4 ms·

As the author said, "If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you’re not a writer." By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone

by madrox 3y ago

As the author said, "If someone can talk you out of being a writer, you’re not a writer." By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone you're asking for feedback from, you're not really asking for feedback. As the author puts it, you're asking for a pat on the head. Consideration is always nice, but if I didn't get it from someone who was giving (free) candid advice I wouldn't call them a dick for it.

ivraatiems 3y ago
> By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone you're asking for feedback from, you're not really asking for feedback. I don't agree with this statement. Being reasonably considerate and empathetic is a mandatory requirement of all human interaction, it is not optional just because you are in the position of being asked for something. It's not "a pat on the head" to be helpful and not insulting. Everyone has the right to be treated decently provided their behavior is minimally decent. Asking someone to do something for you is not sufficiently indecent to earn a rude response. Further, if your goal is to make an impression on someone where they agree with and believe the point you're making, being an asshole to them is unlikely to do it. This story is a case in point - the person thought he was being rude and disengaged, and did not take his advice. To be clear, I am not saying the author of this piece was intentionally being rude. Just that it makes a lot of sense, from the outside, why he came across that way given what he said.
- madrox 3y ago
  Believe me, I'm all for living in a more considerate and empathetic society. However, I think calling it "a mandatory requirement of all human interaction" is not true and is the seed of the paradox of tolerance. As the author says, "you put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy."
  - ivraatiems 3y ago
    The thing is, I don't agree with that second statement of the author's, either. You're not a "bad guy" for having boundaries (or because one guy you barely know thinks you are). Saying "I'm sorry, I just can't mix my professional and personal life like that, it's a rule I have for myself and it's nothing about you personally," is totally reasonable! If you behave reasonably and empathetically, and someone takes issue with it, they're the one with the problem, not you. By behaving tolerantly, you make the other person's intolerance more obvious. (Though again, like I said, not blaming the author. He clearly tried pretty hard to do the right thing here.)

by madrox 3y ago

ivraatiems 3y ago

> By corollary, I'd say if you need or expect consideration from someone you're asking for feedback from, you're not really asking for feedback. I don't agree with this statement. Being reasonably considerate and empathetic is a mandatory requirement of all human interaction, it is not optional just because you are in the position of being asked for something. It's not "a pat on the head" to be helpful and not insulting. Everyone has the right to be treated decently provided their behavior is minimally decent. Asking someone to do something for you is not sufficiently indecent to earn a rude response. Further, if your goal is to make an impression on someone where they agree with and believe the point you're making, being an asshole to them is unlikely to do it. This story is a case in point - the person thought he was being rude and disengaged, and did not take his advice. To be clear, I am not saying the author of this piece was intentionally being rude. Just that it makes a lot of sense, from the outside, why he came across that way given what he said.

madrox 3y ago
Believe me, I'm all for living in a more considerate and empathetic society. However, I think calling it "a mandatory requirement of all human interaction" is not true and is the seed of the paradox of tolerance. As the author says, "you put me in this spot where my only option is to acquiesce to your demands or be the bad guy."
- ivraatiems 3y ago
  The thing is, I don't agree with that second statement of the author's, either. You're not a "bad guy" for having boundaries (or because one guy you barely know thinks you are). Saying "I'm sorry, I just can't mix my professional and personal life like that, it's a rule I have for myself and it's nothing about you personally," is totally reasonable! If you behave reasonably and empathetically, and someone takes issue with it, they're the one with the problem, not you. By behaving tolerantly, you make the other person's intolerance more obvious. (Though again, like I said, not blaming the author. He clearly tried pretty hard to do the right thing here.)