Forum rules, usability, changing titles, moving threads, etc.
I feel that you mostly disagree.
However, my intuition may be wrong, and you genuinely agree.
But we can definitely move on.
I wanted to have a discussion where we could potentially understand each other even if we disagree on a lot of things.
I think we managed to achieve that to a certain extent.
I also certainly learned a lot from your feedback.
So I thank you for your time.
Summary of My Thoughts
I think it would be useful to summarise my thoughts as well.
I understand your point of view that you want to focus on power dynamics and practical strategies.
After all, this is the vision and mission of this website.
That is applied research, and usually a wider audience appreciates its results & outcomes.
Arguably, that, in itself, means it has more value.
It also has more immediate applications and practical value.
Also, it heavily overlaps with entrepreneurship, so I'm very keen on applied research.
I am also interested in basic research because I'm biased and have done that kind of research before.
It builds upon principles that may have trouble being proven, applicable in the moment.
It may not even be true entirely like Einstein's general theory of relativity.
But fast forward to today, it's used to calculate GPS coordinates whenever you use Google Maps.
So this forum is the place for applied research for people strategies.
Quick Clarifications
I didn't do a good job of putting "basic research" and "higher abstractions" into a context where people can understand that it's beneficial for the long term.
Or even some points which I felt that it can be practical.
how is Mach correlated with IQ
I believe this was one of the most theoretical points of our discussion, and it's not in the original thread.
That being said, I think this can help with hiring.
If Mach is uncorrelated with IQ, this means looking out for high IQ, low Mach can be a good idea for entry-level positions.
Even better are people with high IQ and good planning but low Mach.
A more practical point of discussion that involved general psychology was
And someone with better emotional stability should be able to strategise better too.
If someone shows a lot of frustration about missing billiard shots for example, then he probably may not keep a level-head in planning in chaotic situations.
Probably, if someone gets overly upset about missing billiard shots, maybe you don't want to get him involved in important decisions in your life.
Also, the fact that he keeps missing means he's probably not very Machiavellian.
What I Can Do Better?
I agree that for discussions not immediately obvious in terms of benefits, I have to be clearer in how I state my points.
And if I want to give several different directions to explore, I should state that more explicitly and maybe in point forms.
For example,
Since the thread is about identifying whether a person is a Machiavelli, we can explore other factors to help identify a Machiavelli too.
Several possible directions to go into from this discussion:
- Is the person good at planning & strategising but overall not really Machiavellian?
- What other characteristics can we look out for outside the game of billiards that may characterise Machiavellianism?
Is his behaviour in billiards really different from how he acts in day-to-day life?- How much do you know about this person's background and upbringing?
It may influence a person's disposition towards using manipulation and deception
On this thread, the title was "power dynamics".
"Power dynamics" is a whole discipline, it says nothing of the content inside and/or what you need or want to say.
Check the guidelines in my signature (and seek to follow them both for yourself, and for all of us in the community as it makes for a better place for all).
We want to use specific titles for a number of reasons (and for proper communication in general, that also applies to when you send emails).
On this thread, if it's a new situation, feel free to open a new thread for it (you may quote my answer in that thread if it's relevant as a bridge and to provide the reference).
We could say this is my first official act as admin :).
See below:
- Added a closing parenthesis to my journal thread's title: it's now "What I'm Doing, (Maybe Where 🙂 ) & Why"
- Put an apostrophe for the "thank you" thread's title and removed "experimental": it's now "Short Thank You's and Feedback"
- Moved "Cover design feedback (Ultimate Power): how does it look?" from the "Random" section: to "Feedback/Ideas"
- Moved "Cover design feedback: which one is better?" from the "Random" section: to "Feedback/Ideas"
- Added "DPD" to "Cover design feedback: which one is better?" thread title: it's now "Cover design feedback (DPD): which one is better?"
Feel free to let me know if anyone disagrees :).
Great stuff, Ali!
Edit:
What I do if a thread was opened by someone who is still around is to ask if he's cool with me editing it (especially if it was a reflection or anything more personal -it's a form of power protecting, so the more personal a thread is to someone, the better it is to ask-).
However, I think that in this case it was cool to just edit it.
Hello @maverick,
From this thread, I changed the title from:
"Remote Power Move"
to
"hang up now telephone power move".
It's challenging to pick a good title that will summarize the full thread, for sure.
Yet, it's worth trying because it isn't just about the forum: summarizing a concept in a few words is also a life skill.
A few ideas:
- Go several levels lower in specificity: while "remote" was indeed befitting, "telephone power move" would have been already a step forward
- Use the words verbatim: if the words of the power moves are brief, you can simply use the exact words as titles
- Use the category: if you know it's a form of tasking, you could say "tasking to hang up on the phone"
- Come up with a name: if you can come up with a name, that's also a good option. For example, Bel came up with "triangular raging", mixing "raging" and the "triangular" power moves
Also, if you use the blockquote for actual quotes, you'll make it a lot easier for people to read (and more likely people will reply).
