Reading into the question

[Unveiled Artist]

One of the many reasons we get into uncivilized debates is when we read into a question(s), assume we know the intentions, and then shoot ourselves in the head when we debate with one intention in mind when the other's intention is something totally different.

For example, I got this thought from this thread "Does anal sex cause HIV infection?"
Since it's not about religion and politics it would do.

There is no details in the OP just a picture. However, in this question and questions like it (with heavier context) we assume what the OP knows or doesn't know, whose asking the question (it could be a friend's question), whether the OP was serious or not, and things like that.

I see this heavily in religious questions where someone would ask about god or a religion and posters would approach it as a person seeking (their intentions) even if it's something the OP just made up.

The problem with this is it sets up an argument right off the get-go.

If it is not explicit in the OP and you want to intentionally make an off comment stop and ask. It's one thing to make a mistake but if you're intentionally making an off comment (which many people feel they should) make sure you're commenting on the person's intentions not your own.

 

[Nakosis]

One of the many reasons we get into uncivilized debates is when we read into a question(s), assume we know the intentions, and then shoot ourselves in the head when we debate with one intention in mind when the other's intention is something totally different.

For example, I got this thought from this thread "Does anal sex cause HIV infection?"
Since it's not about religion and politics it would do.

There is no details in the OP just a picture. However, in this question and questions like it (with heavier context) we assume what the OP knows or doesn't know, whose asking the question (it could be a friend's question), whether the OP was serious or not, and things like that.

I see this heavily in religious questions where someone would ask about god or a religion and posters would approach it as a person seeking (their intentions) even if it's something the OP just made up.

The problem with this is it sets up an argument right off the get-go.

If it is not explicit in the OP and you want to intentionally make an off comment stop and ask. It's one thing to make a mistake but if you're intentionally making an off comment (which many people feel they should) make sure you're commenting on the person's intentions not your own.

Actually, to me, it seems to have gotten better on the forums.

 

[Kooky]

One of the many reasons we get into uncivilized debates is when we read into a question(s), assume we know the intentions, and then shoot ourselves in the head when we debate with one intention in mind when the other's intention is something totally different.

For example, I got this thought from this thread "Does anal sex cause HIV infection?"
Since it's not about religion and politics it would do.

There is no details in the OP just a picture. However, in this question and questions like it (with heavier context) we assume what the OP knows or doesn't know, whose asking the question (it could be a friend's question), whether the OP was serious or not, and things like that.

I see this heavily in religious questions where someone would ask about god or a religion and posters would approach it as a person seeking (their intentions) even if it's something the OP just made up.

The problem with this is it sets up an argument right off the get-go.

If it is not explicit in the OP and you want to intentionally make an off comment stop and ask. It's one thing to make a mistake but if you're intentionally making an off comment (which many people feel they should) make sure you're commenting on the person's intentions not your own.

Of course, when I do ask questions to clarify the OP, people frequently feel personally attacked and turn hostile, so really, there seems to be no way to not ruffle feathers in such conversations no matter what.

 

[sun rise]

I had a postcard with the below saying in my cubicle for years during my career. I remember a boss telling me once to pick up the (expletive) phone and talk to another person because we had gotten into a messy misunderstanding of just this sort via email:

 

[Gargovic Malkav]

I think it's better to just accept that people might see me differently than how I see myself.
If I feel its just their own projection, I have no reason to take it (too) seriously.
Maybe they do have a good point that I can't see at the time or ever, but I gotta work with what I've got.

Besides, I myself can also be pretty convinced that some folks are not the kind of people they pretend to be.
And in my experience, it's generally more satisfying to try to punch through reinforced concrete with my bare hands than to get such people to face their errors.