It was never the same since then. We've hurled barbs back and forth, but just because we were teenagers and didn't know any better. I don't believe we did it to boost ourselves up, but just to say clever retorts and impress our audience. In any event, yes, I agree it has gone on for too long. Let's bury the hatchet. Thanks for sharing this, Ken.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Here goes Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 19:56:24 06/23/02 Sun >I wish I did know. We did begin to do that some time >ago, but I believe it >was more recent. We were pretty close from 1973 or so >until after 1977. You might be right about that. I can't remember specifically. Old age, I guess. >You began to move in a different circle that I did, >and I believe that's when you began >to become displeased and/or angry with me. But we >didn't see much of each >other and so the friction wasn't that obvious. I >believe we might have hung out >at summertime, but I can't remember. Then when you >came to work at Mann's >(circa 1980-1981) all hell broke loose. >It was never the same since then. We've hurled barbs >back and >forth, but just because we were teenagers and didn't >know any better. I don't believe >we did it to boost ourselves up, but just to say >clever retorts and impress our >audience. Yes! We both have always had to have the last word, and we both have a talent for put-down humor (in addition to our ample talents with other brands of humor). Even though it may not have been designed to inflict injury, I believe it did. I believe it has left a lasting impression on us both. The worst part is that our paths diverged and we never came to this understanding when we were younger. Then we met again, years later, and this pocket of animosity had evidently been preserved in all its pungent acidity. We couldn't talk to each other without the other expecting another smart-aleck remark, or worse, seeing smart-aleck remarks hiding inside perfectly innocuous statements. And I think we probably have tried to beat the other guy to the punch, and gotten things rolling without any provocation whatsoever. So, here we are, forty years old and still sawing on the same log. Probably irritates the hell out of John and Jeff, too. >In any event, yes, I agree it has gone on for too >long. Let's bury the hatchet. Well, it might not be so easy. After all, you are a pluperfect asshole at times - wait a minute, strike that -- seriously, we've been doing this a long time. Even if we both shake hands, it will be hard to know for certain that any given innocuous remark doesn't really contain a cleverly concealed zinger. Anyway, I am eager to begin anew if you feel the same way. >Thanks for sharing this, Ken. You held up your end of the bargain as well. Thank you. And thanks to Jeff, too. We've bitten your head off a couple of times along the way, but I think you have us on the right path.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Sorry Ken Author: Curt [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 00:36:58 06/24/02 Mon Sounds good. I agree with it all. I'll try not to look for hidden slights in your comments, and we can be civil. Thanks Jeff for the facilitation. Ken, I have something that I'd like to tell you. It is about the time when we snuck into Mrs. Rogers' (Engligh teacher's) room at R.E. Simpson. I know that after it happened we didn't talk that much about it. Probably because we were so ashamed of ourselves and sad. I was a little kid, and was terrified of being caught, but I am really sorry that you were caught and I wasn't. It bummed me out, but my saddness was probably nothing compared to what you felt. At that early age you had to go through some real hell, and I'm sorry that it happened. We were definitely some trouble-making kids. that's for sure. I don't know what got into us. In a way, one or both of us getting caught did have a sobering effect and definitely put the kibosh on any future shennanigans we might have done. Once again, not that it will help after all these years, but I'm sorry.

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Sorry Ken Author: jeff-facilitator (in tears) [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:52:18 06/24/02 Mon Thank you Curt and Ken, for sharing of yourselves, for having the courage to look at,in my judgement, a very big shadow wrapped around the two of you. You both can easily fall into old ways, it does take time but the biggest accomplishment for you both is awareness. I believe you will be more aware of the past hurt and anger, and when you begin to walk those same steps, you have a better chance of realizing what you are doing then make the decision to change. Good work. I am proud of you both. I want you both to know that as a facilitator, I am guilty of over protection, especially when we are all new at this. All of you may begin to feel irritated regarding my stepping in at times or feeling like I'm translating....its not to appear like the referee or that either of you are inept to communicate...I just want to be careful and I love you both and don't want the process to get out of hand and all hells breaks loose. Even if I have to clear....I may get stuck or not sure or feeling uneasy....I need a man to be able to reassure safety and trust. Thanks Ken for recognizes my receiving a few jabs, it can happen, especially when the feelings are strong and a man wants to let it all out. (I feel like I'm rambling as I sit here tearful after reading your last messages.) So, to finalize and wrap up....Ken, do you feel complete? Are you clear wit Curt? Is there anything else you need to add? Most important - How do you feel now? Curt - IF Ken is complete, do you still need to clear with Ken?

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Sorry Ken Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:39:37 06/24/02 Mon >So, to finalize and wrap up....Ken, do you feel >complete? Are you clear wit Curt? Is there anything >else you need to add? Most important - How do you feel >now? I'm fine, although there is more I could add. Unfortunately, I am completely out of time and on my way to work. More later. (I think I'll start a new thread before this outline cracks the right side of my screen).

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Sorry Ken Author: Ken [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:19:17 06/25/02 Tue >about the time when we >snuck into Mrs. Rogers' (Engligh teacher's) room at >R.E. Simpson. >Once again, not that it will help after all these >years, but I'm sorry. Thanks, Curt. In all honesty, it wouldn't have helped then, either, You had nothing to apologize for then or now. That rat bastard janitor was the one who made things difficult. You know he ripped off that classroom and blamed it on us. Then again, we were breaking and entering. I look back on that as my first real moral dilemma. I didn't want to implicate you, and I stuck to my guns, and it felt good. I didn't know that rat bastard was going to pull his little rip-off stunt and that I would end up being summoned to juvenile services, but I would do the same thing all over, anyway (not ratting you out, that is). I enjoyed the counselling sessions I was sent to, and I think I benefited some, too, all at taxpayer expense! At any rate, I certainly have never blamed you for any of it. I'm glad you got it off your chest if it's bothered you at all, though.