Got Tired of FP "Failures to Bargain in Good Faith" -- So, When it Started to Snow, I went Out to Play with the Birds
community » Discussions » Category » Photography & Art » Discussion » Got Tired of FP "Failures to Bargain in Good Faith" -- So, When it Started to Snow, I went Out to Play with the Birds
I know … there's no contract on NT whereby discussions are bound to an underlying "good faith" and fair give-and-take; but it troubles me nevertheless that each of us are not intrinsically committed to such.
Still a dreamer at my age, I am.
In many states, even if not explicitly stated, every contract contains a duty to negotiate in good faith. This means that the parties to the contract must have an honest intent to act without taking an unfair advantage.
Good faith is often defined in the negative, by describing situations where one party acts in bad faith. [1] There is no precise way to establish good faith when negotiating, but acting in an honest, fair manner often will result in a good faith negotiation .
I know I'm intense and hard-headed … but I'm also fair in my disagreements; by that I mean, I will be direct and specific when stating my positions, refute with specifics, and, be clear with my rationales.
Never do I "fire the first shot" in terms of ad hominem comments … and I will counter punch.
Nor will I equivocate … what you see initially in a discussion is what you get … UNLESS I SEE WHERE I HAVE BEEN, OR, MAY BE … WRONG OR ON SHAKY GROUND. Than I will acknowledge such.
False equivalents and intentional misrepresentations piss me off and make NT less than what it should be in terms of lively and quality discussion.
So … I escape through the viewfinder of my cameras.
Or, I give my Gracie a belly rub while we sit in my favorite chair …
I'm fortunate to have alternatives (rather than ALTERNATIVE FACTS).
I love the fact that it's a condom commercial! Also that is a child who obviously was not spanked enough. Not beaten you understand, but corrective spanked when he acted out. Children will test until what they find their boundaries are and you need to be prepared to show them.
Children will test until what they find their boundaries are and you need to be prepared to show them.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
In some cases, the parents say one thing-- but by their behaviour the kid knows they don't really mean it (Sort of like what's happening on this site, now that you mention it. The children here-- & let's be honest, some of them are actually acting just like children-- know that they can get away with just about anything. So guess what? They do!
Children will test until what they find their boundaries are and you need to be prepared to show them.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
In some cases, the parents say one thing-- but by their behaviour the kid knows they don't really mean it (Sort of like what's happening on this site, now that you mention it. The children here-- & let's be honest, some of them are actually acting just like children-- know that they can get away with just about anything. So guess what? They do!
(K's rant, cont'd):
P.S: parents don't have to spank kids. But what an effective parent does is use some kind of negative conditioning to extinguish the negative behaviour. (Could be spanking... or.. something else.
Perhaps withdrawal of some positive stimuli-- no desert. Being grounded. No TV or video games for a while. Etc. However, it only works if its consistent... two many "second chances" & the children begins to learn that the authority figure doesn't really mean what they say. .. capiche?
P.S. #2: Apologies to AMac for my derailling the conversation, but given the current condition of this site I felt it necessary to speak out-- we can always get back to the topic. And I may not have many more opportunities to speak out...because I'm very close to deleting my account and leaving permanently.
"And I may not have many more opportunities to speak out...because I'm very close to deleting my account and leaving permanently."
It's not necessary to spend your time mostly on the Home (Front) Page. There are other venues on NT such as groups that could be of interest and blogs. I, at least, would miss your wit if you were to leave permanently, and I am sure that Perrie would be quite disappointed. You were my first friend and mentor when I joined Newvine many years ago.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
I agree. I remember when my sons were young one of them was about 3 years old (we lived in a very rural area) made a running start for the road because he wanted to get to the pond on the other side, even though he had been told that the road and the pond were off limits by his mother, his 5 year old brother (who had already discovered it) and myself. I ran after him, caught him just before he got to the road and smacked him on the butt and yelled at him.
