Sharing info and opinions with others - good and bad ways

mc · Post by mc » 26 Jun 2009 08:14

Isn't it unfortunate when someone has a good, important, valuable piece of information or opinion, but they only way they are able to share it is in a condescending, contradictory, or confrontational way?

In my experience, when someone presents information in these ways, their tone overshadows their message, and they are met with a lot of resistance. It is resistance to their methods more than their message, but the resistance still gets in the way of the message, effectively rendering the good, important, valuable message either ineffective, or sometimes, countereffective.

Can anyone think of an instance of someone successfully sharing an important piece of information in a condescending, confrontational way?

("Success" being defined as "bringing the listener to a state of understanding which leads to integration of the message in their lives".)

In other words, if you've got an important letter to write, but you don't know how to use ink and pen and instead choose to fingerpaint your message in your own diarrhea, chances are quite good that the stench of your methods will render your important message unreceivable to the vast majority of receivers.

I think someone told me that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

thoughts?

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 26 Jun 2009 09:10

"Collegue? [sic]" Give me a fucking break.

Also, remember guys, this is the internet, you don't get marked down for poor spelling. People who feel the need to correct other's spelling, however, when it's perfectly clear what the author meant, do deserve to be made fun of.

mc · Post by mc » 26 Jun 2009 10:33

He did note the spelling mistake, although, I think his incredulity was aimed more at the implication that the person he was responding to was a colleague of michael jackson's.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 26 Jun 2009 12:15

why beat around the bush? Who are you annoyed at right now, what is the example?

C-Fan · Post by **C-Fan** » 26 Jun 2009 12:23

I'm guessing Erik Chan.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 26 Jun 2009 12:29

I figured it was freaking bowler probably

ohhhhhhh, you mean Jeremy? I seeeeeee

I think you should just say it if you mean it.

But I don't think he cares - I think argumentative Jeremy is what it is. He loves the arguments, loves the villain role.

If you simply ignore his posts he can't derail topics into the boring whatever blah blah blahs they become. And face it... he's better at arguing than anyone on the planet besides Brat, so trying to win ("so there Jeremy! ha! I argued you into submission") just realistically isn't going to happen.

me: Hi my name is Bob

everyone else: Hi Bob!

me: Jeremy is smarter than me and better at arguing... and I'm ok with it.

everyone else: Welcome to the group Bob! Want some coffee and donuts?

mc · Post by mc » 26 Jun 2009 13:28

I'm just sharing my thoughts on effective communication. If there's people out there whose tactics indicate that they disagree with how I feel about effective communication, I encourage them to speak up.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 26 Jun 2009 16:41

This topic is obviously directed at me in response to my opinions about the death of Michael Jackson. Opinions that clearly cannot be regarded as important or meaningful. I would suggest having a sense of perspective and looking at the different ways people communicate given the context of what their communications can achieve.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 26 Jun 2009 17:37

And to think, their was a time when I was the only one making thredz to point out Jeremy's blatant hipocrizes, lies, and ugly personal trates in contrast to his stayted values.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 26 Jun 2009 19:13

this is going to sound a bit cliche but i think everything(not just modified) would function smoothly if people were more honest

matt, i dont think you can be angry at jeremy(if thats who this is directed towards) he had an opinion and he voiced it. i on the other hand had a different one but i dont think any less of him because we disagree on a social issue.

also, in regards to the way information is presented as opposed to the message that it contains well there is nothing you can really do about that if somebody is being confrantational in most cases somebody is going to be pissed off at them

personally i think dispute is often a great thing it brings out a lot of information that you might not of known about i wish there were more informed debates on this forum

mc · Post by mc » 26 Jun 2009 19:37

I see lots of comments on what I didn't say.

any comments on what I did say?

What I said may apply to people and events on this forum, but I think it applies just as much to my daily interactions with all kinds of people around me.

Interesting that it seems so clear to those participating in this discussion (including Jeremy) that it would be in reference to Jeremy.

---

So, if someone cares about a message enough to think about it and have an opinion, but they don't care whether or not that message is received and integrated, what is their motivation for spreading that message?

crazylegs32 · Post by **crazylegs32** » 28 Jun 2009 22:45

I know what you are saying Matt. I think of myself as a shy individual but if I know you a but i may come across as overbearing and maybe even an asshole? At the point I know you I just feel free expressing myself

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 29 Jun 2009 02:06

hahah im gone for over a month and i come back and the first topic i see is about jeremy being and assshole!

