I think we may all getting worse at "yes, and"-ing as a result of being Very Online. It's possible to frame a conclusion that is coherent with or even implied by the original message as a disagreement or one-up, but why? Maybe a pointless scuffle feels better than no engagement
-
-
I wonder how NLP sentiment work varies from transcribed in-person conversations to discussions online. I don't think the same tags ("yes," "hmm," "note that," etc.) work quite the same way across contexts
Show this thread -
Part of it is probably just that all the layers of in-person interaction (content + tone + body language, etc.) plus the richness of in-person relationship history means that there are a lot of kinds of nuance that are both less present and sometimes *forced to collapse* in text
Show this thread -
I mean, I *know* that people have been talking about how easy it is to misinterpret intent from text for ages... but I also think we've possibly been trained by way of low-resolution text tools to *start* with less emotional range when we're dealing with Internet People.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is what I wanted to say about your initial tweet. There are a huge range of reasonable interaction styles. It is sensible to zero in on the point of disagreement, even if minor, if the alternative is a mutual back-patting society. But it can be misinterpreted.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Some people, women especially, habitually phrase things so as to lower the likelihood of being misinterpreted in this way. Other people, men especially, don't. Sometimes it's a lack of awareness, sometimes it's a point of principle.
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.