To an outside observer it may have seemed like I was cruel to him, especially to one of the types of parents who don't believe in spanking or yelling at their children (who end up like the ones in that commercial and then the rest of us have to put up with them too), but of course it had a purpose. I sent him to bed and he cried a bit, more because I yelled at him because I really didn't spank my kids very hard ever.
After about 20 minutes I went into his brothers and his room and I asked him if he knew why I had spanked him and yelled at him. He shook his head no (I mean he was only 3 after all) and I told him it was because I loved him (which I am sure confused him at first). I told him that I was mad because I was scared that he might get hit by a car and hurt or killed or that he would get to the pond before I could stop him and I might not be able to get him in time (I can't swim) and I didn't want anything bad to happen to him. I told him that he needed to understand that Daddy has rules not just to be mean or because I just wanted to make up rules, but that every rule I had was because I wanted him to be safe or to grow up to be someone that his mother and I could be proud of. I have no doubt that he understood because he never did it again.
It's not the disciplining your child, such a a quick smack on the butt or a yell at them, it's the follow up that counts. Even when they are quite young they understand more then we give them credit for. If you just spank them, yell at them and send them to bed and that's it, then all you are doing is confusing them. They don't get it. They have no idea of what they did wrong and just end up thinking that dad is a son of bitch and they are less likely to listen to you the next time.
No, problem, Randy; conversations evolve at times and as long as a comment is not mean-spirited, equivocating or a misrepresentation, in my threads, it stays.
I know … there's no contract on NT whereby discussions are bound to an underlying "good faith" and fair give-and-take; but it troubles me nevertheless that each of us are not intrinsically committed to such.
Still a dreamer at my age, I am.
In many states, even if not explicitly stated, every contract contains a duty to negotiate in good faith. This means that the parties to the contract must have an honest intent to act without taking an unfair advantage.
Good faith is often defined in the negative, by describing situations where one party acts in bad faith. [1] There is no precise way to establish good faith when negotiating, but acting in an honest, fair manner often will result in a good faith negotiation .
To have good faith Brother, you have to have honest intent.
Which we are sorely lacking around here.
Which pic mostly represent this around here....
This one?
Or this one?
I'm afraid we are stuck with the first one... (and have been ever since Trump was nominated, but it is a choice one must make for themselves)
Good sentiment BTW.
(and no the pics aren't mine, I stole them off google, honest intent and all)
Thanks, NWM.
I know I'm intense and hard-headed … but I'm also fair in my disagreements; by that I mean, I will be direct and specific when stating my positions, refute with specifics, and, be clear with my rationales.
Never do I "fire the first shot" in terms of ad hominem comments … and I will counter punch.
Nor will I equivocate … what you see initially in a discussion is what you get … UNLESS I SEE WHERE I HAVE BEEN, OR, MAY BE … WRONG OR ON SHAKY GROUND. Than I will acknowledge such.
False equivalents and intentional misrepresentations piss me off and make NT less than what it should be in terms of lively and quality discussion.
So … I escape through the viewfinder of my cameras.
Or, I give my Gracie a belly rub while we sit in my favorite chair …
I'm fortunate to have alternatives (rather than ALTERNATIVE FACTS).
Sweet! Almost as cute as my Molly. (she's looking at me so I have to say almost)
How could ANYONE treat a dog with a face like that unfairly or unkindly?
Not talking about you in particular Brother, just the general atmosphere.
And Gracie is as beautiful as always.....
@ Nowhere Man
Or how about THIS one?
That is some what representative Buzz.
Everyone needs to invest in asbestos underwear.....
Everyone needs to invest in asbestos underwear.....
Much easier just to spend less time here. (There are other things one can do with one's life.... )
Neither pic represents what I think of when I think of what most people here are like.
While there are a few exceptions, this video is an excellent representation of what most people here are like:
(No, I don't mean the guy in the blue shirt & black jacket).
