Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- conflict_resolution:start [2026/03/02 12:15] – ultracomfy
+++ conflict_resolution:start [2026/03/02 23:17] (current) – ultracomfy
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ~~Title:Procedures~~
-====== Start ======
+====== Conflict Resolution ======
 ===== Standard Conflict Resolution =====
-There used to be a past in which I rationalized human conflict like this //exactly//. I warned and final'd and consequence'd people directly and explicitly, which was extremely socially unadapted, got me weird looks, not taken serious and made situations worse. That last part was because people thought I was robotically threatening them with consequences, which none of this is actually about. While the goal is indeed to be robotic (insofar as to be very predictable and understandable), the goal is //not// to threaten people. Every step before actual consequences themselves are about //avoiding// consequences by inviting a person to a conversation. The big words on the cover ("Warning", Final", etc.) really just state how important it is.
+Through observation and introspection I have, over the years, developed a somewhat socially adapted [[:Systems|system]] to navigate and deescalate interpersonal conflict. The system primarily serves as a framework/guideline for me on how to express my feelings and encourage a conversation to peacefully resolve problems. This is done in five distinct "stages", the fifth of which coming into effect in case the system fails at producing sufficient results. Exact descriptions for each stage can be seen below.
-These days I do this in a way that is a lot more socially adapted. I don't explicitly tell people "This is an S3-Repeat Warn"((Which I would have genuinely done many years ago.)) but package it in a way that humans will consider socially adapted. That's annoying to me because anything //but// S3-Repeat Warn is less precise than just saying S3-Repeat Warn, but it is the overall better play. This is to say, issuing notices, warnings, repeated warnings, finals and consequences now only happens implicitly (except with the people who I have already introduced to these terms). We all do this all the time, we just don't think about it in such a structured way and nobody but me uses these particular terms, but when your mom is shitting on your dad for coming drunk from work, that's an S3-Repeat Warn right there.
+There used to be a past in which I rationalized human conflict in these five stages  //exactly//. I warned and final'd and consequence'd people directly and explicitly, which was extremely socially unadapted, got me weird looks, I did not get taken serious, ridiculed, and it made situations worse. That last part was because people thought I was robotically threatening them with consequences, which none of this is actually about. While the goal is indeed to be robotic (insofar as to be very predictable and calculated), the goal is //not// to threaten people. Every step before actual consequences themselves are about //avoiding// consequences by inviting a person to a conversation. The big words on the cover ("Warning", Final", etc.) really just state how important it is.
+These days I do this in a way that is a lot more socially adapted. I don't explicitly tell people "This is an S3-Repeat Warn"((Which I would have genuinely done many years ago.)) but package it in a way that humans will consider socially adapted. That's annoying to me because anything //but// S3-Repeat Warn is less precise than just saying S3-Repeat Warn, but it is the overall better play. This is to say, issuing notices, warnings, repeated warnings, finals and consequences now only happens implicitly (except with the people who I have already introduced to these terms). We all do this all the time, we just don't think about it in such a structured way and nobody but me uses these particular terms, but when your mom is shitting on your dad for coming drunk from work, that's the equivalent to a S3-Repeat Warn.
+I will also mention that there are some acts which are so egregiously and obviously malicious that some, most or even all steps are skipped. Standard Conflict Resolution is closely tied to [[:ULTRACOMFY Ethical Jurisdiction System|Ethical Jurisdiction]] and often goes hand in hand. In these cases, pro-active defense is necessitated by the offender and we cannot wait until the system is run through conventionally.
-I will also mention that there are some acts which are so egregiously and obviously malicious that some, most or even all steps are skipped. Standard Conflict Resolution is closely tied to [[:ULTRACOMFY Ethical Jurisdiction System|Ethical Jurisdiction]] and often goes hand in hand. In these cases, pro-active defense is necessitated be the offender without waiting until the system is run through conventionally. Due to the obviously harmful nature of such an act it does not need one or even multiple warnings for the person to know that what they are doing is objectionable. In that case, consequences may proceed instantly.
 [[Notice]]
@@ Line 17: / Line 20: @@
 [[Consequences]]
 ===== Emergencies =====