Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumResources: Researches, Studies, TheoriesLearningFeedbacks & clarifications

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Feedbacks & clarifications

#461 · September 1, 2022, 10:43 pm

Quote from Kavalier on September 1, 2022, 10:43 pm
Hello, John
I didn't mean it as a threat at all, and I'm not angry, nor I had taken this as a personal attack. Though if you apply the bold formatting (although you intended to use it for emphasis), it does sound more menacing, so I'll point this out just to make it clear for other people reading here that it's not in the original text.
By the way, I don't feel strongly attached to the "left-wing" label. Actually I'm a believer in putting labels aside and concentrating on solving problems alongside people from every point of view. As my ideas fall broadly into the "left" label, though, and I'm going to be shoved in that category anyway, I fight any frame that may be interpreted as "left equals bad".
But I see where you are coming from, as it's a common way to express a covert threat. This is a case where I believe the problem is in the unidimensional nature of writing, as it doesn't allow for modulation of speech. It was more of a friendly feedback. I would also appreciate opinions on how to phrase this in a way that precludes the "threat" interpretation, if you guys would like to share.
Ultimately, this ended up being an uninteded example of why
it's women/spanish people/dogs/category X do this and this
is a blueprint that would rather be avoided.
Implying that "a person who make this power move is usually leftist" follows that pattern. If there is a leftist, a woman, a Spanish, a dog or a category in the room and what you said is something that is not unambiguously positive, you create a negative frame for them. It has consequences for the individual even if he doesn't see himself as part of that category (if others see him as part of that). It makes them look worse in front of everybody if they don't fight the frame. If they look worse, you look better by contrast, because you're also implying that you don't do whatever they do. That's why I said "unintended" social climbing.
You'd rather avoid it even when you say seemingly obvious things like "Spanish people speak Spanish", to use your example from that previous thread. Chances are they are not obvious: in fact many people who see themselves as citizens of Spain speak Basque, Catalan, Galician, Aragonese... and then pointing this out is not smart alecking. A lot of Spanish people actually resent being forced to speak Spanish (i.e Castelan. It also annoys a lot of people to call a regional language the national language), so it's almost guaranteed that by saying something along those lines you'll annoy someone. You want to be attuned to these nuances, because they're important for social effectiveness.
So it's more of a friendly feedback/reminder like "hey, John, take care with how it's phrased, because it can be misinterpreted and annoy someone". More than something that concerns me personally, it's a feedback for life: if you are using it a lot, perhaps that's why you're getting so many negative reactions, as you say that you've encountered the "you cannot generalize" answer several times. The "you cannot generalize" you are hearing a lot may be, more often than not, a feedback as much as it's a "don't put myself/people I care about in that category".
All is good :)

Hello, John

I didn't mean it as a threat at all, and I'm not angry, nor I had taken this as a personal attack. Though if you apply the bold formatting (although you intended to use it for emphasis), it does sound more menacing, so I'll point this out just to make it clear for other people reading here that it's not in the original text.

By the way, I don't feel strongly attached to the "left-wing" label. Actually I'm a believer in putting labels aside and concentrating on solving problems alongside people from every point of view. As my ideas fall broadly into the "left" label, though, and I'm going to be shoved in that category anyway, I fight any frame that may be interpreted as "left equals bad".

But I see where you are coming from, as it's a common way to express a covert threat. This is a case where I believe the problem is in the unidimensional nature of writing, as it doesn't allow for modulation of speech. It was more of a friendly feedback. I would also appreciate opinions on how to phrase this in a way that precludes the "threat" interpretation, if you guys would like to share.

Ultimately, this ended up being an uninteded example of why

it's women/spanish people/dogs/category X do this and this

is a blueprint that would rather be avoided.

