3 ms·

> Words matter. But they are not the way humans communicate. People communicate any way they can. On online forums, we have to communicate with words as there

> Words matter. But they are not the way humans communicate. People communicate any way they can. On online forums, we have to communicate with words as there is no other way (so far). > Assuming a well-intended statement is intended to be malicious is a path to complete communication meltdown. You're right, but this is just as much, and probably more so, the fault of the writer than the reader. Because like you said, so much of our communication is not using words, when we are limited to words, we have to be extra careful about which words we use and how we craft our message because the chance of being misunderstood is much higher.

chiefalchemist 6y ago
My fave comms goto is: "It's not what you say, it's what they hear." - Frank Luntz Unfortunately, it pre-dates cancel culture and such. We've allowed "always assume the worst" to be normalized. We've made one (event) into a pattern. Communication is a two way street. If one side (i.e., the receiver) is intentionally undermining "the contract" then the processes is doomed. You can't have a two-way process where one half is trying their best to communicate, and the other is trying their best not to do so. It doesn't work that way. Which is obvious at this point. Insanity is at an all time high.
- ativzzz 6y ago
  > Insanity is at an all time high. People have always been insane, we've just never been connected to so many people simultaneously and have never experienced so much collective insanity accessible anytime, anywhere. > You can't have a two-way process where one half is trying their best to communicate, and the other is trying their best not to do so This is impossible to prove, especially how many "trying their best to communicate" efforts I've seen are simply not good enough. People suck at communicating clearly just as much as they suck at receiving and processing unclear communication, especially via text, and I bet people who think they are communicating effectively are misjudging just how effective their communication is. These people then tend to blame political affiliation for their lack of communication skills, though of course any platform will tend to be biased in some way or other. But yes, communication is a two way street, and particularly with divisive topics, neither the sender nor the receiver of the message is properly taking into account people of differing opinions.

chiefalchemist 6y ago

My fave comms goto is: "It's not what you say, it's what they hear." - Frank Luntz Unfortunately, it pre-dates cancel culture and such. We've allowed "always assume the worst" to be normalized. We've made one (event) into a pattern. Communication is a two way street. If one side (i.e., the receiver) is intentionally undermining "the contract" then the processes is doomed. You can't have a two-way process where one half is trying their best to communicate, and the other is trying their best not to do so. It doesn't work that way. Which is obvious at this point. Insanity is at an all time high.

ativzzz 6y ago
> Insanity is at an all time high. People have always been insane, we've just never been connected to so many people simultaneously and have never experienced so much collective insanity accessible anytime, anywhere. > You can't have a two-way process where one half is trying their best to communicate, and the other is trying their best not to do so This is impossible to prove, especially how many "trying their best to communicate" efforts I've seen are simply not good enough. People suck at communicating clearly just as much as they suck at receiving and processing unclear communication, especially via text, and I bet people who think they are communicating effectively are misjudging just how effective their communication is. These people then tend to blame political affiliation for their lack of communication skills, though of course any platform will tend to be biased in some way or other. But yes, communication is a two way street, and particularly with divisive topics, neither the sender nor the receiver of the message is properly taking into account people of differing opinions.