<3!

asshole!

aight fuck yall im out!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 29 Jun 2009 03:07

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_2xGIwQfik[/youtube]

FlexThis · Post by **FlexThis** » 29 Jun 2009 08:48

I find that tit-for-tat tactics don't work on forums. Words on a screen are subjective to the reader. One person's intent can get misinterpreted leading to pages of unnecessary explanations.

I know I have been both the aggressor and the victim of a lot of player's posts. I accept this!

I do find it interesting that Jeremy is being attacked often in the past few weeks. Honestly though, turn about is fair play.

Sidenote: The Michael Jackson thread was completely derailed - which I find expected at modified. It is a shame however that MJ's influence on the WORLD (not just pop culture) is being lumped into the category of useless news. Open your eyes - the internet came to a crawl. This was compared to Obama's inauguration . That is impressive. Not to mention the DAYS worth of Tributes being expressed on TV and radio all over the world. MJ was not a mere celebrity, he was a definition of a culture.

Footbag Sidenote: If you look back into the archives of the old freestyle list you may find a post I made about Footbag inventions involving rake tricks. 2 tricks come to mind that were named after the KING of POP. Thriller - aka barfly rake, and MJ Thriller - aka blurriest rake. So MJ's influence even reached Footbag! [These tricks were named in 1997 - 12 years before Michael's death].

PegLegHolly · Post by **PegLegHolly** » 29 Jun 2009 08:55

Here were some Google results when I typed in "Effective Communcation"

http://www.wikihow.com/Communicate-Effectively
http://www.1000ventures.com/business_gu ... _main.html
http://top7business.com/?id=1767

From what I've learned personally, the best tool for effective communication is listening.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 29 Jun 2009 15:38

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PAJqgeeJf4[/youtube]

Clearly after he showed the motion at 3:52, it was only matter of time till some hackysacker thought of doing a barrage.

renke · Post by **renke** » 29 Jun 2009 20:38

haha, michael jackson, an inspiration for the development of footbag..
who could have figured that

habitat · Post by **habitat** » 30 Jun 2009 06:39

Doesn't the first sentence in this thread basically translate into the idea of "I completely understand the person's point, but I got personally offended so I will knowingly disregard it."?

The fact that the paper smells like shit doesn't mean what's on the paper is any less relevant or correct. And when it comes to debating it's only the facts that matter or get things figured out, not feelings. The type of debates where feelings are taken into account are embarrassingly useless aka the US presidential debates.

mc · Post by mc » 30 Jun 2009 09:03

response 1:

James, such a good point... I would say that that's a pretty close (but still inaccurate) translation - let me give it a try...

"If you have a good message, but you send it in a way that disgusts and insults the receiver, then you have drastically reduced the effectiveness of your message.

For the point of the message to be effective, it has to be transmitted in its entirety, and if someone becomes disgusted with you before your message is even halfway transmitted, chances are quite good that they're not going to receive the whole message because their disgust is going to overwhelm their curiosity / receptiveness.

For the point of the message to be effective, it has to land on a supple and open mind, and a mind that is feeling insulted and defensive is neither supple nor open."

I'm not saying, "appeal to emotions", I'm saying, "know your audience".

You're absolutely not going to change people's minds if you're insulting them while you do it.

So, that was my point.

and then my next question was,

"If someone has a good message, but they clearly don't care that it's received and integrated, yet they insist on spreading it with much proliferance and vigor, what is their motivation for spreading the message?"

I think that's a much more interesting question.

That kind of reminds me of the guys with big posterboards with pictures of aborted fetuses, yelling through loudspeakers at disinvolved passersby at public gatherings.

-----------------

response 2:

You clearly haven't read what I wrote. How long have you been speaking the english language? I recommend you spend the next year or so reading Webster's Dictionary and familiarizing yourself with the process of reading and understanding.

Also, your post-quote argument from your previous post is a strawman argument, and I can't believe that there's anyone out there still foolish enough to try and use such a thoughtless, immature tactic. Really, James...

If it's really beyond the grasp of your mind to understand how the medium and manner in which you convey a message affects the way a receiver receives the message, then I really can't help you with this issue, nor can I waste any more time trying and failing to help you understand this very simple concept.

Anyone who approaches this conversation while displaying a similar willful ignorance and / or inability to understand me will be disregarded. This conversation is for big kids only. Seriously, don't waste my time.

-----------------------

Have I made my point?