Implying that "a person who make this power move is usually leftist" follows that pattern. If there is a leftist, a woman, a Spanish, a dog or a category in the room and what you said is something that is not unambiguously positive, you create a negative frame for them. It has consequences for the individual even if he doesn't see himself as part of that category (if others see him as part of that). It makes them look worse in front of everybody if they don't fight the frame. If they look worse, you look better by contrast, because you're also implying that you don't do whatever they do. That's why I said "unintended" social climbing.

You'd rather avoid it even when you say seemingly obvious things like "Spanish people speak Spanish", to use your example from that previous thread. Chances are they are not obvious: in fact many people who see themselves as citizens of Spain speak Basque, Catalan, Galician, Aragonese... and then pointing this out is not smart alecking. A lot of Spanish people actually resent being forced to speak Spanish (i.e Castelan. It also annoys a lot of people to call a regional language the national language), so it's almost guaranteed that by saying something along those lines you'll annoy someone. You want to be attuned to these nuances, because they're important for social effectiveness.

So it's more of a friendly feedback/reminder like "hey, John, take care with how it's phrased, because it can be misinterpreted and annoy someone". More than something that concerns me personally, it's a feedback for life: if you are using it a lot, perhaps that's why you're getting so many negative reactions, as you say that you've encountered the "you cannot generalize" answer several times. The "you cannot generalize" you are hearing a lot may be, more often than not, a feedback as much as it's a "don't put myself/people I care about in that category".

All is good :)

