Schrodinger's revenge

[jay]

Interesting to note how friends, partners, people-in-general shift during difficult periods... especially noteworthy when there's a sharp difference between gently chiding or supportive one-on-one discussions and a seemingly-harsher line taken by the same folks in public spaces. One senses attempts to play off both sides in a dispute... or perhaps an unwillingness to burn bridges.

Nonetheless, I've certainly noted who my friends have been -- and haven't been, at least not openly -- in this recent flap. Other folks say that they may like me, but they're unwilling to trust me unless I promise to communicate the manner they prefer? Fine, but that statement cuts two ways... my own trust-assessments have certainly been adjusted downward recently for some people, upward for others. The chestnut about difficult times differentiating between true friends and those posing as such has some validity, unfortunately. Likewise the one about Schrodinger's cat... containers have been opened. One way or the other...

Comments

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[trinker.livejournal.com]

It was this line: will actually figure out what I'm trying to say (instead of rushing to knee-jerk reactions or simple interpretations). I suppose that's a bit arrogant, but otherwise I'm easily bored... that set my teeth on edge. It seemed very "flaunting superiority", very "mocking the stupid", very "are you worthy of my words".

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

Really? Wow. (not sarcastically) "a bit arrogant" refers to inconveniencing others by my employing an exception-based (others have to notice and ask) rather than an opt-in (I flag what I'm doing in advance) approach. If I unilaterally shift that burden to others, even defensively, that's adding to their communications-processing load. Any self-imposed inconvenience to others is a bit arrogant, as I see it. Perhaps "a bit impolite" or "a bit selfish" would have been better wording choices. Hmmm...

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[trinker.livejournal.com]

Yeah, "a bit selfish" would have been less teethgrinding, for me.

Also the bit about "bored" made it sound like you were using the possible befuddlement of others for entertainment value.

And "will actually figure out what I'm trying to say (instead of rushing to knee-jerk reactions or simple interpretations)" made it sound like "unless they're too lazy to do so", or made it seem like the problem was willful lack of care on the part of the reader rather than something that was possibly two-way, or even all about how you phrased something. Makes it seem like people are expected to poke at your words for all possible meanings, and come up with the right one (mindread).

This really bothers me, because it's this sort of thing, I think, that lead to the whole "indirect communication requires mindreading on the part of the recipient, and is passive aggressive misdirection on the part of the sender" discussion.

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[brian1789.livejournal.com]

I can see that the juxtaposition of "puzzle-solving fun" at the beginning with "bored" at the end could have easily given that impression, and I apologize for that. Mailing list readers aren't lab rats.

"easily bored" refers not to some entertainment value in others' befuddlement (which is generally frustrating, not fun or a puzzle), but self-amusement in trying different modes of speech, different styles and attitudes, even different personas. Inwardly, not externally-focussed. I *would* be easily bored if I had to always communicate in a painfully sober, clear, serious fashion. I do lots of that at work already...

Rather than expecting mindreading, I'd usually hope that someone would ask for clarification if they saw something strange or button-pushing, rather than rushing to the worst possible interpretation... the latter pattern has led to frustration on my part, expressed above.

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[trinker.livejournal.com]

If you were still interested in trying to smooth the waves (I don't know that you should be, given that some might already be set in their attack stance), it might be helpful to calve off that first paragraph ("I can see....lab rats." ;) and put that in a separate journal entry.

Thank you for articulating that. It's that specific point that was getting to me, and I wasn't part of the mailing list discussion that spawned all this.

The part about "easily bored" not being about others' befuddlement is also a good clarification. You might bear in mind that playing with your expression, while enjoyable, can get in the way of clear communication. It's a lesson I had to learn, and learned badly, when I was in high school.

The shifts in style can lead to a sort of "cried wolf" thing, where people are less willing to work at understanding, because it's all going to change soon, anyway. I would hope that the enjoyment of a group discussion would come from the sensation of learning about others, and sharing one's own thoughts, rather than from the very self-contained joys of trying on expressive styles as if they were costumes.

Does this make sense to you?

Re: Noodle, schmoodle

[lizw.livejournal.com]

Really? Wow.

Since that surprises you, I think it may be worthwhile for me to add that I had the same reaction to that line as trinker did. (And trinker and I come from distinctly different communication styles, so if we both misread it in that way, I'm guessing others will have done the same).