If you are an ordinary person who is staying home, taking care of your kids, or putting yourself on the line to do an essential job, you’re already a good guy. If you’re doing “a little” to help, your help matters.
-
-
“Only a [insert terrible name here] would disagree with me” is a rhetorical tactic for getting weak-minded people to passively go along with you. It’s not a way to attract competent people to actively buy in and help you.
Show this thread -
It’s kind of like — I find it skeevy to guilt-trip people into giving to charity. “You SHOULD be more generous.” The reality is, people are already pretty generous. You can provide donors *value* by offering them unusually good opportunities to help.
Show this thread -
“Put more effort/attention into MY favored project or I’ll withdraw my approval from you” is a song anyone can sing, and the loudest, nastiest voices are the best at it. I don’t think it’s a smart tactic for those whose causes are actually good.
Show this thread -
Yes, I admit I’m sensitive about this personally. I think shaming people for not being good enough causes a lot of toxic side-effects. I know sometimes the right thing to do *is* to try harder, but there are ways to encourage effort that install less malware, I think.
Show this thread -
Good exhortatory content makes doing a hard thing look necessary, exciting, and *doable by you*. Skip the last part and you just demotivate people.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's written to some portion of the public in order to counter this attitude ("dominance trick") coming from the dominant culture. It's aggressive, but I don't see it as seeking passive acquiescence via guilt. More like awareness and questioning.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.