I totally get this point, as I thoroughly read another of Yaakov’s threads. The one about those “hard of learning.”

To me at least, I find this a helpful PERSONAL tool to determine whether or not take the time and effort to answer a thread, and/or risk a confrontation with a stranger.

I am Personally doing this already, but I find Yakov’s list much better structured than my train of thought.

So Yaakov, if you find this list useful to you, by all means use it.
Godspeed to you.

Thanks. I am afraid that people may have misunderstood my original post. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. Perhaps the title was not well crafted. In any case, I hope my responses clarified it at least for some.

Another lesson

There is a saying from Rabban Gamliel, a rabbi in the Talmud:

וְאַל תֹּאמַר דָּבָר שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁמֹעַ, שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לְהִשָּׁמַע

"Do not say something that cannot be understood [trusting] that in the end it will be understood."

Maybe I need to think about that when I am writing the titles for my posts. I used to instruct my staff that when they sent out emails they must have subjects that were clear and only one topic per email or they would not be read, nor would anything but the first idea understood. I should take my own advice.

 

Hi Salts,
May I ask why you are so anxious to have this Thread rated poorly.?

E

Mr Salts is triggered by Yaakov. Since most (all?) of his posts may have negative ranks, he feels the need to lash out.

<removed>

Edit: I have poor self control skills. Hence, I have edited my response so be more accurately represent a non-judgemental post.

 

While @MrSalts and I clearly have disagreements, I feel uncomfortable that this thread would prompt comments about him.

Whatever I think of him, I don't think public ridicule is good thing. I hope there is not a lot that in this thread.

 

Hi Salts,
May I ask why you are so anxious to have this Thread rated poorly.?

E

Because it is a solution waiting for a problem - it just sounds like someone looking to be patted on the head to get recognition or feel like they have been recognized (depending on who can view the results). Pointless.

 

Thanks. I am afraid that people may have misunderstood my original post. I'm sorry I wasn't more clear. Perhaps the title was not well crafted. In any case, I hope my responses clarified it at least for some.

Another lesson

There is a saying from Rabban Gamliel, a rabbi in the Talmud:

וְאַל תֹּאמַר דָּבָר שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִשְׁמֹעַ, שֶׁסּוֹפוֹ לְהִשָּׁמַע

"Do not say something that cannot be understood [trusting] that in the end it will be understood."

Maybe I need to think about that when I am writing the titles for my posts. I used to instruct my staff that when they sent out emails they must have subjects that were clear and only one topic per email or they would not be read, nor would anything but the first idea understood. I should take my own advice.

I did misunderstand you in the beginning, and I believe that I do understand you now. Thank you for the clarification.

We each intake and output ideas with unavoidable biases. You wrote what you wrote in a way that would have made total sense to anyone who was already on your train of thought. I (and others) read what you wrote in a way that made total sense to anyone who is familiar with the popularity contest features of other sites. You could have been more clear and I/we could have paid closer attention to detail. It is challenging to cleanly communicate ideas untainted at either/both ends by bias.

This is something I am trying to work on personally. Despite the lapse I demonstrated just now in this thread, I think I have gotten better at receiving information. I guess the next step for me is to start asking myself if I really know what another means prior to my first communication, not only after their reply does not match my expectations.

When I'm on the other end, presenting my ideas, I try to think of all the most obvious ways I might be misunderstood (especially in politics where people try to misunderstand you) and be clear that [that thing] isn't what I'm talking about. Doesn't always work, sometimes I miss obvious things and sometimes people skim past my preemptive clarifications and misunderstand me despite my best efforts, but it does help. This is not a fast a process. I think I come across as slow witted in real life.

 

This is just a fun Gedankenexperiment, don’t take it too seriously.

Hi salts,
You are over thinking it.

This may help:
Definition of gedankenexperiment
: an experiment carried out in thought only

E

 

I did misunderstand you in the beginning, and I believe that I do understand you now. Thank you for the clarification.

We each intake and output ideas with unavoidable biases. You wrote what you wrote in a way that would have made total sense to anyone who was already on your train of thought. I (and others) read what you wrote in a way that made total sense to anyone who is familiar with the popularity contest features of other sites. You could have been more clear and I/we could have paid closer attention to detail. It is challenging to cleanly communicate ideas untainted at either/both ends by bias.

This is something I am trying to work on personally. Despite the lapse I demonstrated just now in this thread, I think I have gotten better at receiving information. I guess the next step for me is to start asking myself if I really know what another means prior to my first communication, not only after their reply does not match my expectations.

When I'm on the other end, presenting my ideas, I try to think of all the most obvious ways I might be misunderstood (especially in politics where people try to misunderstand you) and be clear that [that thing] isn't what I'm talking about. Doesn't always work, sometimes I miss obvious things and sometimes people skim past my preemptive clarifications and misunderstand me despite my best efforts, but it does help. This is not a fast a process. I think I come across as slow witted in real life.

It has taken me many years not to jump the gun on understanding things. My partner in recording studio work was practically opposite to me. I would jump in A, X, R, B while he would go A, A and a half, B, B and a half, C... etc. He was completely linear and very slow but very far from stupid. I could do many things he couldn't but his linear, careful thinking spotted errors I completely missed. Thankfully, he put up with my insulting responses "Shouldn't the red be on that terminal?" "No, dummy, it's normalled to... oh, wait, you are right."

I try to purposely slow conclusions down now, though I am not always successful. Listening is amazingly powerful.

 

Hi salts,
You are over thinking it.

This may help:
Definition of gedankenexperiment
: an experiment carried out in thought only

E

Thought experiments are great for scientific discussions. Thought experiments can be very dangerous if used to find an individual's or a community's weaknesses/vulnerabilities in a social engineering or gaslighting effort. Keep it for science. It tends to have bad endings when you ask a group of people their opinions to see how far and what specific attitudes need to be addressed to move the opinion of a group. Today's topic was carefully presented as a "thought experiment" but it was really a "thought experiment - for now". From thought experiment to modified idea to acceptable idea to implementation to .... to obedient, socially engineered drones.

Enjoy your thought experiment.

 

Didn't we have a post grading system on the forum at one time? And it, if I remember correctly almost totally broke this forum.

Along this same line of thinking, what do any of us do when a member is posting total nonsense answers? I call him out and get a warning. I explain why I do as I do and am ignored. And the member continues to give answers that a quick Google can show is wrong, but said member has a way of making himself feel like the TS best friend.

 

Ya can't legislate morality.

The only thing that works is culture, which is created by peer example.
I see YOU setting a standard for empathic, patient, and honorable behavior, this gradually becomes MY frame of reference.

This place is better than most in this regard, crappy behavior is shunned, we strive to improve.

 

Hi salts,
Thanks for your detailed reply I can now see clearly why you have a problem.

The Thread outlines the personal way the TS grades a query type Thread posted by another person, not a suggestion that it should be an AAC rule or TS marking system.

I am sure we all have a mental audit on how to analyse a newly posted query Thread and how it should have ‘really’ been asked and written, we then base our response on that analysis.

As I said previously you are over thinking the document
Your reasoning seems based on almost paranoia that you/we are being manipulated in some way.

Today's topic was carefully presented as a "thought experiment" but it was really a "thought experiment - for now".

. From thought experiment to modified idea to acceptable idea to implementation to .... to obedient, socially engineered drones.

If you are always fearful of other people putting up and discussing new idea’s just because they maybe somehow be used against you, then you are not going to get very far in life.

To paraphrase Sigmund, sometimes an ‘idea’ is just a ‘idea’

Eric