Sidwell prom

[Anonymous]

PP appears to be unfamiliar with irony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sure. We all will when the insults stop. Also when the discourse is civil. And finally when I’m reassured there isn’t some politics mixed in — there was a lot of love for Amy, Brett, and dare I say, Trumpism, during the same type of discussions in 2020. So, I don’t like how it reflect upon us

You could say those are different people but the language and the arguments repeat. “Crazy”, “basement dweller”, “lazy mother”, “teacher”, “administrator”, “simple room” (attack on Quaker values). Shameful in my opinion.

For me, this isn’t about the prom either. Happy either way. Would let the students have a say. But for me it is about the discourse. You can’t say, this is a new thread, and you calling us out on the quality of discourse is what derailed it. Not what happened. But I take your point. Will leave you to it since it’s not going to help. I naively thought this might stop and become a better, more respectful conversation. There was a blissful break after one of the OPs was kicked off after making fun of a racially motivated tragedy.

So I’m guilty of not wanting to see this type of discourse because I’ve never seen it at the school and it’s not reflective of who I and many others think we are, someone younger might even say it’s triggering to see these threads, which pop up with such regularity. They never do quite like that for other schools. And they historically never used to for us. Nothing changed at the school, so maybe it’s a couple of people at the school who cannot be satisfied?

Wow. So long as we’re clear that you think it’s acceptable for you to dictate the terms and tone of the discussion and you can insult posters until you are “reassured” of something that can’t even possibly be measured or quantified on an anonymous message board. Just wow. That seems rather inconsistent with several of the SPICES and yet you talk about Quaker values and wield them like a sword. But I’m at least glad that we’re clear about this now.

[Anonymous]

I’m not very tolerant of repeated irony when it’s at others’ expense on such foundational values. The mocking of the Meeting Room whose very nature is to be simple and which has nothing to do with any possible prom location was repeated until it was called out. Most of us couldn’t event think up such things to say because they’re not anything we ever think or feel, even privately.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. We all will when the insults stop. Also when the discourse is civil. And finally when I’m reassured there isn’t some politics mixed in — there was a lot of love for Amy, Brett, and dare I say, Trumpism, during the same type of discussions in 2020. So, I don’t like how it reflect upon us

You could say those are different people but the language and the arguments repeat. “Crazy”, “basement dweller”, “lazy mother”, “teacher”, “administrator”, “simple room” (attack on Quaker values). Shameful in my opinion.

For me, this isn’t about the prom either. Happy either way. Would let the students have a say. But for me it is about the discourse. You can’t say, this is a new thread, and you calling us out on the quality of discourse is what derailed it. Not what happened. But I take your point. Will leave you to it since it’s not going to help. I naively thought this might stop and become a better, more respectful conversation. There was a blissful break after one of the OPs was kicked off after making fun of a racially motivated tragedy.

So I’m guilty of not wanting to see this type of discourse because I’ve never seen it at the school and it’s not reflective of who I and many others think we are, someone younger might even say it’s triggering to see these threads, which pop up with such regularity. They never do quite like that for other schools. And they historically never used to for us. Nothing changed at the school, so maybe it’s a couple of people at the school who cannot be satisfied?

Wow. So long as we’re clear that you think it’s acceptable for you to dictate the terms and tone of the discussion and you can insult posters until you are “reassured” of something that can’t even possibly be measured or quantified on an anonymous message board. Just wow. That seems rather inconsistent with several of the SPICES and yet you talk about Quaker values and wield them like a sword. But I’m at least glad that we’re clear about this now.

I don’t think that. But I think I can tell you how it comes across. And by the way, it’s a pretty widely shared opinion. I said I’ll happily take the advice to introspect (which I do anyway, as a thoughtful human ought to) once I had some reassurance that I’m misunderstanding what I’m reading, repeatedly and in a consistent language.

[Anonymous]

More logical fallacies. More delusional paranoia. You don’t know a whit about anyone’s politics on an anonymous message board, certainly not mine.

You are really the one making Sidwell parents look bad by injecting politics into the mix here and proclaiming that all reasonable and thoughtful Sidwell parents share the same politics and views. Just wow, again.

[Anonymous]

All reasonable and thoughtful parents who start threads on dcum in which they insult and name call other people using the same exact words from thread to thread but are actually a very large group of very different people? Is that what you meant?

