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

#681 · October 14, 2023, 6:50 pm

No further comments on my side on the dynamics nor the content.

Thank you Ali, I think your analysis is full of teachings.

I also want to thank Lucio and DGX 37. Yes it's a conflict but I learned from it. At least I did from the conflicts I had and also from yours. So it's a great learning experience even if it's always a bit painful. (Note: To prevent unwanted power moving on you guys, I used "I" instead of "We" and removed "the community". However I want to express that I'm probably not the only one who learned from it.) So I think as bizarre as it may sound I think this whole episode and its conclusion was value-adding.

I hope I'm not overstepping any boundary here. If I am, please let me know.

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

#682 · October 15, 2023, 7:07 am

Removed post:
Admin's request was clear on no more comments. Thank you for your understanding and for your future full compliance.

#683 · October 19, 2023, 11:22 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 19, 2023, 11:22 am
Hello John,
In this thread here, your post:
Quote from John Freeman on October 19, 2023, 10:31 am
(...) One situation about which I posted recently I thought about this (and that's why I put the cat down). For others I might lack some self-awareness, it's definitely a possibility.
I'll re-visit my recent posts with the framework you shared above.
This reply assumes the thread was directed at you.
But there was no mention of you there.
And of course some threads/posts of yours may have spurred that reflection.
But if the original poster doesn't mention you, it's because he willingly chose to do so.
So while thinking of the application to the self is definitely a great idea, it should mostly concern one's own reflections, and not necessarily the public behavior / reply.
How it disempowers me
Whatever the reason for the original poster to keep it general, it should be respected as his choice.
Because the moment you reply as if it was directed to you, it also affects the original poster (me), and the rest of the community (since everyone else may feel it doesn't concern them).
To reply as if it were directed at you is disempowering to the original poster (me) for several reasons, including:
May frame the original post as indirect/sneaky (power move). As in wanting to talk directly to you, but avoiding doing so (and just to be sure, that can be a good approach in some cases). To rob him of his choice to keep it general or even indirect is a power move on him
Frames me/the message at lower-levels, the level of of (covertly) addressing individuals and individual threads, instead of addressing larger and shared issues. The latter is far more empowering both to me, and what TPM can do for the world
How it disempowers the future readers (community)
And even more important:
Disempowers the original message that goes from "to all" to "to John". It personalizes the original thread instead of keeping it at a general advice level, which is definitely not what I wanted. It's advice that's worth reminding for many, me included -and that's true regardless of whether the original reflection was born from one of your posts, from someone else, or from many different people-
So now everyone who's reading that thread may think it was directed at you and may never get any value from it because it will not start any personal reflection.
In that sense, it wastes the thread.
That's even more true in case of replies that are only at the "me level" and very early, since early reply have more power to channel the conversation in unintended and unproductive directions -similar to the WhatsApp group folks who reply "I can't" as soon as you propose something and you think "couldn't you have just kept that to yourself, or at least for later?-.
So in the future, I'd appreciate it if whatever message I choose to write at a general level stays at a general level instead of being personalized.
How it disempowers you
Finally, it's disempowering to you, too.
Feels like over-personalizing things.
It's a sign of inner strength to keep things at a general level, VS turning it to "me". There was a great thread by Power Duck on this, worth a read.
And for sure sometimes keeping things general is part of "game of status and signaling", but it's also important to learn the rules of that game.
Referring to very specific cases is also an over-personalizing move that's best to avoid -I had no idea what the cat had to do with it, for example, and you never want people to think "what the heck is he talking about"-.
The final self-tasking is also disempowering to you.

Hello John,

In this thread here, your post:

Quote from John Freeman on October 19, 2023, 10:31 am
(...) One situation about which I posted recently I thought about this (and that's why I put the cat down). For others I might lack some self-awareness, it's definitely a possibility.
I'll re-visit my recent posts with the framework you shared above.

This reply assumes the thread was directed at you.

But there was no mention of you there.

And of course some threads/posts of yours may have spurred that reflection.

But if the original poster doesn't mention you, it's because he willingly chose to do so.

So while thinking of the application to the self is definitely a great idea, it should mostly concern one's own reflections, and not necessarily the public behavior / reply.

How it disempowers me

Whatever the reason for the original poster to keep it general, it should be respected as his choice.

Because the moment you reply as if it was directed to you, it also affects the original poster (me), and the rest of the community (since everyone else may feel it doesn't concern them).

