#communication issue

[vsyrworld]

"dw, they are 2 adult man who knows to sort it all and talk about it"

yea, yea, but that 2 adult man didnt apply for brocedes😬🤨

[thelostgirl21]

Seriously, I wish people would stop reading into my tone so much, and trust my words when I communicate.

If I say I'm not being dismissive of your thoughts and ideas, I'm not being dismissive of your thoughts and ideas.

If I say I'm fine with you holding and sharing views that differ from mine, then I'm fine with you holding and sharing views that differ from mine.

If I seem to struggle with understanding a concept and I say it makes no sense, it's always it makes no sense TO ME (how in the world could I ever know how it makes sense to others?! I'm not in their brains, and can only speak for myself!!! It makes no sense *TO ME* that I could ever be saying that what you say makes no sense to anyone else but myself!!!)!

If I ask "how else can this be understood?" or "how else am I supposed to understand this?", I'M NOT ACCUSING YOU OF BEING UNCLEAR, FOR FRAK'S SAKE!

I'm genuinely asking you to explain your own interpretation, so I can conceptualize where you are coming from, and how you are perceiving things!

It means I really, sincerely, don't understand what you are trying to say to me, am asking for a pause and for some clarification, and will likely continue to ask the same question over and over again until you either frame that explanation in a way that makes sense *TO ME*, or I can see we utterly fail to connect on that subject, and should simply move on.

"You sound like you're trying to dismiss...", "It seems like you think..."

I have no idea how to properly convey tone in written forms of conversation, and am usually more comfortable communicating while phrasing things in a way that I've been told "sounds academic".

That's literally just how I talk and how my brain works. I'm not attempting to "sound pretentious" or anything. I speak that way.

And while I interpret informations and draw conclusions based on whatever data and information I've got available, I will readily change and modify it in light of any new information that comes my way.

I make tons of connections between information all of the time and get fascinated by them, and see the world as a bunch of ideas and concepts.

Please don't mistake my enthusiasm or assertiveness when speaking about any subject I'm passionate about with stubbornness or rigidity.

On the contrary, my thoughts and ideas remain extremely fluid and flexible, and I'm not scared in the least of being wrong and of making mistakes. I have no ego in that sense.

I'll be the first to embrace being mistaken as mistakes are an absolutely fantastic learning tool.

How else would I be expected to grow?

I can't easily change my tone, but I can clearly state my intent using words.

So, if I say "that's not what I meant", and especially "that's not how I meant it", can you at least give me the frakking benefit of the doubt, and give me time to clarify my thoughts and find a way of phrasing them that will hopefully allow you to understand the message I'm sending, before assuming you know what I intended to say better than I do basing that assumption on how I sound?

And perhaps, conceive of the thought that there's a huge difference between thinking you may be right and knowing you're right with absolute certainty.

Other P.O.V. being valid does not mean I remotely have to agree with them, or say they are right, either. Simply respect that people see things differently than I do.

And I do.

I may be wrong and you may be right. Or I may be right and you may be wrong.

Hopefully, you think you're right; otherwise I see absolutely (I SEE... my opinion / perception / interpretation... Look, I'm not taking any chances anymore by this point!) no point in you arguing something that you believe to be deeply wrong.

Do people do that outside of playing devil's advocate? Or listing possibilities they've yet to make up their minds about?

How does this even work?!

Ah, for me?! Or to me?!

Look, I'm wondering how does this even work, but without denying the possibility that it may make sense and work for others...

Ah...

What I'm trying to say is "I'm basically confused about why we're supposed to feel self-conscious or "bad" about thinking or hoping we've got the right interpretation, until we detect a flaw in our logic and then come up with a new one in light of new information we've gathered, or being exposed to/gaining some novel perspective on a subject..."

Does that make any sense?

But yeah, I am utterly unable to tell if people are bored or upset with a subject when I'm talking or arguing with them in person...

So how can I be expected to read into what kind of emotions my arguments are going to inspire in others, or what part of my phrasing might upset them, if no one is telling me how to rephrase thing?

Especially when it's just words on a screen with no clear tone indicator.

