3 ms·

And I recommend to not use 'we' when speaking for yourself. Regarding your nice -> respectful update, just replace 'nice' with 'respectful' so the proposed ide

• mdp2021 4y ago
  'We' is perfectly valid if not using an individual matter but a sharable position: "I went there", but "We believe". (Because it is not just this one who happens to be writing.) (By the way, I could add for clarity, there is an extreme difference from the considerations that are apparent in the case of that 'we' and the suggestion "Who has never set fire to a public monument? I did" (Graham Chapman) that was implied in that 'you'. It is really not the same, because avoiding calling people "arsonists" is what I recommended.) The idea to have engines that notify of disrespectful qualities in text is interesting - of course it should be clear that it is a completely different matter from what was discussed before -, but I suspect that the engine should be quite intelligent to discriminate what is respectful and what is not. It is similar to the former context: a veneer of kindness is cheap and possibly inadvisable; a respectful stance is not superficial hence not cheap - it has harder requirements for feasibility.
  • throwaway290 4y ago
    Real example: https://twitter.com/DannyRichman/status/1598254671591723008 https://twitter.com/DannyRichman/status/1598254671591723008 > Because it is not just this one who happens to be writing. I am talking to you and you are representing only yourself, not a collective.