4 ms·
> Despite the strong complaints, the article isn't that bad and does have some merits. I will likewise critique your critique: Instead of creating a new threa
by Eisenstein 3y ago
> Despite the strong complaints, the article isn't that bad and does have some merits.
I will likewise critique your critique:
Instead of creating a new thread you post directly to the author who responded to an unrelated message. Since the author is obviously responding to criticisms, why did you feel the need to expand a thread with a non-related article quotation you took issue with rather than start your own? It seems to me you wanted to ensure that the author read what you wrote because you felt it was particularly important for him to see it. I don't agree.
The article is about finishing projects instead of starting new ones -- it is not about when to cut losses. The two topics may seem related but I argue that they are not.
The type of person to leave an unfinished project on the table because it isn't 'good enough' is the person for whom the author is writing. It is not the type of person who can't let a project go despite the damage that project is causing to other things or despite the project being a lost cause.
Example:
The person who makes a bet 'if I risk X in exchange for A% of success happening and I lose, I can live with that, but I couldn't live with not trying' is not the person who makes a bet 'I lost X, which I couldn't afford to lose, but if I risk everything I have left or go into debt, then I can make back what I lost and be whole again'. One is an entrepreneur and the other is a gambling addict. The same type of difference exists in the two cases you present.
Your final sentence seems to be a half-assed acknowledgment that you found value in the work, but you are unable to give praise so the complements you use are negated put-downs (not bad, despite complaints, is not meritless). I think that this form of praise is worthless and makes you look petty. Stop doing it.
- BeetleB 3y ago> Instead of creating a new thread you post directly to the author who responded to an unrelated message. Since the author is obviously responding to criticisms, why did you feel the need to expand a thread with a non-related article quotation you took issue with rather than start your own? It seems to me you wanted to ensure that the author read what you wrote because you felt it was particularly important for him to see it. I don't agree. I have no idea what you are talking about. My comment is on the same topic as the head of the thread, and provides more details on that original critique.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- Eisenstein 3y agoI stand by my original assessment. I am not seeing a connection between 'the use of 'you' vs 'I' personalization and the effectiveness of the difference in using them' and 'a request to investigate a logical fallacy and the relevance of such fallacy to the article'.
- BeetleB 3y agoAnd I stand by my original response: I have no idea what you're talking about.
- plewd 3y agoI think their point makes a lot of sense, although they could have been less aggressive about it. Your reply, while interesting, would work better as a standalone comment and doesn't really relate to the thread.