#462 · September 1, 2022, 11:21 pm

Quote from John Freeman on September 1, 2022, 11:21 pm
All is good for me as well, Kavalier!
Great answer. So now we can dig deeper as I see I'm not understood yet. If I end up not being understood anyway, I'll be alright anyway.
Quote from Kavalier on September 1, 2022, 10:43 pm
Hello, John
I didn't mean it as a threat at all, and I'm not angry, nor I had taken this as a personal attack. Though if you apply the bold formatting (although you intended to use it for emphasis), it does sound more menacing, so I'll point this out just to make it clear that it's not in the original text.
Alright cool. Of course it was not in bold in original text, boldness was to emphasize what I was talking about as you understood it. It's clear for everyone I'm quite sure.
But I see where you are coming from, as it's a common way to express a covert threat. This is a case where I believe the problem is in the unidimensional nature of writing, as it doesn't allow for modulation of speech. It was more of a friendly feedback. I would also appreciate opinions on how to phrase this in a way that precludes the "threat" interpretation, if you guys would like to share.
Another way of saying it if you like the word "careful" is: "Be careful, as it can be interpreted as social climbing" and to me at least your message will be clear. It will look as a warning rather than a threat. If you want to avoid the word "careful", you can say: "When you say "leftist" it sounds to me as you're saying it in a negative way. and I identify as a leftist, so imagine how I could feel. I could feel as you're insulting me"
Ultimately, this ended up being an uninteded example of why
it's women/spanish people/dogs/category X do this and this
is a blueprint that would rather be avoided.
Implying that "a person who make this power move is usually leftist" follows that pattern. If there is a leftist, a woman, a Spanish, a dog or a category in the room and what you said is something that is not unambiguously positive, you create a negative frame for them. It has consequences for the individual even if he doesn't see himself as part of that category (if others see him as part of that). It makes them look worse in front of everybody if they don't fight the frame. If they look worse, you look better by contrast, because you're also implying that you don't do whatever they do. That's why I said "unintended" social climbing.
That's what I thought. However I preferred to be sure and hear it from you rather than interpret. Thanks for the explanation. What you're saying is true for many people but not all (see below).
BTW: can you imagine a World where everything you say is unambiguously positive about someone? Personally I don't live in a such a World. Negativity is part of Life and it's a good thing. It's a matter of proportion. Without positive there is no negative.
For me to better understand, when you say you are a "leftist", what do you mean exactly? I also want to be sure to understand.
You'd rather avoid it even when you say seemingly obvious things like "Spanish people speak Spanish", to use your example from that previous thread. Chances are they are not obvious: in fact many people who see themselves as citizens of Spain speak Basque, Catalan, Galician, Aragonese... and then pointing this out is not smart alecking. A lot of Spanish people actually resent being forced to speak Spanish (i.e Castelan. It also annoys a lot of people to call a regional language the national language), so it's almost guaranteed that by saying something along those lines you'll annoy someone. You want to be attuned to these nuances, because they're important for social effectiveness.
I am aware of these nuances. That's my point.
I'll give you an example: When I talk with some people from a culture and I'm careful not to say anything negative. Then I say openly what I have in mind: some people defend the category and some don't. Some people have their own point of view that we share about this negative thing ("yeah I hate when Swiss people are angry about being late", being Swiss themselves). But I hear you: you view it in a public way and this forum is public. Well, for one I did not know you identified as a leftist and second I'm quite sure that the meaning I used in the thread is not the one you used.
I am aware that many people resent to speak Spanish, you took a specific example and turned it in the negative, implying I don't have cultural sensitivity. So it depends on what example we're talking about. Aha, I now understand we're not talking about the same thing. Thank you. Now I understand the misunderstanding.
I could give you another example but it would turn into a frame battle. I respect your point of view and I realize we're not talking about the same thing.
So it's more of a friendly feedback/reminder like "hey, John, take care with how it's phrased, because it can be misinterpreted and annoy someone". More than something that concerns me, it's a feedback for life: if you are using it a lot, perhaps that's why you're getting so many negative reactions, as you say that you've encountered the "you cannot generalize" answer several times. The "you cannot generalize" you are hearing a lot may be, more often than not, a feedback as much as it's a "don't put myself/people I care about in that category".
I encountered it twice actually. You're the one that say that I'm getting so many negative reactions, not me. I respectfully ask you not to put words into my mouth.
And it's not the situation. It's not that in these two instances these people reacted because they felt that I disrespected people they liked.
I think it's because they felt that I said something that was not moral (to them). So the frame is: "By making this statement, you are being bad". Alright, thanks to you I now understand these people are not smart Alecing. They genuinely think that. Next time I will ask them why they think that.
For me, it's more about what you can say and cannot say. Another example: if 6 out of 10 Swiss people (I'll take my own category to alleviate the emotional load) are obese and I say: "A lot of Swiss people are obese". I'm not talking down on them, it's a fact.
So I guess it's a matter of context. There are some people with whom you can say what you think and the person will try to understand what you mean and others will interpret it as they see you.
Thanks a lot, Kavalier, I learned a lot! I gained a new perspective. Thanks for engaging the conversation and the explanation about the "unintended social climbing". It's a great explanation that's PU worthy I believe.

All is good for me as well, Kavalier!

Great answer. So now we can dig deeper as I see I'm not understood yet. If I end up not being understood anyway, I'll be alright anyway.

Quote from Kavalier on September 1, 2022, 10:43 pm
Hello, John
I didn't mean it as a threat at all, and I'm not angry, nor I had taken this as a personal attack. Though if you apply the bold formatting (although you intended to use it for emphasis), it does sound more menacing, so I'll point this out just to make it clear that it's not in the original text.

Alright cool. Of course it was not in bold in original text, boldness was to emphasize what I was talking about as you understood it. It's clear for everyone I'm quite sure.

But I see where you are coming from, as it's a common way to express a covert threat. This is a case where I believe the problem is in the unidimensional nature of writing, as it doesn't allow for modulation of speech. It was more of a friendly feedback. I would also appreciate opinions on how to phrase this in a way that precludes the "threat" interpretation, if you guys would like to share.

