I think this is failing to understand, once again, that people simply don't behave as perfect, omniscient, objective moral arbiters. They simply get tired of things they perceive as negative, regardless of whether they're justified or factual. https://t.co/5NY8UOPCi6
-
-
So if you have an argument to make, you need to decide whether you care about that more than just being right—your "ego", if you like—and if you do, try to empathize with every corner of your audience to persuade them.
Show this thread -
Blocking and banning are pretty blunt tools for dealing with issues like this, but I can see the appeal to moderators: if they perceive negativity, they get a switch to turn it off and increase net positivity in the forum. But it also has the potential to exacerbate the problem.
Show this thread -
If someone feels they've been maligned, and is willing to make a cause of it, hitting the "ban" button has the potential not only to improve positive vibes in one forum, but to create negative vibes elsewhere. Moderators need to understand that this is a reality of what happens.
Show this thread -
So what do I propose? Talk to each other. Talk individually; privately. Take egos and politics out of the equation. Try to empathize, to understand each other. If you don't, then talk some more. If you end up arguing, take some time out, then talk again. Don't close the dialog.
Show this thread -
Don't expect anyone to say, "you were right all along, I'll reevaluate my worldview". But the more you talk, the more you'll see that the other person has a viewpoint, and the more you'll be able to show them that you do too. And if you do care about yours, you should want that.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.