People really like to have both sides of conversations. You’d think this is a sort of stylized performance element but it isn’t. Many people have a real style that a,punts to: have both sides of a conversation, get mad when live counterparty goes off script, to force them back onhttps://twitter.com/leftistexe/status/1330386159176982529 …
-
-
For a sufficiently mature person, a word to the wise is sufficient. They instantly get why hearsay of anything other than properly witnessed free-play conversations is basically noise as consulting input. Or that at best it reveals stuff about projection tendencies.
Show this thread -
Once you get it it seems like a superpower. “Oh wow you can actually use conversations to discover new info if you allow other side to own their side of the conversation. It doesn’t have to be a Sisyphean struggle of hostile universe repeatedly knocking your story off-script.”
Show this thread -
People who resist the allure of this discovery potential are attached to the world being the way their scripts validate. They literally want to hear nothing except confirmation. When I sense this (if it gets this far) I tell them they need a therapist not a consultant.
Show this thread -
Though usually I can tell from the initial email or exploratory call.
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.