Another way of saying it if you like the word "careful" is: "Be careful, as it can be interpreted as social climbing" and to me at least your message will be clear. It will look as a warning rather than a threat. If you want to avoid the word "careful", you can say: "When you say "leftist" it sounds to me as you're saying it in a negative way. and I identify as a leftist, so imagine how I could feel. I could feel as you're insulting me"

Ultimately, this ended up being an uninteded example of why
it's women/spanish people/dogs/category X do this and this
is a blueprint that would rather be avoided.
Implying that "a person who make this power move is usually leftist" follows that pattern. If there is a leftist, a woman, a Spanish, a dog or a category in the room and what you said is something that is not unambiguously positive, you create a negative frame for them. It has consequences for the individual even if he doesn't see himself as part of that category (if others see him as part of that). It makes them look worse in front of everybody if they don't fight the frame. If they look worse, you look better by contrast, because you're also implying that you don't do whatever they do. That's why I said "unintended" social climbing.

That's what I thought. However I preferred to be sure and hear it from you rather than interpret. Thanks for the explanation. What you're saying is true for many people but not all (see below).

BTW: can you imagine a World where everything you say is unambiguously positive about someone? Personally I don't live in a such a World. Negativity is part of Life and it's a good thing. It's a matter of proportion. Without positive there is no negative.

For me to better understand, when you say you are a "leftist", what do you mean exactly? I also want to be sure to understand.

You'd rather avoid it even when you say seemingly obvious things like "Spanish people speak Spanish", to use your example from that previous thread. Chances are they are not obvious: in fact many people who see themselves as citizens of Spain speak Basque, Catalan, Galician, Aragonese... and then pointing this out is not smart alecking. A lot of Spanish people actually resent being forced to speak Spanish (i.e Castelan. It also annoys a lot of people to call a regional language the national language), so it's almost guaranteed that by saying something along those lines you'll annoy someone. You want to be attuned to these nuances, because they're important for social effectiveness.

I am aware of these nuances. That's my point.

I'll give you an example: When I talk with some people from a culture and I'm careful not to say anything negative. Then I say openly what I have in mind: some people defend the category and some don't. Some people have their own point of view that we share about this negative thing ("yeah I hate when Swiss people are angry about being late", being Swiss themselves). But I hear you: you view it in a public way and this forum is public. Well, for one I did not know you identified as a leftist and second I'm quite sure that the meaning I used in the thread is not the one you used.

I am aware that many people resent to speak Spanish, you took a specific example and turned it in the negative, implying I don't have cultural sensitivity. So it depends on what example we're talking about. Aha, I now understand we're not talking about the same thing. Thank you. Now I understand the misunderstanding.

I could give you another example but it would turn into a frame battle. I respect your point of view and I realize we're not talking about the same thing.

So it's more of a friendly feedback/reminder like "hey, John, take care with how it's phrased, because it can be misinterpreted and annoy someone". More than something that concerns me, it's a feedback for life: if you are using it a lot, perhaps that's why you're getting so many negative reactions, as you say that you've encountered the "you cannot generalize" answer several times. The "you cannot generalize" you are hearing a lot may be, more often than not, a feedback as much as it's a "don't put myself/people I care about in that category".

I encountered it twice actually. You're the one that say that I'm getting so many negative reactions, not me. I respectfully ask you not to put words into my mouth.

And it's not the situation. It's not that in these two instances these people reacted because they felt that I disrespected people they liked.

I think it's because they felt that I said something that was not moral (to them). So the frame is: "By making this statement, you are being bad". Alright, thanks to you I now understand these people are not smart Alecing. They genuinely think that. Next time I will ask them why they think that.

For me, it's more about what you can say and cannot say. Another example: if 6 out of 10 Swiss people (I'll take my own category to alleviate the emotional load) are obese and I say: "A lot of Swiss people are obese". I'm not talking down on them, it's a fact.

So I guess it's a matter of context. There are some people with whom you can say what you think and the person will try to understand what you mean and others will interpret it as they see you.

Thanks a lot, Kavalier, I learned a lot! I gained a new perspective. Thanks for engaging the conversation and the explanation about the "unintended social climbing". It's a great explanation that's PU worthy I believe.