To reply as if it were directed at you is disempowering to the original poster (me) for several reasons, including:

May frame the original post as indirect/sneaky (power move). As in wanting to talk directly to you, but avoiding doing so (and just to be sure, that can be a good approach in some cases). To rob him of his choice to keep it general or even indirect is a power move on him
Frames me/the message at lower-levels, the level of of (covertly) addressing individuals and individual threads, instead of addressing larger and shared issues. The latter is far more empowering both to me, and what TPM can do for the world

How it disempowers the future readers (community)

And even more important:

Disempowers the original message that goes from "to all" to "to John". It personalizes the original thread instead of keeping it at a general advice level, which is definitely not what I wanted. It's advice that's worth reminding for many, me included -and that's true regardless of whether the original reflection was born from one of your posts, from someone else, or from many different people-

So now everyone who's reading that thread may think it was directed at you and may never get any value from it because it will not start any personal reflection.

In that sense, it wastes the thread.

That's even more true in case of replies that are only at the "me level" and very early, since early reply have more power to channel the conversation in unintended and unproductive directions -similar to the WhatsApp group folks who reply "I can't" as soon as you propose something and you think "couldn't you have just kept that to yourself, or at least for later?-.

So in the future, I'd appreciate it if whatever message I choose to write at a general level stays at a general level instead of being personalized.

How it disempowers you

Finally, it's disempowering to you, too.

Feels like over-personalizing things.
It's a sign of inner strength to keep things at a general level, VS turning it to "me". There was a great thread by Power Duck on this, worth a read.
And for sure sometimes keeping things general is part of "game of status and signaling", but it's also important to learn the rules of that game.

Referring to very specific cases is also an over-personalizing move that's best to avoid -I had no idea what the cat had to do with it, for example, and you never want people to think "what the heck is he talking about"-.

The final self-tasking is also disempowering to you.

Ali Scarlett, John Freeman and 3 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#684 · October 19, 2023, 5:54 pm

Quote from John Freeman on October 19, 2023, 5:54 pm
Hello Lucio,
Thank you very much for your message.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 19, 2023, 11:22 am
Hello John,
In this thread here, your post:
Quote from John Freeman on October 19, 2023, 10:31 am
(...) One situation about which I posted recently I thought about this (and that's why I put the cat down). For others I might lack some self-awareness, it's definitely a possibility.
I'll re-visit my recent posts with the framework you shared above.
This reply assumes the thread was directed at you.
But there was no mention of you there.
And of course some threads/posts of yours may have spurred that reflection.
But if the original poster doesn't mention you, it's because he willingly chose to do so.
So while thinking of the application to the self is definitely a great idea, it should mostly concern one's own reflections, and not necessarily the public behavior / reply.
Yes, you're right I agree. Reading it now it seems obvious to me.
How it disempowers me
Whatever the reason for the original poster to keep it general, it should be respected as his choice.
Because the moment you reply as if it was directed to you, it also affects the original poster (me), and the rest of the community (since everyone else may feel it doesn't concern them).
My bad, it was clumsy from my part. It was clear to me it was not directed at me personally (many people post here about self-defense) but I felt I was one of the persons concerned.
To reply as if it were directed at you is disempowering to the original poster (me) for several reasons, including:
May frame the original post as indirect/sneaky (power move). As in wanting to talk directly to you, but avoiding doing so (and just to be sure, that can be a good approach in some cases). To rob him of his choice to keep it general or even indirect is a power move on him
I can see that now. Not my intention, my apologies. Thinking about work, I understand now. If I send a general email to the residents about a certain behaviour and one person answers to me publicly it could frame me as if I wanted to convey a message to the person but did not have the courage to do so.
Frames me/the message at lower-levels, the level of of (covertly) addressing individuals and individual threads, instead of addressing larger and shared issues. The latter is far more empowering both to me, and what TPM can do for the world
Alright. I understand.
How it disempowers the future readers (community)
And even more important:
Disempowers the original message that goes from "to all" to "to John". It personalizes the original thread instead of keeping it at a general advice level, which is definitely not what I wanted. It's advice that's worth reminding for many, me included -and that's true regardless of whether the original reflection was born from one of your posts, from someone else, or from many different people-
I agree by answering to a general message with an "I", it does personalize the message. So I read Zathrian's message now and I understand it's more appropriate to answer to a general message with a general statement. Lesson learned.
So now everyone who's reading that thread may think it was directed at you and may never get any value from it because it will not start any personal reflection.
In that sense, it wastes the thread.
Yes I can see that. I tried to correct it by summarizing in a hope to add value but failed since there was still an "I" frame in my second answer. So instead of correcting it, I dug deeper on the same mistake.
That's even more true in case of replies that are only at the "me level" and very early, since early reply have more power to channel the conversation in unintended and unproductive directions -similar to the WhatsApp group folks who reply "I can't" as soon as you propose something and you think "couldn't you have just kept that to yourself, or at least for later?-.
Yes, as I went back to the thread it does that. Again, sorry.
So in the future, I'd appreciate it if whatever message I choose to write at a general level stays at a general level instead of being personalized.
Yes of course, Lucio!
How it disempowers you
Finally, it's disempowering to you, too.
Feels like over-personalizing things.
It's a sign of inner strength to keep things at a general level, VS turning it to "me". There was a great thread by Power Duck on this, worth a read.
And for sure sometimes keeping things general is part of "game of status and signaling", but it's also important to learn the rules of that game.
Yes, I agree. Thanks.
Referring to very specific cases is also an over-personalizing move that's best to avoid -I had no idea what the cat had to do with it, for example, and you never want people to think "what the heck is he talking about"-.
Yes, definitely. It's like one is talking about a topic and a person starts to talk about an event where they were involved thinking that people were referring to it:
Person A: Yeah, I love this game
Person B: You guys are talking about the time when I lost?
It does reek insecurity and low self-esteem.
The final self-tasking is also disempowering to you.
Alright, I'm aware of it now, thanks a lot.
Apart from social intelligence and approval seeking, one of my mistake was: I wanted to avoid using "we" as I did not want to power move. However I neglected the effect of "I". So now I'm aware of it. There's a 3rd way.
All in all, I want to thank you very much. I'm truly sorry. I think your message in the referred thread is an important one for the community. And apart from my mistakes I do have a huge enthusiasm for it. So it's a shame that I did not support it as it I meant it.

