No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
A lot of the response here has been around the way the 'apology' focusses too much on the person who's supposed to be receiving the apology and not the person who has something to apologise for. The intended draft follows along the classic lines of "sorry if you feel that way" which implies that the person being apologized to is really the one in the wrong for having taken offence and the apologizer is just indignant at being forced to say anything rather than actually sorry for anything.
I get all that, but... Is there no way to sincerely express being sorry for not considering or anticipating another person's individual response to something as opposed to the thing itself? Without seemingly blaming them for that response? It's still about the apologiser's actions in having been inconsiderate in their deployment of language then, just not for the actual language. I ask because your proposed change "I'm going to work on improving my language" implies that the error was in using the word fuck at all and that their language is in general faulty in some way. I don't think that's the case. Having a manner of speech that includes that word is not something inherently bad, the bad behaviour necessitating an apology as I see it is for being too presumptive in assuming this particular person would have no problem with it when it's known that some people might and also for not immediately taking that person's offence seriously in the immediate aftermath when they expressed having taken offence (they didn't take it seriously, this is a follow up post).
It seems reasonable, if expressed very carefully, to commit to avoiding the word around them, since that's all that person can reasonably want, that's the problematic behaviour that is getting in the way of their working together. Committing to improving their language can really only mean committing to not saying that word generally which is defacto suggesting the word itself, not the lack of consideration is the problem and also puts OP in a position now of being on the hook in future not just for using the word around this individual but in all other circumstances as well something they shouldn't promise. If the work environment is such that nobody else speaks like this and they're the only one then sure, it should have been common sense to begin with and such a commitment is a no brainer, but if it's otherwise common practice and it's just this one person they need to accommodate then that's what should be done, accommodating this one specific person in order not to offend in future and apologising in order to let them know that you hear them and consider their feelings important.
It's pretty straightforward. If the apology is expressed around how the other person perceives things. It's not a real apology.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sorry you think that. I'm sorry you took that misunderstanding from me.
In fact, in these situations, it may be better not to apologize at all. I realize some of the language I use isn't great, I'm working on it, please understand I'm not going to be perfect at it.