#463 · September 2, 2022, 4:12 am

Quote from Kavalier on September 2, 2022, 4:12 am
Great, John, it's good to see that we are both cool with this.
Now, for another round of feedbacks! These are unique opportunities of getting rid of communication problems in our styles, that we both have, so I'll address nuances here. I don't think we are in a frame battle, it's more two friends who are helping each other make their communication even better.
For me to better understand, when you say you are a "leftist", what do you mean exactly? I also want to be sure to understand.
Thanks for asking, man, I appreciate that you show interest in this. Left-wing politics, the way I see it, is more of a broad term for world views that emphasize egalitarianism and stress the need for social reforms in order to make the world resemble that. It gets a bad rep: many times deserved, many times not (but that's true of any ideology).
Rest assured I didn't feel attacked in any remote way. The feedback was in the same spirit of the original post: it's fair for you to address the "you cannot generalize" power move, but first make sure you don't invite those reactions. Reading your post I thought "hmmmmm maybe he's overdoing it, because he's doing it right now – he's unintendedly saying something slightly demeaning to a thing I can relate to. People are getting pissed, that's why he's encountering these answers. I'll alert him". To me it seemed the root cause.
I thought that using myself as an example would more eloquently draw attention to a pattern of communication you were using that could be the source of the problems (as well as saying "hey, John, leftists are cool") you were reporting. It was quite on topic.
hence my surprise of his reaction
The issue here is that it frames what I said ("by the way, John, leftist speaking here. It's a very small one, but you want to be careful with unintended social climbing") as a strong, overreactive, bordering out of place triggered reaction (otherwise, there would be no reason for you to be surprised). The way I see, though, it was not even a reaction: I had checked your "Spanish people are X" as a potential power move in the spirit of learning. Sure, checking like that a real microaggression in a "real" environment would be "too much", so I would just let it pass. But I checked that because we're in TPM and it was not at all an aggression, but in another environment could be seen as such. If we here in TPM, among ourselves, let it pass, we'll be robbing ourselves of a damn good opportunity, because we are the only people who can detect and rationalise what we are saying and why it may come accross as offensive. Nobody outside of the community can go deep as we can go here in this forum.
So I went direct, but I took steps to take the edge out of it: "it's a small one" (no big deal); "you want to be careful" (this one was interpreted as some sort of threat. I still can't see this, but I'm open to interpretations, I do want to communicate properly); "unintended" (I know you didn't mean it, but that's how it comes accross); and, the biggest one: I went along with the discussion. Had it been a reaction so strong as to cause "surprise", I wouldn't have continued on the conversation.
BTW: can you imagine a World where everything you say is unambiguously positive about someone? Personally I don't live in a such a World. Negativity is part of Life and it's a good thing. It's a matter of proportion. Without positive there is no negative.
Whereas my belief is: you can say a negative thing, even about a category that I belong to IF the conversation is about understanding this category and relating better to them (which it was in this case, hence my surprise of his reaction).
Those are great mindsets, John. And mindsets that we both share. But the number of people in the world who live by these principles is quite small, so we cannot expect them to espouse our beliefs. We have to communicate in a way that takes that in account, because we still want those people at our side.
And this is precisely why "Xs are Ys" should be avoided when Xs are groups of people, because you never know who you are talking to. Any variation of "some Xs are Ys", "many Xs are Ys" are fine, and this is a good way to summarize my frame in that whole discussion.
I encountered it twice actually. You're the one that say that I'm getting so many negative reactions, not me. I respectfully ask you not to put words into my mouth.
Let's address this one: saying that I'm putting words in your mouth is quite strong. Still in feedback spirit, save that for when people are really distorting what you said, lest that can lead to an escalation. In this case you were the one that you said "here is a power move I encountered several times now".
If it's indeed a power move, and you received that as a reply, then it is a negative reaction. Several can mean "more than one", "more than two but fewer than many", and even "being a great many". So let's simplify this and conclude that "several" is more than a few, though unspecified. That matches the definition of "so many" (it's different than "many"), which is defined as constituting an unspecified number.
So I believe that saying you're getting "so many negative reactions" is actually a very precise way to paraphrase what you said yourself. You can dispute my interpretation of your text, but to call it "putting words into my mouth" is quite a stretch.
I am aware that many people resent to speak Spanish, you took a specific example and turned it in the negative, implying I don't have cultural sensitivity.
Okay, here I can say that, yes, I could have phrased this in a better way. Saying "You want to be attuned to these nuances" opens the guard for that interpretation, though I reassure you that wasn't what I meant. I'll be more aware.
I wouldn't say that I turned it in the negative, though. My intention was to point out that any kind of "Xs are Ys" can be interpreted in the negative. So I took one example that you gave yourself and expanded on it to show that even that can still piss many people off. Still on topic.
I know you have cultural sensitivity, and you are very well travelled man and I have to say, I admire that. But "Xs are Ys" formats don't show this cultural sensitivity, that's why I'd avoid it and advise people to also avoid it. It's about advertising, and "some Xs are Ys", "many Xs are Ys" are instead a great way to talk about cultural tendencies without risking sounding offensive and a great way to advertise your culturedness.
Thanks for the opportunity, John! I also learned a lot. It's always a pleasure to debate with you. I hope we can keep making PU worthy content like this one that we both made, I believe :)

