DUI 2008« an older post
a newer one »Out of place

Do you know me?


Yesterday, after our second game ended early, I was looking over our stats roster and asked about a few of the names on the list. My question was to no one in particular, but it started a conversation with Lori about various people we both knew. At one point, she made a rough but incredibly honest and forthright comment about someone, something about how she liked the person but would never want that person as a teammate. I was taken aback by the sheer honesty of her assessment of the person, and asked, "What do you say about me when I'm not around? I won't be upset with anything you say. I'm curious."

She looked at me from where she was sitting. "I don't think I've ever described you," she commented, but offered to think about it. She had, at some point, described me as "organized," and the Queen of some Realm, but she couldn't remember the Realm. If she remembered, I asked, I'd love to hear it.

I find it very difficult to tell someone something bad (or rather, something I perceive as bad, whether he does or not), so my request to Lori was probably unfair. Maybe I'm projecting there: I don't see her, or any of my friends actually, as someone who enjoys giving someone bad news (or info).

There is, however, only so much information self-reflection can give. Outside input is often quite good, even if difficult to hear.

Later in the afternoon, during the warm up for another game, Lori mentioned she thought of two adjectives that described me well: honest and non-apologetic. My first reaction was, "Hey! Awesome! I like that!" The first is a given as a fabulous trait. The second, well...

I assumed the definition Lori was using was

of the nature of a formal defense or justification of something such as a theory or religious doctrine

indicating that I'm not in the habit of needing to justify myself to others. I had only recently learned of that definition, in the last year or so, from Paul's blog name, so that definition was much stronger in my mind.

From that definition, I inferred, in this split second emotional analysis of her words, confidence (from not needing to justify myself), intelligence (from knowing things that didn't need justification) and all sorts of other positive connotations.

Only after a few minutes did I realize she could have meant the more common definition of apologetic:

regretfully acknowledging or excusing an offense or failure

and the negative connotation that maybe, just maybe, I don't actually admit to my failings, even when I'm wrong.

I probably should have asked her which definition she meant. Pondering the two has been more entertaining than knowing, though.

Then I remembered that Lori had created a Johari window as "an interesting psychological experiment."

In a nearly non-committal sort of way, I could find out from my friends just how far off I am in my own perception of myself.

So, help me out here. If you know me, or think you know me because you've been here a lot and, well, this site pretty much does sum up my personality (just ask Kris, he says he hears my voice when reading, which is saying something, because it's a weird voice), let me know what you think of me. I promise not to be upset.

The good stuff is here: http://kevan.org/johari?name=noasi

The bad stuff is here: http://kevan.org/nohari?name=noasi

Take them both. I can take the criticism (or, at least, I'm learning to take it).


Well, I filled out those johari / nohari windows. I didn't even go anonymous, so you can see exactly what I think. I tend to go too easy on people and not tell them what I really think (maybe because I seek approval from others? Maybe because I tend to not weigh connotations carefully and would rather not say something completely insensitive?), so this is a good opportunity for me to give honest praise / criticism. We can talk sometime if you want clarification / want to tell me what a dick I am.

As for unapologetic, I think you fit both the good and the bad, and in my mind the word has both connotations from the same definition. I think you know who you are and don't feel you need to explain it to anyone else. You are who you are, and your opinions are what they are. It's good, because it means you seem to be very comfortable in your own skin and will tell people what you really think. It's bad because it lends a certain degree of inflexibility to your personality (and sometimes people don't want to hear what you really think - sometimes, on some subjects, we need or desire to be lied to). Mostly, though, it's a compliment. Think of it as "confidence in one's self" - 90% good, 10% bad. My opinion, anyway.

I really hope you take this all as pure entertainment value!