I'm astounded that you can read what I wrote and get "apathy" from it.
I think you care. I think you care a lot about people's suffering. I think you were concerned for b_b when he wrote his very sad piece. Your reply to b_b was the first one posted. You responded right away to show support in your own way. By mentioning how really crappy so many other things were, you hoped maybe he'd feel better. I guess. That might have been your plan also in the post above. I'm not surprised though that steve saw your reply as apathy towards his suffering. b_b might also have wondered why you replied the way you did. There is no guarantee that a reader will read it the way we intend it. Now I'm aware that you are not asking why steve might have thought you were showing "world-class apathy" - but if you want to make sure people hear your actual compassion, it might be a good idea to first say something like, "Steve, you must feel so invaded to have someone walk into your yard and take your stuff. It's easy to see why you feel discouraged in humanity today." -- something like that... Steve will think "yeah, kleinbl00 sees what I'm going through." -- and then he'll be interested in hearing your experience. What do you think kleinbl00? Maybe you feel that just by responding to a public forum, that's enough to show concern? What do you think mk and thenewgreen - I noticed you said "sorry" before saying anything else. Anyway, having people hear and get what you intend by what you say and write -- is difficult.
Only because you asked: Although outside of Hubski I don't know either individual, I have gotten to know steve and kleinbl00 enough to know that they are two very different people. steve is a man of deep faith, that faith extends not just towards a higher power but towards the better nature of his fellow man. Kb is admittedly someone without the capacity for faith, though if you follow that link it is not because he disrespects the faithful, rather at times he seems to realize that having the ability to have faith would be advantageous. This said, I think steve's faith in humanity is shaken when an event like this occurs. -Mine would be (and has been) too. KB on the other hand tends to reason from first principles devoid of emotional baggage. Thief has needs, thief provides for needs by steeling a bike, just happens that bike was YOURS. Pretty black and white. Whereas steve (like myself) thinks more along the lines of person violated my personal space, a place where my family lives. They took something fundamental to my life with no regard for how important it is to me. Two different ways of thinking. I'm more like steve for sure but I can appreciate where KB is coming from. That said, because I'm more like steve I would have found KB's comment a bit salty in my fresh wounds too. As for me saying "sorry", I was and am. Having your bike stolen sucks. I just bought my wife her THIRD bike since we've been married. If this one gets stolen, she can ride on my handle bars.
Really interesting to hear the background, thx. As you know I'm very interested in how people respond to troubled people.Only because you asked
I think it's interesting that "your mistake is in taking it personally" is somehow seen as an affront but "don't beat yourself up" is seen as commiserating. Theft is always a violation - if you let it be. Considering the post is titled "what a bummer" I did not judge the tenor of the conversation as one that makes "so sorry your bike got stolen" obligatory. Thing is, Steve usually throws snark my way so his response would likely have been the same. I just wish I knew why I got beat up for being acerbic when usually, it's someone else taking a swing at me.