Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 7412011" data-attributes="member: 2525">I understand where you're going with this (you're lecturing an attorney about the Socratic method, which is particularly presumptuous). So, it's not that I am having trouble understanding what you're saying.It's that I disagree. His approach routinely is leading to more adversity, not less. Because he's going around the thread and lecturing people on how their replies don't meet his criteria for appropriate replies as if he owns that thread. Which is causing more people to want to disagree with him, which causes him to lecture them more, which spirals more into further drift off topic. It's a bad approach.Indeed, even in improv, if someone messes up the rule, you don't point it out and stop the imrpov, you roll with it as best you can to keep things going. Because that's the goal of the improv...not the rule. That's not what's going on in that thread - the rule is causing it to grind to a halt because it's being pointed out constantly as if the rule is more important than the topic.If he want's a &quot;Yes, and&quot; approach, then there are such superior ways to present than then a &quot;plus&quot; thread that such alternative methods should be his goal. For example, this is an audience of gamers...so present it as a game!&nbsp; Say, &quot;Here is a premise, and each person gets to build on this premise&quot;. That likely would have worked.&nbsp; Instead he took an audience of gamers and started to focus on rules...which also works, if what you want to talk about is this kind of thread we're in right now rather than the topic he wanted to talk about.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 7412011, member: 2525"] I understand where you're going with this (you're lecturing an attorney about the Socratic method, which is particularly presumptuous). So, it's not that I am having trouble understanding what you're saying. It's that I disagree. His approach routinely is leading to more adversity, not less. Because he's going around the thread and lecturing people on how their replies don't meet his criteria for appropriate replies as if he owns that thread. Which is causing more people to want to disagree with him, which causes him to lecture them more, which spirals more into further drift off topic. It's a bad approach. Indeed, even in improv, if someone messes up the rule, you don't point it out and stop the imrpov, you roll with it as best you can to keep things going. Because that's the goal of the improv...not the rule. That's not what's going on in that thread - the rule is causing it to grind to a halt because it's being pointed out constantly as if the rule is more important than the topic. If he want's a "Yes, and" approach, then there are such superior ways to present than then a "plus" thread that such alternative methods should be his goal. For example, this is an audience of gamers...so present it as a game! Say, "Here is a premise, and each person gets to build on this premise". That likely would have worked. Instead he took an audience of gamers and started to focus on rules...which also works, if what you want to talk about is this kind of thread we're in right now rather than the topic he wanted to talk about. [/QUOTE]

Verification