5 ms·

Can't tell if this thread got meta or if this a perfect example of the original article's point to not use "you". Eradicatethots intention (I believe) was to sa

• dahart 9y ago
  Great point, I did assume it was me and not someone. Maybe he's not as agitated as it seemed. But the article's point was to avoid personal attacks, not about pronoun confusion, right? If you're right, then I made the mistake. Yours is the better more generous benefit of the doubt assumption anyway, so in retrospect I prefer it. That said, I don't think it's fair to claim that avoiding personal attacks, and using language that helps people to be more optimistic is equivalent to manipulation that looks bad and fails. It's very, very hard to read @raganwald's blog post and take it as manipulative - did you check it out? You should! I still don't understand "I don’t think a guide [on communication] can help you if you feel like you need one." Did I mis-interpret that one too, is there also a better assumption here than the one I made?
  • jonwiththewind 9y ago
    I agree, the thoughtful and intentional use of language is important (read through raganwald's post and it is a good explanation of that). Seems cynical to me to think of conversing as a strategic game of manipulation. Didn't mean to agree with the previous poster – simply found it amusing that the idea of not needing to think about communication was immediately disproven by the statement being misinterpreted.