You’ll have to specify you don’t support it when describing it in a way that can be confused as a defense for it if you really want to avoid it. Saying, “nah it doesn’t work like that.” is very, very easy to take as an adversarial statement.
It doesn’t imply defense, but it can come across as a defensive posture. Poe’s Law kinda’ sucks to deal with. It’s one of many reasons good speech writers are kept around. It’s not just about having correct English or making logically correct statements.
They were being neither parodic nor sarcastic so Poe’s law really doesn’t apply.
I also disagree that they have to specify they don’t support it. The comment is a statement of fact, a readers assumptions about the stance of the writer speaks to the readers bias, not the writers.
Yes, notice how I said, “…if you want to avoid it.”
It wasn’t an appeal for making correct statements. It was an appeal to hedge communication, which is always intelligent to do with a general audience. Most people do not think like a computer. You HAVE to communicate with that in mind to effectively communicate.
Yes, it’s a problem with stupid people, but if you want stupid people to understand you, you better get used to it.
I think you are falling into the social media trap that every comment has to be a back and forth, or a disagreement. When you describe the existing system, if someone disagrees with it, it’s not a disagreement with you. When you let that go and realize you don’t need to reply, it’s a weight lifted.
I don’t disagree with you.
Just describing the existing system.
This is becoming a running thing for me on Kbin. Describing the system and facing people who are angry about the system.
I don’t endorse it. I think it is bullshit. But it is what it is until we figure out how to make them fix it.
You’ll have to specify you don’t support it when describing it in a way that can be confused as a defense for it if you really want to avoid it. Saying, “nah it doesn’t work like that.” is very, very easy to take as an adversarial statement.
It doesn’t imply defense, but it can come across as a defensive posture. Poe’s Law kinda’ sucks to deal with. It’s one of many reasons good speech writers are kept around. It’s not just about having correct English or making logically correct statements.
They were being neither parodic nor sarcastic so Poe’s law really doesn’t apply.
I also disagree that they have to specify they don’t support it. The comment is a statement of fact, a readers assumptions about the stance of the writer speaks to the readers bias, not the writers.
Yes, notice how I said, “…if you want to avoid it.”
It wasn’t an appeal for making correct statements. It was an appeal to hedge communication, which is always intelligent to do with a general audience. Most people do not think like a computer. You HAVE to communicate with that in mind to effectively communicate.
Yes, it’s a problem with stupid people, but if you want stupid people to understand you, you better get used to it.
shoots the messenger
I think you are falling into the social media trap that every comment has to be a back and forth, or a disagreement. When you describe the existing system, if someone disagrees with it, it’s not a disagreement with you. When you let that go and realize you don’t need to reply, it’s a weight lifted.
Keep informing and more people learn.
That’s actually really good advice.
Cheers.
No it’s not.