Hello Lucio,

Thank you very much for your message.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 19, 2023, 11:22 am
Hello John,
In this thread here, your post:
Quote from John Freeman on October 19, 2023, 10:31 am
(...) One situation about which I posted recently I thought about this (and that's why I put the cat down). For others I might lack some self-awareness, it's definitely a possibility.
I'll re-visit my recent posts with the framework you shared above.
This reply assumes the thread was directed at you.
But there was no mention of you there.
And of course some threads/posts of yours may have spurred that reflection.
But if the original poster doesn't mention you, it's because he willingly chose to do so.
So while thinking of the application to the self is definitely a great idea, it should mostly concern one's own reflections, and not necessarily the public behavior / reply.

Yes, you're right I agree. Reading it now it seems obvious to me.

How it disempowers me
Whatever the reason for the original poster to keep it general, it should be respected as his choice.
Because the moment you reply as if it was directed to you, it also affects the original poster (me), and the rest of the community (since everyone else may feel it doesn't concern them).

My bad, it was clumsy from my part. It was clear to me it was not directed at me personally (many people post here about self-defense) but I felt I was one of the persons concerned.

To reply as if it were directed at you is disempowering to the original poster (me) for several reasons, including:
May frame the original post as indirect/sneaky (power move). As in wanting to talk directly to you, but avoiding doing so (and just to be sure, that can be a good approach in some cases). To rob him of his choice to keep it general or even indirect is a power move on him

I can see that now. Not my intention, my apologies. Thinking about work, I understand now. If I send a general email to the residents about a certain behaviour and one person answers to me publicly it could frame me as if I wanted to convey a message to the person but did not have the courage to do so.

Frames me/the message at lower-levels, the level of of (covertly) addressing individuals and individual threads, instead of addressing larger and shared issues. The latter is far more empowering both to me, and what TPM can do for the world

Alright. I understand.

How it disempowers the future readers (community)
And even more important:
Disempowers the original message that goes from "to all" to "to John". It personalizes the original thread instead of keeping it at a general advice level, which is definitely not what I wanted. It's advice that's worth reminding for many, me included -and that's true regardless of whether the original reflection was born from one of your posts, from someone else, or from many different people-

I agree by answering to a general message with an "I", it does personalize the message. So I read Zathrian's message now and I understand it's more appropriate to answer to a general message with a general statement. Lesson learned.

So now everyone who's reading that thread may think it was directed at you and may never get any value from it because it will not start any personal reflection.
In that sense, it wastes the thread.

