On 21 January 2014 13:25, Tobias Ellinghaus <[email protected]> wrote: > But whatever > the reason is, not everyone is comfortable with the American (?) way to put > everything into harmless words. So it is similar to the hugging example: may I > not tell someone that he is an idiot if that is the case? Not necessarily in a > derogative way, but just in a discussion. Does the idea that someone expresses > his disagreement like that make you feel uncomfortable? Well, not being able > to express me the way I am used to makes ME feel uncomfortable.
If something someone says in a discussion does not make sense, that is what you say: X is wrong because Y. The same goes if the person does something wrong, say which action you believed was wrong, and why. Don't call the person an idiot. It might work out most of the time*, but expecting others to have a hard skin and deflect the comment about their person, and to correctly deduce what you *really* meant by it is not a good approach to communication. It increases the risk of hurting people and/or to derail the conversation. Keep criticism on actions and arguments. *at least for the person who calls another an idiot... > So where to draw the line? As I wrote at the first day of this discussion I > also prefer the "treat others the way you think it is ok, and if it turns out > that the other person doesn't feel the same then try to adapt and find some > common ground for social interaction." approach. That is what being a social > being is about: being able to copy with different social backgrounds, adapting > and reacting to the situation at hand. And in the worst case avoid that person > if interaction is not possible. The people you interact with decide where they draw the line. Until you know what the limits are, presuming that your own definition is suitable is risky business. My 2 øre. -- Jon Nordby - www.jonnor.com _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
