Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Xamnam" data-source="post: 8939181" data-attributes="member: 7037765">I've been following that framing as it's the exchange that prompted this particular conversational thread:We've both said that comparison of strengths and weaknesses is not what we're talking about here. And like I said in my last post, while I agree with you that it's not necessarily a criticism of the person, it is a fairly regular and/or predictable outcome for it to be received that way when blunt terms are used. And I have seen people offer similarly simple criticisms in other threads.I can only speak for myself. Am I outraged? No. Neither am I outraged when people do just call a system bad. However, I do think that sort of language is actively counterproductive for generating dialogue, and don't particularly care for it, and is the sort I do advocate against.I also know that it comes from Lanefan playing a very specific game in a very specific way, and has strong and somewhat idiosyncratic&nbsp; definitions when it comes to ttrpgs and their play, which is a filter I now internally pass it through. I've seen more than a few people react strongly and poorly to their sentiments because of how much more aggressive the language can come across if you lack that context. This is exactly why I'm advocating for including context to make your sentiments as clear as possible to the people you're engaging with.I totally understand why you would have that takeaway. However, my reaction to this thread is more that the language we use to talk about technical elements matters, and specificity and clarity goes a long way to minimizing frustration on that front, not that talking about them is fundamentally an inflammatory endeavor. But, perhaps that is the how some people feel. That's a shame, in my eyes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Xamnam, post: 8939181, member: 7037765"] I've been following that framing as it's the exchange that prompted this particular conversational thread: We've both said that comparison of strengths and weaknesses is not what we're talking about here. And like I said in my last post, while I agree with you that it's not necessarily a criticism of the person, it is a fairly regular and/or predictable outcome for it to be received that way when blunt terms are used. And I have seen people offer similarly simple criticisms in other threads. I can only speak for myself. Am I outraged? No. Neither am I outraged when people do just call a system bad. However, I do think that sort of language is actively counterproductive for generating dialogue, and don't particularly care for it, and is the sort I do advocate against. I also know that it comes from Lanefan playing a very specific game in a very specific way, and has strong and somewhat idiosyncratic definitions when it comes to ttrpgs and their play, which is a filter I now internally pass it through. I've seen more than a few people react strongly and poorly to their sentiments because of how much more aggressive the language can come across if you lack that context. This is exactly why I'm advocating for including context to make your sentiments as clear as possible to the people you're engaging with. I totally understand why you would have that takeaway. However, my reaction to this thread is more that the language we use to talk about technical elements matters, and specificity and clarity goes a long way to minimizing frustration on that front, not that talking about them is fundamentally an inflammatory endeavor. But, perhaps that is the how some people feel. That's a shame, in my eyes. [/QUOTE]

Verification