an alt.poly post

[firecat]

Since I broke my own guideline of not contributing to dogpiling threads on alt.poly, I obligated myself to make a substantive post to alt.poly.

When I thought up the idea for the post, I initially hesitated to post it because I thought that some folks might believe I was sending messages to them personally or referring to their situation specifically. Which I amn't.

But I couldn't think of any other thing to post, so I went ahead and posted it anyway.

I hope that neither the post nor the disclaimer hurts or offends anyone.

Comments

[firecat]

I think Steve has an interesting distinctive viewpoint on things, and also has some big blind spots. IMO, this is one of the blind spots.

[saluqi.livejournal.com]

Got any ideas about what to do when blind spots and hot spots collide?

I think Laura's post described something similar to the reasons I get cranky. That is, where there is a point being made, sometimes it's hard to work out whether someone is picking it undone via the application of logic to test the point, or just dismissing the whole thing on a technicality. And that doesn't even address the question as to whether logic can be applied to all personal communication situations.

[firecat]

Got any ideas about what to do when blind spots and hot spots collide?

I know what I do, which is state my POV/argument directly to the person once or twice, and if I get a sense the person isn't paying attention and thinking about what I said, then ignore them. The conversation will shift soon enough.

I don't know what to do to make the person think about what I said.

As for Steve specifically, the hyperlogical "debate" mode of communication that he uses annoys me a lot. Gentle humor sometimes knocks him out of it on a case by case basis, but doesn't stop him from using it altogether.