Yes I can see that. I tried to correct it by summarizing in a hope to add value but failed since there was still an "I" frame in my second answer. So instead of correcting it, I dug deeper on the same mistake.

That's even more true in case of replies that are only at the "me level" and very early, since early reply have more power to channel the conversation in unintended and unproductive directions -similar to the WhatsApp group folks who reply "I can't" as soon as you propose something and you think "couldn't you have just kept that to yourself, or at least for later?-.

Yes, as I went back to the thread it does that. Again, sorry.

So in the future, I'd appreciate it if whatever message I choose to write at a general level stays at a general level instead of being personalized.

Yes of course, Lucio!

How it disempowers you
Finally, it's disempowering to you, too.
Feels like over-personalizing things.
It's a sign of inner strength to keep things at a general level, VS turning it to "me". There was a great thread by Power Duck on this, worth a read.
And for sure sometimes keeping things general is part of "game of status and signaling", but it's also important to learn the rules of that game.

Yes, I agree. Thanks.

Referring to very specific cases is also an over-personalizing move that's best to avoid -I had no idea what the cat had to do with it, for example, and you never want people to think "what the heck is he talking about"-.

Yes, definitely. It's like one is talking about a topic and a person starts to talk about an event where they were involved thinking that people were referring to it:

Person A: Yeah, I love this game
Person B: You guys are talking about the time when I lost?

It does reek insecurity and low self-esteem.

The final self-tasking is also disempowering to you.

Alright, I'm aware of it now, thanks a lot.

Apart from social intelligence and approval seeking, one of my mistake was: I wanted to avoid using "we" as I did not want to power move. However I neglected the effect of "I". So now I'm aware of it. There's a 3rd way.

All in all, I want to thank you very much. I'm truly sorry. I think your message in the referred thread is an important one for the community. And apart from my mistakes I do have a huge enthusiasm for it. So it's a shame that I did not support it as it I meant it.

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#685 · October 19, 2023, 6:30 pm

Correction:

So I feel sorry that I did not support it as it I meant it in the first place.

instead of:

So it's a shame that I did not support it as it I meant it.

Lucio Buffalmano and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

#686 · October 19, 2023, 9:35 pm

Cheers John, glad we clarified (and so easily)!

John Freeman and Kavalier have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#687 · October 19, 2023, 10:04 pm

Thank you! Same feelings on my side!

Kavalier has reacted to this post.

