Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9105303" data-attributes="member: 177">So, with respect, this discussion isn't about YOU, personally and in particular.&nbsp; How you, personally and in particular, use a word doesn't constitute a jargon, which is shared nomenclature. In addition, your goals in a discussion may not match the goals of others in that same discussion.Note that Snarf's OP discusses not just the definition of a term, but goals of the term's origin, and goals and effects of use.&nbsp; If others in similar discussions are focused on discussing how some games they like are &quot;high agency&quot; and others they don't like are &quot;low agency&quot;, and how High Agency is awesome... well, it is going to be hard for you, using the same term, to differentiate yourself from that.Really?&nbsp; That's how you want to present it?So, right here, you have a HUGE problem.&nbsp; Even if we set aside the non-apology approach of shifting the burden of offense to the offended, your example models have connotations.&nbsp; &quot;It's not like I can control if people feel slighted by my correct view, just because they may perceive insult or judgement to their incorrect models.&quot; If this is how you talk, then I think there's a LOT you can do to avoid insulting people or expressing judgement on their way of doing things.&nbsp; This paragraph shows far too little consideration of how the presentation will come across.(Note: heliocentrism is also not entirely accurate, but the broad perception stands.)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 9105303, member: 177"] So, with respect, this discussion isn't about [I]YOU[/I], personally and in particular. How you, personally and in particular, use a word doesn't constitute a jargon, which is shared nomenclature. In addition, your goals in a discussion may not match the goals of others in that same discussion. Note that Snarf's OP discusses not just the definition of a term, but goals of the term's origin, and goals and effects of use. If others in similar discussions are focused on discussing how some games they like are "high agency" and others they don't like are "low agency", and how High Agency is awesome... well, it is going to be hard for you, using the same term, to differentiate yourself from that. Really? That's how you want to present it? So, right here, you have a HUGE problem. Even if we set aside the non-apology approach of shifting the burden of offense to the offended, your example models have connotations. "It's not like I can control if people feel slighted by my [I]correct[/I] view, just because they may perceive insult or judgement to their [I]incorrect[/I] models." If this is how you talk, then I think there's a [I]LOT[/I] you can do to avoid insulting people or expressing judgement on their way of doing things. This paragraph shows far too little consideration of how the presentation will come across. (Note: heliocentrism is also not entirely accurate, but the broad perception stands.) [/QUOTE]

Verification