Great, John, it's good to see that we are both cool with this.

Now, for another round of feedbacks! These are unique opportunities of getting rid of communication problems in our styles, that we both have, so I'll address nuances here. I don't think we are in a frame battle, it's more two friends who are helping each other make their communication even better.

For me to better understand, when you say you are a "leftist", what do you mean exactly? I also want to be sure to understand.

Thanks for asking, man, I appreciate that you show interest in this. Left-wing politics, the way I see it, is more of a broad term for world views that emphasize egalitarianism and stress the need for social reforms in order to make the world resemble that. It gets a bad rep: many times deserved, many times not (but that's true of any ideology).

Rest assured I didn't feel attacked in any remote way. The feedback was in the same spirit of the original post: it's fair for you to address the "you cannot generalize" power move, but first make sure you don't invite those reactions. Reading your post I thought "hmmmmm maybe he's overdoing it, because he's doing it right now – he's unintendedly saying something slightly demeaning to a thing I can relate to. People are getting pissed, that's why he's encountering these answers. I'll alert him". To me it seemed the root cause.

I thought that using myself as an example would more eloquently draw attention to a pattern of communication you were using that could be the source of the problems (as well as saying "hey, John, leftists are cool") you were reporting. It was quite on topic.

hence my surprise of his reaction

The issue here is that it frames what I said ("by the way, John, leftist speaking here. It's a very small one, but you want to be careful with unintended social climbing") as a strong, overreactive, bordering out of place triggered reaction (otherwise, there would be no reason for you to be surprised). The way I see, though, it was not even a reaction: I had checked your "Spanish people are X" as a potential power move in the spirit of learning. Sure, checking like that a real microaggression in a "real" environment would be "too much", so I would just let it pass. But I checked that because we're in TPM and it was not at all an aggression, but in another environment could be seen as such. If we here in TPM, among ourselves, let it pass, we'll be robbing ourselves of a damn good opportunity, because we are the only people who can detect and rationalise what we are saying and why it may come accross as offensive. Nobody outside of the community can go deep as we can go here in this forum.

So I went direct, but I took steps to take the edge out of it: "it's a small one" (no big deal); "you want to be careful" (this one was interpreted as some sort of threat. I still can't see this, but I'm open to interpretations, I do want to communicate properly); "unintended" (I know you didn't mean it, but that's how it comes accross); and, the biggest one: I went along with the discussion. Had it been a reaction so strong as to cause "surprise", I wouldn't have continued on the conversation.

