Crocker's Rules
Declaring yourself to be operating by "Crocker's Rules" means that other people are allowed to optimize their messages for information, not for being nice to you. Crocker's Rules means that you have accepted full responsibility for the operation of your own mind - if you're offended, it's your fault. Anyone is allowed to call you a moron and claim to be doing you a favor. (Which, in point of fact, they would be. One of the big problems with this culture is that everyone's afraid to tell you you're wrong, or they think they have to dance around it.) Two people using Crocker's Rules should be able to communicate all relevant information in the minimum amount of time, without paraphrasing or social formatting. Obviously, don't declare yourself to be operating by Crocker's Rules unless you have that kind of mental discipline.
Note that Crocker's Rules does not mean you can insult people; it means that other people don't have to worry about whether they are insulting you. Crocker's Rules are a discipline, not a privilege. Furthermore, taking advantage of Crocker's Rules does not imply reciprocity. How could it? Crocker's Rules are something you do for yourself, to maximize information received - not something you grit your teeth over and do as a favor.
A friend just pointed me in the direction of this definition. I was amused because I have been operating this way for a few decades now but without realizing someone else had coined it as a methodology.
Personally I like it as a system of interaction and communication. It is clear on where responsibility lies and it facilitates a more honest interaction.
The problems I come up against are two fold, one is educating others, not everyone is ready to communicate this way, they are too conditioned to sugar coat and work within the so called expected "niceties" of our society.
The other is the conditioning of oneself, recognizing that your reactions are your own responsibility, does not always negate the fact that you may react...in a negative manner.
It is wonderful to have enough consciousness to observe your own reaction and to take the steps to alter it. But personally I am far from perfect and I still react to people and situations and will outwardly show my emotions.
This can result in a feedback loop. The person communicating in the open and honest manner experiences the reaction, wants to avoid the same reaction in the future and reverts back to a more insidious method of interaction.
What is you favorite method of social interaction?
3 Comments on "Crocker's Rules":
I've liked to operate this way for a few years too (since I went through a Gestalt training program), and like glassfaery had no idea that there was a name for it. I especially hate it when people are nice to me if they're actually being dishonest. Recently a recruiter told me what she thought was horribly wrong with my résumé (which I'd had professionally rewritten!) and said apologetically that she was being rude; I replied that "rude" was not a word I would apply to this. Sometimes I think I'd like to move to Israel because many Israelis are very direct, something I would once have found very hard to take but now really appreciate.
Funny, I don't see the question that way.
If people want to be honest with me and tell me how I fail to meet their expectations, politely or not, I will either be hurt or I won't, depending on my mood at the time, and how credible their statements are to me. But it's irrelevant. It usually says more about them than me. And they may well not feel the same way the next day anyway.
I've spent the last 25 years learning how NOT to make that kind of pronouncements on others. Not because I'm trying not to hurt people (though that's the part I learned 25 years ago), but because it's usually counterproductive, almost always incorrect, and always says more about me than them.
Of course it's possible to be insultingly direct, and factually correct, and productive, and not project your own moods and inadequacies into the insults. Some of you can probably do it consistently. But I admit that takes more skill than I've got. So I avoid the issue by focusing on issues or deeds or accomplishments rather than why I think someone else has failed. I'm not trying to be kind or polite, just trying to be productive.
If someone using "Crocker's Rules" wants my honest opinion of their performance or whatever, they'll get it. But I'll be focusing on things I can prove. And "you're a moron" is usually tough to prove.
I agree that many/most people project but knowing this is part of the process.
I think you are adhearing to the theory by saying you recognize that their comments say more about them than it does about you.
Furthermore I don't see how that is unhelpful, I think getting to know others by recognising that their comments are a reflection of themselves is a wonderful way of connecting with people and being able to communicate with them on a higher more effective level.
I like the idea of focussing on the positive or the facts as opposed to opinions and impressions.
Post a Comment
<< back to .:. fuck decaf .:.