#688 · October 25, 2023, 8:42 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on October 25, 2023, 8:42 am
@Kellvo,
Mate, the dynamics on this thread (and a previous similar one) are:
Losing social capital with me/community (that may be better spent with advice)
This was the exchange progression:
New thread: Kellvo says access has gone, "can you help"- <--- totally fair question, but still ends up taking from me (since I'm looking for ways to be zero involved in admin tasks) and the community (since the forum isn't supposed to be for support and everyone reading that gained nothing and only lost time). But so far no biggies here since one isn't supposed to know all of that and if he can understand the underlying dynamics, he can apologize later, show that he "gets it" and even gain from the faux pas)
Me: sure thing contact support. I might delete this after <----- I was far from clear here, but that sentence of deleting the thread already provides the hint that it was not supposed to be there and that it added admin task on my plate
Me: delete thread after a few days to keep the forum free of support questions
New thread: Kellvo asks how to contact support <----- still a fair question. But no BS honest feedback here, it did bother me as I thought "how about checking the contact page". And for sure I'm very touchy about using my time effectively and very anal-retentive about keeping the forum clean, but guaranteed I'm not the only one. And you'd still lose social capital even with those who are not as extreme
Me: go to contact page, use either email or WhatsApp. Give them email and/or username. Put a like on this thread so I know I can delete it
Question to support: no username/email <------- small and inconsequential mistake. But now the dynamics change since it goes from "social strategy mistake" to "not doing what was asked of you mistake". It's more "official" now that one maybe in the wrong, albeit no more damaging (as a matter of fact, social strategy mistakes are often more damaging than actual mistake)
Support asks for receipt: small mistake from support since asking for username/email may have been quicker. But they do that to ensure that people did purchase the product since someone who had a username but didn't purchase may try that move, so can't blame them too much
New question on the thread: support is asking for my receipt, how can I get that? <------- now this triangulates me and you and support. And while it's still fair for a customer to expect support, it's a lot less justified to come back to me once you have support on the line and you know they're there for you. Put yourself in my shoes or anyone else reading that. No matter how fair, this still spends more social capital. Some may wonder "why not asking support directly and leave Lucio more time to add value on actual strategies/techniques?" I can tell you that for sure I did think that
Edit:
9.: Me: then wrote this post here, which is even investment/time, and risk (park of the risk is that Kellvo may take it the wrong way, so not only I wouldn't add any value, but disappoint a customer/make an enemy). For the receiver of the clarification, the only way to make the speaker (me) whole in this case is to recognize the mistake, apologize, and thank for the explanation.
But not everyone will understand and do that. This is why you never take the time to explain mistakes to people with poor character and/or no potential. Because you waste time, for nothing (or for an actual loss).
Public requests for support disempower TPM
Asking for support to me publicly is disempowering to TPM since it frames it as "small business with one guy doing everything".
And it IS a small business indeed.
But still, good social strategies and "smoothness" towards people you like/want in your corner include that you want to avoid negative threads no matter how true they are.
(Plus, there is now someone handling support, so it isn't even a 100% honest representation of current TPM and that only loses 2x more social capital).
Asking support questions to me disempowers me
It disempowers because my frame -and my goal!- is that my time must go to more value-adding advice/strategies/work.
That isn't just me of course, but the goal of any person who wants to be effective.
It devalues me to pull me into support questions since it frames me as doing customer care, instead of developing products/helping people with the strategies.
Of course customer care is SUPER important.
And of course I want that to be done to perfection for PU customers -no questions about that-.
But it shouldn't be me to do it.
And people still (rightfully?) think that the guy who does the strategy/discipline development is higher value.
If you noticed, my messages were:
Short
With little details
Redirecting to support (instead of doing it myself)
Always mentioning the deletion of the thread
That was all on purpose because the sub-communication was: "this is not the place to ask that, I'm not the guy to ask that, take it with those who do take care of admin work, because I don't".
So to pull me back into support work time and time again is bound to disempower me (and spend even more social capital, which of course isn't infinite).
Edit: forcing me to be curt/cold spends even more social capital
Edit:
Also, I am forced to avoid being very giving when it comes to admin/customer support.
Because being super helpful would set a bad precedent and invite even more admin questions.
This is a case of being forced into acting cold/curt. Not too unlike the guy who is talking to a girl and is forced to throw the interloper under the bus when he's interrupting (because he ends up acting like an unwitting cockblocker).
And that spends even more social capital because nobody with some morals and ethics likes being forced to act cold/curt.
I want to add value, not being forced to be curt to defend TPM and/or my reputation.
Just to be clear:
This concerns the dynamics with me as an individual, not TPM as a service provider.
TPM as a business strives to provide fast, effective and, as per one of our core values, value-adding customer service.
And this is all meant to both clarify with you, Kellvo, and to hopefully add value (and maybe add value to some other readers as well).
My hope is that it can be taken that way -because you, Kellvo, seem to me like an awesome guy to me. And the fact that I took time to write this is a testament to that. Granted, I wouldn't have done it for just about any random user-.

@Kellvo,

Mate, the dynamics on this thread (and a previous similar one) are:

Losing social capital with me/community (that may be better spent with advice)

This was the exchange progression:

New thread: Kellvo says access has gone, "can you help"- <--- totally fair question, but still ends up taking from me (since I'm looking for ways to be zero involved in admin tasks) and the community (since the forum isn't supposed to be for support and everyone reading that gained nothing and only lost time). But so far no biggies here since one isn't supposed to know all of that and if he can understand the underlying dynamics, he can apologize later, show that he "gets it" and even gain from the faux pas)
Me: sure thing contact support. I might delete this after <----- I was far from clear here, but that sentence of deleting the thread already provides the hint that it was not supposed to be there and that it added admin task on my plate
Me: delete thread after a few days to keep the forum free of support questions
New thread: Kellvo asks how to contact support <----- still a fair question. But no BS honest feedback here, it did bother me as I thought "how about checking the contact page". And for sure I'm very touchy about using my time effectively and very anal-retentive about keeping the forum clean, but guaranteed I'm not the only one. And you'd still lose social capital even with those who are not as extreme
Me: go to contact page, use either email or WhatsApp. Give them email and/or username. Put a like on this thread so I know I can delete it
Question to support: no username/email <------- small and inconsequential mistake. But now the dynamics change since it goes from "social strategy mistake" to "not doing what was asked of you mistake". It's more "official" now that one maybe in the wrong, albeit no more damaging (as a matter of fact, social strategy mistakes are often more damaging than actual mistake)
Support asks for receipt: small mistake from support since asking for username/email may have been quicker. But they do that to ensure that people did purchase the product since someone who had a username but didn't purchase may try that move, so can't blame them too much
New question on the thread: support is asking for my receipt, how can I get that? <------- now this triangulates me and you and support. And while it's still fair for a customer to expect support, it's a lot less justified to come back to me once you have support on the line and you know they're there for you. Put yourself in my shoes or anyone else reading that. No matter how fair, this still spends more social capital. Some may wonder "why not asking support directly and leave Lucio more time to add value on actual strategies/techniques?" I can tell you that for sure I did think that

