Please or Register to create posts and topics.

"Thanks for sharing your preferences": When to Use? Maybe Against Taskers?

Is this because it switches her frame from "this is the rule, and you are outside Airbnb rules" to "her preferences within the boundaries of Airbnb rules"?

Yeah, it's a few things together, including what you mention:

  1. It's a preference, not a rule
  2. Frames it as a preference, rather than her ordering me on how to behave, and me complying
  3. Frames me as willingly accepting out of kindness and respect for her preferences, not because she's ordering/tasking me to

I was thinking that we can use "Thank you for your preference" in several other examples.

Against Tasking

Him: Please do this.

You: Thanks for sharing your preferences in what to do.

Against A Strong Statement

Him: This is how it works.

You: Thanks for sharing your preferences in how to approach this.

selffriend has reacted to this post.
selffriend

Yes, good catch on singling out the technique.

We saw something somewhat similar before when it comes to opinions.
Rather than opinion, here we use preferences, but it works in a similar way: it removes her authority by severing her power-borrowing from "rules" and "what's proper / what's not".

At the higher level, this is frame control, and reframing.

On a power dynamics perspective, it's rejecting/ignoring the initial frame, and then setting up your own with your next reply/move.

USE: AGAINST TASKERS, JUDGES, MORAL ATTACKS

It can be used against taskers, yes.
Especially when they had not the authority to task you, but it's still kind of you to do something. At that point, you might still want to do it to avoid escalation and/or to keep a good relationship, but you want to do it on your terms.
Then you can go for something similar.

It can also be used against judges, when someone tries to frame their request as "the (only) good/moral way of doing something".

And against moral attacks or frames as well.
For example:

Her: I can only communicate via the official platform, it's inappropriate to contact someone on their private phone
You: I think it's always good to confirm to the host's number in case something urgent or safety-related is needed. But thanks for sharing your preference when it comes to communication though, some people prefer Airbnb, some others prefer the directness of texts and calls. Now that I know you prefer Airbnb, I'm totally cool with sticking to it. Cheers!

Name for The Technique?

I'm thinking whether it makes sense to name this technique, or if it makes more sense to let it fall underneath the general "power borrowing" and "reframing" umbrella without a specific name.

As you correctly say, it can be used in several situations.

selffriend has reacted to this post.
selffriend
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I think this could be a good example under the umbrella of "Undermining their judge authority" of "reframing the judges", in the section 4 of

The Judge Role: A Tool For Power & Control | The Power Moves

 

However, OP's technique is a little bit more advanced. Rather than directly pointing out that the tasker has no authority, he indirectly frame that tasker has no authority. It might be also a covert powermove (if I understand correctly), and very few people are able to see through the implied frame.

This covert powermove is better than directly fighting the judge rule because the tasker cannot easily fight back the new frame without being socially awkward.

Processing...