Why don’t you just say, you’ve got the politics wrong for the people whose arguments are that teachers and administrators should be quiet because they pay the tuition? Or that teachers should teach no matter what? Just because they quack like a duck… they’re perfectly entitled to their politics. I agree. But if we argue on values and I think it’s about the issues, but there are other motivations, then it’s a much less productive conversation. So once that seems possible, it’s fine to say it could be the case.

Can you try to respond without name calling? Try. See how it feels. You might like it.

[Anonymous]

I'm a PP who thinks OP (and others) is overblowing this prom decision. It's normal for some kids to be upset, it's ok for them to approach admin to attempt to get a change. Not normal for parents to be up in arms.

I have not weighed in with complaints on this thread....and while I do agree the school treats parents poorly, often acts arrogant, and is awful at communication - I don't think any of that is relevant to this prom scenario. I would never expect the school to solicit parent feedback on this. When we got our emails about it, it never occurred to me that they should have.

Also - as for keeping parents at arms length, I do see why SFS doesn't love parent feedback given these posts. I'm sure it's a lot and there are crazies and "DC" power pushers and financial power pushers and more. But I think the job of any good school is to have a leader and administration that can manage that component without using the current tactic that paints every parent as overbearing and every bit of feedback as unworthy. Every school has to deal with these things and SFS isn't up to snuff. I am certain they get away with it because of high demand. They know they will fill seats and they just don't care what parents think. But this is nothing new. It's too bad, though.

[Anonymous]

That’s not been my experience to date, but I very much respect your opinion and the manner in which you’ve shared it. As the result, I’m much more open to appreciating that point of view and helping where I can. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All reasonable and thoughtful parents who start threads on dcum in which they insult and name call other people using the same exact words from thread to thread but are actually a very large group of very different people? Is that what you meant?

Why don’t you just say, you’ve got the politics wrong for the people whose arguments are that teachers and administrators should be quiet because they pay the tuition? Or that teachers should teach no matter what? Just because they quack like a duck… they’re perfectly entitled to their politics. I agree. But if we argue on values and I think it’s about the issues, but there are other motivations, then it’s a much less productive conversation. So once that seems possible, it’s fine to say it could be the case.

Can you try to respond without name calling? Try. See how it feels. You might like it.

You mean, avoid name calling like this?

the only explanation seems to be that the OPs of these threads are petty, insecure and grinding some sort of personal axe over and over again

It’s odd. I’m trying to enable a discussion about the school and how it handles particular issues, rather than make ad hominem attacks and engage in logical fallacies in an effort to wave away criticisms of the school. Whereas you want to attack other parents’ motives (and politics?) as if that somehow undermines the substance of their comments. And whatever you may think about your supposed “tiny minority” of “OPs” and their politics, you should understand that the number of reasonable parents who are critical of the school’s administration goes way beyond them. So even if you are correct about your supposed OPs, you can’t use personal attacks to just try to dismiss everyone who might be critical of the school. I mean, I guess you can try, but it’s not going to be very effective.

[Anonymous]

You sound like you’d be pretty open about your politics. So was the question above off the mark?

Suggesting possible motivation is maybe a bit colorful, but it’s not calling people names. That’s squarely in one corner.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I don’t even know what you are talking about at this point and what question you are referring to. But I don’t believe I’ve called anyone names, whereas I see words like “petty” and “insecure” being thrown around.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a basketball game to watch. Go Quakers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are people congratulating a group of mean spoiled kids with seniority’s for hoodwinking a bunch of complaining, idiotic parents? Just curious. Or maybe the kids and the parents are related. Just a thought.

Because complaining, idiotic parents deserve ample mocking, particularly if hoodwinked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I don’t even know what you are talking about at this point and what question you are referring to. But I don’t believe I’ve called anyone names, whereas I see words like “petty” and “insecure” being thrown around.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a basketball game to watch. Go Quakers!

Hahaha Called it

Appreciate your honesty

[Anonymous]

Baseline test (formerly known as MAGA sweep) works every time. Just when you think things have evolved a bit…

Bladerunner: This test is based on the fact that replicants struggle with empathy, an inherently human trait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry, I don’t even know what you are talking about at this point and what question you are referring to. But I don’t believe I’ve called anyone names, whereas I see words like “petty” and “insecure” being thrown around.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a basketball game to watch. Go Quakers!

Hahaha Called it

Appreciate your honesty

Called what? You are making things up if you think I said anything about my politics. Ask me a specific question and I may answer it.

Also, where’s your school spirit?