• Replies 107 replies
  • Subscribers 3 subscribers
  • Views 8628 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Quality of CIPD online discussions

Amanda Claire Baldwin

This is my first foray into the mist of CIPD online discussions and I have to admit to being a bit disappointed with the quality of some discussion for debate. 

Not to say that the items listed are not relevant but I think it would be better to have an 'advice section' for those individuals who have simple questions about practice to be answered? 

Then the space for discussions can be recogised and valued more as one where real debate will occur.

Parents

  • Good points Peter


    I suppose my thinking is based on my (usual) mindset that I don't mind people disagreeing with me, so long as that disagreement is open to exploration of ideas towards an outcome of either agreement, compromise or a mutually acceptable/comfortable "agreement to disagree", rather than being merely a prelude to confrontation.


    I do, however, take you point that agree/disagree can be almost a clone for "like/dislike"


    Perhaps a more enlightened selection might be "understand/don't understand" since understanding should be the prelude to either agreement or disagreement but is, of itself, non-judgemental.


    In the context of "Communities" I would, I think, prefer to know whether my views are understood rather than whether they are agreed with. To be judged a grumpy old wombat because I am wrong or believed to be talking rubbish would be uncomfortable but acceptable, to be so judged because I have been misinterpreted or have expressed myself inadequately well would be far more frustrating, and to find I had badly misguided someone on that basis I would find devastating.


    P

Reply

  • Good points Peter


    I suppose my thinking is based on my (usual) mindset that I don't mind people disagreeing with me, so long as that disagreement is open to exploration of ideas towards an outcome of either agreement, compromise or a mutually acceptable/comfortable "agreement to disagree", rather than being merely a prelude to confrontation.


    I do, however, take you point that agree/disagree can be almost a clone for "like/dislike"


    Perhaps a more enlightened selection might be "understand/don't understand" since understanding should be the prelude to either agreement or disagreement but is, of itself, non-judgemental.


    In the context of "Communities" I would, I think, prefer to know whether my views are understood rather than whether they are agreed with. To be judged a grumpy old wombat because I am wrong or believed to be talking rubbish would be uncomfortable but acceptable, to be so judged because I have been misinterpreted or have expressed myself inadequately well would be far more frustrating, and to find I had badly misguided someone on that basis I would find devastating.


    P

Children
No Data