BTW: can you imagine a World where everything you say is unambiguously positive about someone? Personally I don't live in a such a World. Negativity is part of Life and it's a good thing. It's a matter of proportion. Without positive there is no negative.

Whereas my belief is: you can say a negative thing, even about a category that I belong to IF the conversation is about understanding this category and relating better to them (which it was in this case, hence my surprise of his reaction).

Those are great mindsets, John. And mindsets that we both share. But the number of people in the world who live by these principles is quite small, so we cannot expect them to espouse our beliefs. We have to communicate in a way that takes that in account, because we still want those people at our side.

And this is precisely why "Xs are Ys" should be avoided when Xs are groups of people, because you never know who you are talking to. Any variation of "some Xs are Ys", "many Xs are Ys" are fine, and this is a good way to summarize my frame in that whole discussion.

I encountered it twice actually. You're the one that say that I'm getting so many negative reactions, not me. I respectfully ask you not to put words into my mouth.

Let's address this one: saying that I'm putting words in your mouth is quite strong. Still in feedback spirit, save that for when people are really distorting what you said, lest that can lead to an escalation. In this case you were the one that you said "here is a power move I encountered several times now".

If it's indeed a power move, and you received that as a reply, then it is a negative reaction. Several can mean "more than one", "more than two but fewer than many", and even "being a great many". So let's simplify this and conclude that "several" is more than a few, though unspecified. That matches the definition of "so many" (it's different than "many"), which is defined as constituting an unspecified number.

So I believe that saying you're getting "so many negative reactions" is actually a very precise way to paraphrase what you said yourself. You can dispute my interpretation of your text, but to call it "putting words into my mouth" is quite a stretch.

I am aware that many people resent to speak Spanish, you took a specific example and turned it in the negative, implying I don't have cultural sensitivity.

Okay, here I can say that, yes, I could have phrased this in a better way. Saying "You want to be attuned to these nuances" opens the guard for that interpretation, though I reassure you that wasn't what I meant. I'll be more aware.

I wouldn't say that I turned it in the negative, though. My intention was to point out that any kind of "Xs are Ys" can be interpreted in the negative. So I took one example that you gave yourself and expanded on it to show that even that can still piss many people off. Still on topic.

I know you have cultural sensitivity, and you are very well travelled man and I have to say, I admire that. But "Xs are Ys" formats don't show this cultural sensitivity, that's why I'd avoid it and advise people to also avoid it. It's about advertising, and "some Xs are Ys", "many Xs are Ys" are instead a great way to talk about cultural tendencies without risking sounding offensive and a great way to advertise your culturedness.

Thanks for the opportunity, John! I also learned a lot. It's always a pleasure to debate with you. I hope we can keep making PU worthy content like this one that we both made, I believe :)

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

#464 · September 2, 2022, 6:39 am

Hello Kavalier,

Great points in there! Thanks for the compliment. You’re welcome!

I still see misunderstanding, interpretation, and power move I must admit but it’s all good. I said what I wanted to say so we’re good. I’m 100% certain you communicated in good faith and so did I. As I said in the beginning I was ready for the limitations in communication due to written and public nature of the forum. You understood what you understood and so did I. There are limits to these conversations as I said in the intro. Let’s end it here as it had its time and place.

What matters the most is that we both learned from one another and we keep a good relationship. To me you’re a cool guy and I enjoy exchanging with you :)

I want to emphasize that I learned a lot from you. I’m looking forward to exchange more with you!

And I’m also sure some people who read that thread learned from our exchange.

I think this one went pretty well.

Thank you for partaking in this conversation!

Cheers! :)

Kavalier has reacted to this post.

#465 · September 2, 2022, 7:45 am

I still see misunderstanding, interpretation, and power move I must admit but it’s all good. I said what I wanted to say so I’m good with you.