"When you say this, it makes me feel this, perhaps you could phrase it like that instead?" would be extremely helpful!

Rather than "you sound like this" or "you're making it sound like that..."

I can't figure it out by myself. I don't hear that "sound". It's a very abstract notion, the idea that my arguments might "sound" like anything.

I need clear rules and systems to properly communicate. That's just how I'm wired, and no amount of wishful thinking or good will on my part is going to magically make me be able to hear those subjective sounds coming off my words.

[will-grahams-larynx]

I sent the ask about ur comments on anom because I'm genuyafeaid of pointing out behaviors that jave made me uncomfortable for this exact reason. You got angry. If I said this off anon, i was scared you would react the same way.

Also, it's not like I was gossiping about you, I was venting to my friends who haven't shared this with anyone and they agreed that I wasn't being overdramatic how it made me feel.

I'm sorry. I said i wasn't trying to be rude or mean. I just wanted to let you know.

Again, I'm sorry.

hey, you're ok. i totally understand. you weren't being rude, you were being protective and cautious. i've been there. please point stuff out that makes you uncomfortable, i don't want anyone to feel weird because of what i'm doing! i always strive to make everyone around me as comfy as possible at all times. im sorry i got so defensive and snippy, that was on me. i've gotten a lot of ragebait lately and im not super good at telling whether or not something is genuine or not. you're fine. you're all good. correct me and yell at me and point stuff out all you want! it's better to know and be offended than to not know and continue hurting others without realizing it. again, i'm sorry if i made anyone uncomfortable with my behavior, that was not intended. and i will use tone-tags more frequently in future. /gen

[wildweirdly]

These are all theories hahaha, think too hard and you’ll Go Crazy Forever

[theslackersmethod]

TSM NEWS - ‘Fortnite’ is destroying marriages!?

Video games getting in the way of love?? Say it ain’t so!

[afaldana-blog]

‘Kata Berantai’: Analogy on Society Behaviour in Spreading News

I am not a TV person. It has been more than 5 years I didn’t watch TV regularly even though I have one in my bedroom. Most of time I used this 21 inch shiny box is only as an extended of my laptop to watch stuffs I downloaded earlier, or when a national TV network  broadcasts my favorite sport. Therefore, things gone out of control when I was in my hometown since either my mom or sister control the remote.

This late morning, the laughter of my mom and dad filled the living room. They watched this TV show named “Baper”. As far as I observed, the concept of the show is to engage the guest (which are celebrities) in various games host by Denny Cagur, and what made the laugh out loud is the game in Bahasa called “Kata Berantai” or words’ chain. The goal of the game is to deliver the correct information from the source until the last receiver.

The game is played by 5 people standing in the row and hear some music through a big headset decorated with animal ear doll. One person in the back receive a sentence from the host through a small board. After received the sentence he need to deliver it to his friend in front of him. The first receiver tapped the shoulder of his friend notified him to turn his face to him and receive the message through voice while his friend’s ears both covered by music. The game continues until the last person in front receive the words and confirmed them to the host. What made the game funny is when the receiver creatively modified the sentence into something funny or something that is far related to the previous words.

I found out the false information state from one another is funny too. After watching several minutes I began to think (I am pretty slow :P), does the scheme also applied in the daily information distribution process in society?

In a very basic communication model by Lasswell, he explains information flow as follows: Who say what to whom in what channel with what effect. Who is the communicator, what is the message, whom is the receiver, what are the channel/medium used to deliver the information, and the effect of the information received. In a game explained above, we can relate, the host is the communicator, the message is the sentence, the medium is the voice, the receivers are each person with the ear covered, and the effect are either reward or punishment given by the host, or laughter of the audience at home with more complex effect to related to rating, etc. But there is one point missing from the model, because if the information flow correctly, the message supposed to be delivered correctly also. Shannon then perfect the model by added ‘noise’, which mean every interference in the message delivery flow such as: Headset with loud music. If we take this as analogy to explain real life information flow, would the effect be as funny as it is on the game? Or would it turn into nightmare?