Edit:

9.: Me: then wrote this post here, which is even investment/time, and risk (park of the risk is that Kellvo may take it the wrong way, so not only I wouldn't add any value, but disappoint a customer/make an enemy). For the receiver of the clarification, the only way to make the speaker (me) whole in this case is to recognize the mistake, apologize, and thank for the explanation.
But not everyone will understand and do that. This is why you never take the time to explain mistakes to people with poor character and/or no potential. Because you waste time, for nothing (or for an actual loss).

Public requests for support disempower TPM

Asking for support to me publicly is disempowering to TPM since it frames it as "small business with one guy doing everything".

And it IS a small business indeed.

But still, good social strategies and "smoothness" towards people you like/want in your corner include that you want to avoid negative threads no matter how true they are.

(Plus, there is now someone handling support, so it isn't even a 100% honest representation of current TPM and that only loses 2x more social capital).

Asking support questions to me disempowers me

It disempowers because my frame -and my goal!- is that my time must go to more value-adding advice/strategies/work.

That isn't just me of course, but the goal of any person who wants to be effective.

It devalues me to pull me into support questions since it frames me as doing customer care, instead of developing products/helping people with the strategies.

Of course customer care is SUPER important.
And of course I want that to be done to perfection for PU customers -no questions about that-.

But it shouldn't be me to do it.

And people still (rightfully?) think that the guy who does the strategy/discipline development is higher value.

If you noticed, my messages were:

Short
With little details
Redirecting to support (instead of doing it myself)
Always mentioning the deletion of the thread

That was all on purpose because the sub-communication was: "this is not the place to ask that, I'm not the guy to ask that, take it with those who do take care of admin work, because I don't".

So to pull me back into support work time and time again is bound to disempower me (and spend even more social capital, which of course isn't infinite).

Edit: forcing me to be curt/cold spends even more social capital

Edit:

Also, I am forced to avoid being very giving when it comes to admin/customer support.

Because being super helpful would set a bad precedent and invite even more admin questions.

This is a case of being forced into acting cold/curt. Not too unlike the guy who is talking to a girl and is forced to throw the interloper under the bus when he's interrupting (because he ends up acting like an unwitting cockblocker).

And that spends even more social capital because nobody with some morals and ethics likes being forced to act cold/curt.
I want to add value, not being forced to be curt to defend TPM and/or my reputation.

Just to be clear:

This concerns the dynamics with me as an individual, not TPM as a service provider.

TPM as a business strives to provide fast, effective and, as per one of our core values, value-adding customer service.

And this is all meant to both clarify with you, Kellvo, and to hopefully add value (and maybe add value to some other readers as well).

My hope is that it can be taken that way -because you, Kellvo, seem to me like an awesome guy to me. And the fact that I took time to write this is a testament to that. Granted, I wouldn't have done it for just about any random user-.

Kellvo, Ali Scarlett and 5 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#689 · October 25, 2023, 5:29 pm

Hi Lucio,

I took your critique to heart; you are right, I could've handled it a lot better. I did notice the subcommunication, and it was my mistake for not listening to it. In the future, I will remember WIIFM and to make sure that I add value here while avoiding another faux pas like this one.

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

#690 · October 25, 2023, 8:12 pm

Thank you for being so cool and open-minded about it, Kellvo!

Also because there certainly is plenty of scope for not taking it well -ie. "I'm a customer, just provide me with my course" or "you changed access policy, you restore it (I don't care how I contact you)".

And of course, it always takes a lot of personal strength and antifragile ego for self-reflection, see the other person's point of view, and see the (possible) value in the message.

So, thank you for this man, very glad we clarified, glad you have access again (I think), and was very happy to read from you again.

Kellvo, Ali Scarlett and 3 other users have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.