Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Forum rules, usability, changing titles, moving threads, etc.

This thread is for feedback and requests around forum usage.


  • Changing titles
  • Editing posts
  • Moving threads to other forums
  • Feedback on following forum rules

For personal feedback, use this other thread.
For forum rules and forum usability, use this thread.

Hey John (@amerok)

I reply here so we can leave that thread for personal feedback only, I think that thread can be a treasure trove to increase emotional intelligence and interpersonal effectiveness:

John: I was wondering about changing the topic from “Value-takers” to “Value-takers and frenemies”. what do you think? you think these should be treated as 2 different topics?

I think there's an overlap between the two, but they're two different concepts.

A frenemy can -and often is- a value taker.
But the value-taker concept is much larger, including many different types of value-takers.

Also, the frenemy is not always and necessarily a net value-taker.
If he brings lots of value in different forms, he might still end up as "net value positive".

Just as an example, if you have a frenemy who deep down resents you but he knows all the clubs in the areas and you skip the line thanks to him and you're in a period in your life in which you enjoy clubbing, then he can be a net value giver.

Of course, that changes over time.
If you move beyond the "partying phase", then he provides no more value, but just (low-level) poison and one-upping. And now he's a value-taker.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Hello Lucio,

would you mind adding this key article of yours in the sticky under Social Skills of the Power Dynamics Best of sticky please?

I think it is a key concept that's worth belonging below the law of social exchange.

Thanks a lot!


Hey John,

Thanks for the heads up, I added it.

Also, I moved the "social climber's sandwich" in the power dynamics subforum since the "case study" subforum is more for self-contained analyses, a video or some pictures are a bonus since they make it more "vivid", but also a description is OK as long as it contains a lesson-learned, or how a certain principle was applied.

I'm not using "@" here since I don't think it's high-priority enough to bother you with an email.

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Hey John (@amerok)

About this thread.

If you quote the relevant dialogue below the video, it's far easier for people to follow and get on your same page.

For example:

With the dialogue right beneath it, people know what you're talking about, and what are the relevant passages.
That also increases participation, since people are less likely to watch a whole vide if there is no transcript and no key guidance on the key passages.


Similar for this thread.

Good idea in linking the relevant parts for the dialogues, you can get the same bang and with much less effort if you use the "blockquote function", this one:

Him: x
Her: y

And it reads much better.

Also, the title, most people have no idea what's "POTC", or what you're going to analyze there.
A more descriptive title could have been:

Jack Sparrow sexual innuendos & compliance tactics

On how to embed videos, feel free to read and experiment on this thread.


On this thread.


  • Background research: when people ask something without checking the available information first, they make me do the same (non-value adding) work an infinite time over. Guess what I don't like doing? The exact same thing infinite times over
  • Right location: it was in PU discussions, I had to move it. Guess what I'm not a fan of doing? Wasting time to move threads around
  • Descriptive title
  • A precise question / goal: was it a question, a complaint, a request? Make it clear

Please check out the forum guidelines, and also this thread on using subjects such as "help".

Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?