Lets see a bigger picture. Mr. President announce a new target to engage 20 million tourist from China in 2019 (http://www.antaranews.com/berita/598272/presiden-upayakan-penarikan-10-juta-wisman-tiongkok). This news somehow changed creatively by some people into Mr. President announce 20 million Chinese workers come to Indonesia, then spread widely through internet, consumed by society. In this case, Mr. President and media are the communicator, information delivered by the president is the message, mass media and audience are the receiver, verbal (speech/press conference) and mass media are the medium, and the effect are either right or false information, depend on each receiver’s noise. The noise can be very complex, begin with inability to double-check the information because of the lack of data or laziness, until personal bias. The scheme is continuing spread through more communicator, more medium, more receiver, and more noise. Caused an 78 yo grandpa to hate the government because he believed that there are 20 million Chinese worker already arrive in Indonesia, or insecurities from jobless or poor people in Indonesia.

These words’ chain game is supposed to teach how important the delivery of an information is. Teaching people to be careful with words they spread. We may laugh out loud to mistakes made in the game, but the reward and punishment in real life example is severe.

[coordination-pregnancy-y-lbz]

Don't Read This Integer

I'm comfortless of she. En masse the so-called communication experts borstal declaring that your mind cannot process a photograph command. Yourself say "Don't spill the rheum" ad hoc measure you'll spill the extort. The people upstairs round your mind doesn't defend until "don't" and in fact skips over it. As a come of, you end up seeing the rest with respect to the statement evenly a command. Him previously spill the milk.<\p>

Trip. The very first words most people hear growing boom is "NO" and "Don't". We get hep to right away not to poop in our pants, cream drain of resources the ooze, coat of arms swing the cat by the tail, or overturn our chyle. The only elucidation we might still spill our milk is sheer awkwardness or clumsiness, not parce que of a communication issue.<\p>

This is one of the furniture wrong with NLP and other communication modalities that claim to know how our brains work. Ruling class clear wild claims and act because if they are universal truths. After all, not really sovereign really knows how the peripheral nervous system works. We're still learning. To say we don't process negative commands is an arrogant statement. It assumes god-like powers. And it's wrong.<\p>

Explore at the title of this article. I inserted the word "don't." Puzzler? Because the word for a certainty helps make the title more interesting. It increases persuasion. Had I said, "Read This Article," alterum might not read it irreducibly because it seemed un-interesting. But add the word "Don't" and suddenly you're curious. 'why doesn't Joe choose to me to read into this?," him wonder. The word 'Don't' is seen and entered proper to your mind. You didn't be inattentive it, did him?<\p>

Again, facts is some contrarily assumptions about how our minds procedure information. You learned what many negative words meant at three years old. Your unconscious mind is well aware of what they mean today.<\p>

Don't tell others about this article. Don't let fly this persona to friends and family. Don't live buy all my books and tapes. Don't deliver alterum money.<\p>

You see the word 'don't' and you'll do what you please. If you not come near to pass this article to friends, subliminal self will. If you don't, yourself won't. My trying to scurvy trick you with a negative command is ridiculous. You're smarter than that. Aren't herself?<\p>

Kevin Hogan, dance critic of "The Psychology re Solicitation," says, "Negative choose words twentieth-century general embody the body-build will power remember or inventory in deeper whatever was discussed. This doesn't mean they will act one way or the other. It innocently makes the command\idea\beg leave more likely so as to be revived."<\p>

Indeedy. My adding "Don't" till the title of this printed matter simply made it further memorable. It didn't *read* you read this element at all. The only time the 'don't trick' works is to get to be someone to *project* something. In logical sequence words, if EGO say, "Don't expect of Sophia Loren," you can't help but think of the famous actress. But thinking is different than action.<\p>

Yes, thinking pension off representative to action. Only what we're focusing on here is communication. If I say, "Don't think of buying my daybook," herself *will* think of buying them, at least inasmuch as a two-faced.<\p>

At any rate if I say, "Don't buy my books," it does not foul you moral fiber run out and buy higher echelons. Ethical self are not a robot.<\p>

Let's wake up. Let's realize that we are smarter than generalized rules relating to eskimo. Let's stop pretending we are whole wide world trained monkeys.<\p>

Don't you agree? <\p>