4 ms·

>How do you turn "you are coming at this from the wrong angle and that's causing problems" into praise? By eliminating those judgement words "wrong" and "probl

>How do you turn "you are coming at this from the wrong angle and that's causing problems" into praise? By eliminating those judgement words "wrong" and "problem," of course. ;-) A more positive-focused process might be, "that's an interesting perspective, and here's a generalization that might unlock new avenues for thinking further." Anyway, see my edit above where I offer an elaboration on your (IMO excellent) observation.

kortilla 2y ago
“That’s an interesting perspective” is not the same feedback as saying something is wrong. Don’t mince words, not everyone needs a participation trophy.
- schiffern 2y ago
  Again, "wrong" is a judgement, not a fact. Whether something is "wrong" depends largely on how negative vs positive the reviewer wants to spin it. There's no objective reality to it, only a chosen emotional state at the time of writing. >participation trophy Sadly this is one of those (pre-) loaded phrases that tends to shut down thought, rather than stimulate it.
  - kortilla 2y ago
    Writing can be objectively wrong if it contains any references to reality.
  - CRConrad 2y ago
    > Again, "wrong" is a judgement, not a fact. Whether something is "wrong" depends largely on how negative vs positive the reviewer wants to spin it. 1 + 1 = 3 OK, go tell the world that's not wrong. > There's no objective reality to it, only a chosen emotional state at the time of writing. Oh, bullpucky. Mealy-mouthed blather like that is what brought us literal participation trophies. Some things are just wrong.
Dylan16807 2y ago
I don't see how "you are coming at this from an angle, end of comment" elevates anything. You could cut off my original comment after the first paragraph and it would still be a reasonably useful comment, but I don't think you can remove the criticism in the rest of the comment without cutting that out entirely and losing the meaning.
- schiffern 2y ago
  Exactly why I offer a better approach. ;)
  - pjc50 2y ago
    You're arguing that your approach is "better", but for OP the criticism is the point. And you're coming across as incredibly smug about it.
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    Your "better" approach still throws out two thirds of my original comment. I'm not convinced. Also I don't think the article covers the groundwork well enough to make the perspective interesting. Interesting is where it could get with further work, not where it is now.
    - schiffern 2y ago
      I gave you an example, but you're right that I didn't do all the copyediting work for you. It's up to you to generalize the example to the rest of your post. Good luck! Any questions please don't hesitate to ask. Good thread, thanks and cheers
      - Dylan16807 2y ago
        ...I gave the same example when I originally asked you the question. It's obvious how to change that sentence. Changing the rest is not obvious. ""If you cut my comment down to "This touches on fundamental philosophy." you could turn it into minor praise but you'd have to throw out the rest.""

kortilla 2y ago

“That’s an interesting perspective” is not the same feedback as saying something is wrong. Don’t mince words, not everyone needs a participation trophy.

schiffern 2y ago
Again, "wrong" is a judgement, not a fact. Whether something is "wrong" depends largely on how negative vs positive the reviewer wants to spin it. There's no objective reality to it, only a chosen emotional state at the time of writing. >participation trophy Sadly this is one of those (pre-) loaded phrases that tends to shut down thought, rather than stimulate it.
- kortilla 2y ago
  Writing can be objectively wrong if it contains any references to reality.
- CRConrad 2y ago
  > Again, "wrong" is a judgement, not a fact. Whether something is "wrong" depends largely on how negative vs positive the reviewer wants to spin it. 1 + 1 = 3 OK, go tell the world that's not wrong. > There's no objective reality to it, only a chosen emotional state at the time of writing. Oh, bullpucky. Mealy-mouthed blather like that is what brought us literal participation trophies. Some things are just wrong.

Dylan16807 2y ago

I don't see how "you are coming at this from an angle, end of comment" elevates anything. You could cut off my original comment after the first paragraph and it would still be a reasonably useful comment, but I don't think you can remove the criticism in the rest of the comment without cutting that out entirely and losing the meaning.

schiffern 2y ago
Exactly why I offer a better approach. ;)
- pjc50 2y ago
  You're arguing that your approach is "better", but for OP the criticism is the point. And you're coming across as incredibly smug about it.
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Your "better" approach still throws out two thirds of my original comment. I'm not convinced. Also I don't think the article covers the groundwork well enough to make the perspective interesting. Interesting is where it could get with further work, not where it is now.
  - schiffern 2y ago
    I gave you an example, but you're right that I didn't do all the copyediting work for you. It's up to you to generalize the example to the rest of your post. Good luck! Any questions please don't hesitate to ask. Good thread, thanks and cheers
    - Dylan16807 2y ago
      ...I gave the same example when I originally asked you the question. It's obvious how to change that sentence. Changing the rest is not obvious. ""If you cut my comment down to "This touches on fundamental philosophy." you could turn it into minor praise but you'd have to throw out the rest.""