jfv wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:08 pm People who show up late to meetings - like near the end - and then ask questions that were addressed earlier in the meeting, causing the meeting to run late.

I hope they get a UTI.

This is an arrogant, passive aggressive move for sure. I don't know if this is also a peeve of yours, but I feel like it's related to folks who scuttle what would have otherwise been settled plans by leveling criticism (with no solutions) too late in the game. That kind of non-constructive criticism is, IMO, really toxic and people who delight in doing it should be held accountable.

twelvepoint wrote: Thu Sep 15, 2022 7:52 am This is an arrogant, passive aggressive move for sure. I don't know if this is also a peeve of yours, but I feel like it's related to folks who scuttle what would have otherwise been settled plans by leveling criticism (with no solutions) too late in the game. That kind of non-constructive criticism is, IMO, really toxic and people who delight in doing it should be held accountable.

Yes, this happens quite a bit in the field in which I work (writing safety standards and regulations for electrical products). You have a committee of 20 or so people who have been working for the better part of two years on a set of regulations and then someone at the last minute, right before the document is published, comes in and says that it's total crap.

It's very difficult to keep things professional at that point, but it's part of the job.

jfv wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:08 pm People who show up late to meetings - like near the end - and then ask questions that were addressed earlier in the meeting, causing the meeting to run late.

I hope they get a UTI.

Relatedly, I was once invited to a meeting with an anarchist org. Waited outside for the people to arrive and unlock the place a half-hour behind schedule. Then a meeting that could've been done in 45 minutes took 2 hours. I did not come back.

This was experienced people as well, not some on-the-spot thing.

Hate that shit.

kokorodoko wrote: Thu Sep 15, 2022 8:52 am Relatedly, I was once invited to a meeting with an anarchist org. Waited outside for the people to arrive and unlock the place a half-hour behind schedule. Then a meeting that could've been done in 45 minutes took 2 hours. I did not come back.

This was experienced people as well, not some on-the-spot thing.

Hate that shit.

Sounds like anarchy.

kokorodoko wrote: Thu Sep 15, 2022 8:52 am

jfv wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:08 pm People who show up late to meetings - like near the end - and then ask questions that were addressed earlier in the meeting, causing the meeting to run late.

I hope they get a UTI.

Relatedly, I was once invited to a meeting with an anarchist org. Waited outside for the people to arrive and unlock the place a half-hour behind schedule. Then a meeting that could've been done in 45 minutes took 2 hours. I did not come back.

This was experienced people as well, not some on-the-spot thing.

Hate that shit.

There are different kinds of meeting "culture" out there. I organize with an anti-police group that includes some anarchists or people from anarchist backgrounds. These days I don't find people doing on the ground organizing are caught up on who's an anarchist or a socialist, etc. There was a lot more that in decades past. Anyway, we run our meetings like clockwork. Rotating facilitators and minute-takers, minutes posted to the Slack immediately after meetings. Easier to do when meetings are virtual mind you.

Thing is, that kind of "efficient" meeting also has its barriers and class dimensions. I've been in groups where low-income, houseless, and direct victims of police violence participate, and you can't run clockwork meetings in that case, because you will bulldoze people and they'll never come back. Our group is a lot of uni-educated radicals (though many very new to activism), so we all like to keep things crisp. Life is fucking busy and time is precious. That does define our internal demographics though. We do direct support with victims and family members of police violence and murder, but that work doesn't happen on our regular meeting schedule and pace. You have to operate at different tempos depending on who's involved.

"Anarchist" also seems to be a broadly/incorrectly used term these days. While some of them might be legit crusties or hippies we at least have some common ground, but there are also 'anarchist' pockets that are actually just Randian bitcoin bros, or anti-vaxxer homeschooling advocates and whatnot.

penningtron wrote: Fri Sep 16, 2022 10:43 am "Anarchist" also seems to be a broadly/incorrectly used term these days. While some of them might be legit crusties or hippies we at least have some common ground, but there are also 'anarchist' pockets that are actually just Randian bitcoin bros, or anti-vaxxer homeschooling advocates and whatnot.

TRUTH

I lose it whenever someone asks "Is it worth reading x?" "Should I read y?". Dude just fucking read it. Then you will know if it's worth it or not!

Maybe an unfair rant since in some cases it could be stemming from anxieties, but on the other hand it's so common to see it used as an excuse to remain ignorant, like "Don't know this person - are they worth reading?" and someone else replies "Not really because [obviously bad faith superficial reason]" and they're like "ok yeah I figured lol".

In either case I want to combat the mentality.

kokorodoko wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 7:00 am I lose it whenever someone asks "Is it worth reading x?" "Should I read y?". Dude just fucking read it. Then you will know if it's worth it or not!

Maybe an unfair rant since in some cases it could be stemming from anxieties, but on the other hand it's so common to see it used as an excuse to remain ignorant, like "Don't know this person - are they worth reading?" and someone else replies "Not really because [obviously bad faith superficial reason]" and they're like "ok yeah I figured lol".

In either case I want to combat the mentality.

I am guilty of asking this question (I may have in another thread here, in fact).

I ask the question from the perspective of a horribly slow and inefficient reader; me picking up a book with the intent of completing it is a time commitment that is not insignificant.

I realize that there are others that may ask similar questions but for different reasons or intents that may be superficial or ignorant, but I don't think I do.

jfv wrote: Mon Oct 17, 2022 9:55 amI ask the question from the perspective of a horribly slow and inefficient reader; me picking up a book with the intent of completing it is a time commitment that is not insignificant.

That's fair. I will make it a point to interpret subsequent similar questions as them asking for a substantial description of the text, so as to better figure it out.