Children will test until what they find their boundaries are and you need to be prepared to show them.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
In some cases, the parents say one thing-- but by their behaviour the kid knows they don't really mean it (Sort of like what's happening on this site, now that you mention it. The children here-- & let's be honest, some of them are actually acting just like children-- know that they can get away with just about anything. So guess what? They do!
Children will test until what they find their boundaries are and you need to be prepared to show them.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
In some cases, the parents say one thing-- but by their behaviour the kid knows they don't really mean it (Sort of like what's happening on this site, now that you mention it. The children here-- & let's be honest, some of them are actually acting just like children-- know that they can get away with just about anything. So guess what? They do!
(K's rant, cont'd):
P.S: parents don't have to spank kids. But what an effective parent does is use some kind of negative conditioning to extinguish the negative behaviour. (Could be spanking... or.. something else.
Perhaps withdrawal of some positive stimuli-- no desert. Being grounded. No TV or video games for a while. Etc. However, it only works if its consistent... two many "second chances" & the children begins to learn that the authority figure doesn't really mean what they say. .. capiche?
P.S. #2: Apologies to AMac for my derailling the conversation, but given the current condition of this site I felt it necessary to speak out-- we can always get back to the topic. And I may not have many more opportunities to speak out...because I'm very close to deleting my account and leaving permanently.
"And I may not have many more opportunities to speak out...because I'm very close to deleting my account and leaving permanently."
It's not necessary to spend your time mostly on the Home (Front) Page. There are other venues on NT such as groups that could be of interest and blogs. I, at least, would miss your wit if you were to leave permanently, and I am sure that Perrie would be quite disappointed. You were my first friend and mentor when I joined Newvine many years ago.
True. Especially at certain ages, children "test" the authority figures (in most cases that means mom & dad) to see what they can get away with. And by "setting boundaries, the parents send a message to the kid-- kid learns what he/she/it can get actually away with.
I agree. I remember when my sons were young one of them was about 3 years old (we lived in a very rural area) made a running start for the road because he wanted to get to the pond on the other side, even though he had been told that the road and the pond were off limits by his mother, his 5 year old brother (who had already discovered it) and myself. I ran after him, caught him just before he got to the road and smacked him on the butt and yelled at him.
To an outside observer it may have seemed like I was cruel to him, especially to one of the types of parents who don't believe in spanking or yelling at their children (who end up like the ones in that commercial and then the rest of us have to put up with them too), but of course it had a purpose. I sent him to bed and he cried a bit, more because I yelled at him because I really didn't spank my kids very hard ever.
After about 20 minutes I went into his brothers and his room and I asked him if he knew why I had spanked him and yelled at him. He shook his head no (I mean he was only 3 after all) and I told him it was because I loved him (which I am sure confused him at first). I told him that I was mad because I was scared that he might get hit by a car and hurt or killed or that he would get to the pond before I could stop him and I might not be able to get him in time (I can't swim) and I didn't want anything bad to happen to him. I told him that he needed to understand that Daddy has rules not just to be mean or because I just wanted to make up rules, but that every rule I had was because I wanted him to be safe or to grow up to be someone that his mother and I could be proud of. I have no doubt that he understood because he never did it again.
It's not the disciplining your child, such a a quick smack on the butt or a yell at them, it's the follow up that counts. Even when they are quite young they understand more then we give them credit for. If you just spank them, yell at them and send them to bed and that's it, then all you are doing is confusing them. They don't get it. They have no idea of what they did wrong and just end up thinking that dad is a son of bitch and they are less likely to listen to you the next time.
I also wish to express my apologies for the derail. Sorry Mac and you may delete if you wish. Randy
No, problem, Randy; conversations evolve at times and as long as a comment is not mean-spirited, equivocating or a misrepresentation, in my threads, it stays.
Added another image … Starry Night Fantasy.
Beautiful, simply beautiful Mac.
Well done.
Good night and Peace to all.
Amazing shots Mac! I can't pic a favorite, they both are so beautiful , and of course well done!