Check out the forum guidelines for more.
Cheers!
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 24, 2022, 11:05 amHello @maverick,
From this thread, I changed the title from:
"Remote Power Move"
to
"hang up now telephone power move".
It's challenging to pick a good title that will summarize the full thread, for sure.
Yet, it's worth trying because it isn't just about the forum: summarizing a concept in a few words is also a life skill.A few ideas:
- Go several levels lower in specificity: while "remote" was indeed befitting, "telephone power move" would have been already a step forward
- Use the words verbatim: if the words of the power moves are brief, you can simply use the exact words as titles
- Use the category: if you know it's a form of tasking, you could say "tasking to hang up on the phone"
- Come up with a name: if you can come up with a name, that's also a good option. For example, Bel came up with "triangular raging", mixing "raging" and the "triangular" power moves
Also, if you use the blockquote for actual quotes, you'll make it a lot easier for people to read (and more likely people will reply).
Check out the forum guidelines for more.
Cheers!
Thank You, Lucio for your ideas to come up with a good title.
I had Telephone Power Move in mind but changed it to remote, since it might apply to broader situations, like gaming, zoom meetings, or online chats, texting,and "hang up now telephone power move" clearly states what the thread is about, which is a nice addition.
Cheers
Small change:
- Changed "offers" to "offerers" in the power dynamics of the job market thread: it's now "Job offerers and job seekers: the power dynamics of the job market"
Quick thoughts on this thread here by Maverick and this post here by Bel.
As it's often the case, this isn't just about forum use, but some of these principles translate to life and communication in general.
Both have great content, but I personally find myself avoiding them because replying to them feels like wasted work, a (forced) power move on you, and going off-topic (ie.: they don't feel organized, on-topic and/or related to the title).
Let's dig deeper:
"I'm not angry" VS "don't be angry / I don't bear grudges"
The post talks about "I don't bear grudges" and "don't be angry".
"I don't bear grudges" would normally be perfect in an "I'm not angry" thread: it's very close to "I'm not angry" in many ways.
However, John's initial post had a different use case for "I'm not angry", so in that specific case, it's not related.
"I'm not angry" is also different than "don't be angry" (the former is often passive-aggressive, while the latter is more often an attack/power move).
Also, the two entries bring more issues (read below).
3 different situations in "friend who tried to outdo you"
The thread lists 3 different power moves, all describing different cases.
(the first one to me feels like a fair interjection in most cases and I often use it myself, the second one is a case of "trap question" and the third one is a case of forcing leadership and defending from that leadership attempt)
They're all super interesting.
But same as above, I'm most likely going to skip it since it puts me in a difficult spot because:
- High demand for my investment, because addressing 3 different cases is time-consuming
- I'm forced to ignore & power move, since if I pick 1 it feels like I'm ignoring Maverick for 2/3 of his content. And I don't want to power move members of the community, I want to give value. I don't like being put in a position to ignore people -not with people I like, at least-. Instead, I want to deal with eagles to whom I give my best (so your task is to make people want to give their best to you).
- Forced into low-efficiency work, since because my reply is under a thread with limited connection to the title, I wouldn't be able to find it later on, and most readers looking for something similar would equally miss it.
Meaning, my time ends up being used for very low-efficiency work (and driven people dislike being low-efficiency) - Forced into lose-lose half-assed work because if I decided to reply and address everything, I spread myself thin trying to be quick and efficient.
I'd end up giving less attention to each single use case and lose both in terms of quality and social status because I produce mediocre reflection and mediocre work, and you lose because you don't get the full value of my replies
Edit:
Overall, it's easier and best for me to skip than to engage -and in good part, it's good for you too, since you'd only be getting little, while also making me work against my will and interest, which destroys social capital-.
Remember: your task is to make others want to help -or, at least, make it easy for them-.
So, solutions (as per forum guidelines):
Open new threads for new use cases. And 1 thread : 1 topic
Do open a new thread for any different situation.
I guess sometimes one may feel like it's not cool to open new threads, but if we're talking about new use cases, then it's the best approach.
Also, you're empowered learners and contributors, so don't hold back.
Sometimes it may be challenging to see what's related to what in terms of power dynamics.
In doubt, just stick to one single use case for a new thread.
Cramming more situations into one thread may feel like getting a bigger bang for the buck but, for the reason above, it's often less efficient in my opinion.
Fixing and/or understanding one single situation is more efficient for the same reasons above.
And already a huge accomplishment: it covers everything similar to that use case, and bring a domino effect as your power awareness grows one use case at a time.
Let me know if it doesn't make sense to you.