I can say the same. We can address this overtime. The most important part is that we came to terms. We think differently, and that's the beauty of it: it allows us to present fresh perspectives to each other.

I also want to say that I learned a lot from you today and many more exchanges are to come, it's a joy that you feel the same way.

Thank you for partaking as well!

Lucio Buffalmano, Ali Scarlett and John Freeman have reacted to this post.

#466 · September 2, 2022, 9:51 am

You’re welcome! That’s life we don’t always reach the perfect communication and it’s ok! And yes there will always be different perspectives, which is enriching I think. I agree with you with coming to terms.

If there was misunderstanding, interpretations or power moves from my side or any combination of it, please accept my sincere apologies. :)

Lucio Buffalmano, Ali Scarlett and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#467 · September 2, 2022, 10:34 am

Feedback for the forum as a medium. It works really well!

There are not flyby takers with a short, (important for them) question, getting an in-depth answer only to leave without even thanking the person who helped them
Conversations are constructive and full of learning opportunities even when opinions clash
Answers often come from experience and from deliberate thinking. Someone made an effort to help you, and it shows
When someone is kicked out, it's clear to everyone else why, and everyone agrees
There are no cliques, no social BS like bullying, voting rings, etc
The founder is at the wheel
Everyone is welcome to make 'a megapost' (long form, detailed post) without fearing to be stealing the thunder from the founder or the usual posters (the courtesans)
You can usually find answers again (try that with a chat-based platform!)
Topics interlink quite well

Anything else I've forgotten?

Lucio Buffalmano, Ali Scarlett and 2 other users have reacted to this post.

#468 · September 2, 2022, 1:51 pm

If there was misunderstanding, interpretations or power moves from my side or any combination of it, please accept my sincere apologies.

Thank you very much, John! More than accepted. Please, accept mine too!

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

#469 · September 3, 2022, 8:14 am

It's all good, Kavalier! :)

Kavalier has reacted to this post.

#470 · September 6, 2022, 5:22 pm

Quote from John Freeman on September 6, 2022, 5:22 pm
Talking about putting the right thread at the right place, this goes here actually (no edit):
@Growfast (did not find the right tag)
Hey Growfast,
I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.
I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.
Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.
Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.
Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.
We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.
I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).
Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.
Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.
Sincerely,
John

Talking about putting the right thread at the right place, this goes here actually (no edit):

@Growfast (did not find the right tag)

Hey Growfast,

I'm trying to understand what you mean. I don't see where is my power move if I propose them different hosting solutions with the different prices where they can find what is affordable for them and if they prefer central or not central. I might lack power awareness, that could be the case.

I want to understand your point of view and I sincerely think there is a misunderstanding here. I admitted I might have been oversensitive on this one. I'm interested in your feedback, I would like to understand it first.

Doesn't come off as you looking for collaboration. Comes off as trying too hard to act superior.

Yeah, when I wrote that, I knew it was a risk. I should have written this thread in my own journal as the initial goal was self-reflection, hence the experimental ending and the tone of the thread. So it was clumsy from me. My initial intention was not to make it an open thread and then I changed my mind at the end as I thought that it was something that could be shared. BTW , I totally admit I have tons to do to improve my mindset. I also think there was a miscommunication from my part in the form of the thread.

Alright, I respect you not wanting anymore to discuss on the threads I write. To me it's a bit sad as I did my best to answer you to the best of my abilities from my perspective.

We all have different perspectives and limitations, to me it's important to communicate despite them.

I also might still be a bit paranoid through my previous experiences which might still have left me on the defensive. And could unconsicously provoke it (as I'm trying to understand what is happening).

Thank you very much anyway as all of what you wrote is food for thoughts and I'm going to reflect on it. If you want to clarify what happened through another mean of communication (email, phone), I'm more than open to it.

Excuse me if I offended you in any shape or form.

Sincerely,

John