I was in an incident that led to people complaining about me here and by extension in Ask Lemmy, one which I explained my perspective on elsewhere. Then, when sharing my perspective, I was asked by a certain Blaze to share it in YPTB, only for those in charge there to give what amounted to a signal of disregard for it and to take it elsewhere. Going by their own words, I then shared it in !fediverselore@lemmy.ca as the only close alternative available, which, as a part of their own “rules subtext”, sometimes allows this, and the person, if not all of those who help with YPTB, proceeded to drop by anyways and scold me because “YTPB has specific posting guidelines in the sidebar”.
The implication here is false, at least by my definition of the word “false”, and he even alluded to that after it began to be discussed elaborately, albeit before using an appeal to the masses (story of my life) and say “most people seem to understand”, which ignores consensus of me and the aforementioned Blaze (as much as the “the truth we all wanted to speak” remark ignores not everyone had that issue). Notice how I responded with “I can spot rules broken by the other person’s thread more easily than I can spot rules broken by mine” and got only thumbs down for it and no responses, yet when I actually dissected the rules piece by piece in front of him to point out that any rule I supposedly broke wasn’t there, which even the person who recommended I make the discussion in the first place (the aforementioned Blaze) agreed was a “fair point to be honest”, the mod then delved into the concept of “unspoken rules” as an excuse for himself and said he didn’t want to “rules-lawyer”, which not only disproves what he said about “specific posting guidelines” being “in the sidebar” that supposedly explained what I did wrong, but proved a point I commonly mention about people in different places including here always being uncritical and unwilling to see things for themselves and just taking peoples’ word for things (and about that, to respond to Cypher’s last reply, intellectual =/= intelligent). A part of that is it also suggests, by extension, that the quantity of thumbs down you garner is unreliable as consistently meaning anything, unless the rule is actually to apply gladiator logic and say a thumbs down signals mercy, as indicated by the very Roman-esque culture around here. I guess all this time, I was being praised and didn’t realize it?
This idea of “unspoken rules” and “reading between the lines” seems to be a common theme here because everyone seems to think that concept is valid, and they think that whether you’re akin to an outcast is defined by the norms you follow. This makes me curious to ask… hypothetically, if I get all PTB gradings from everyone because I couldn’t read the “unspoken rules” or anticipate mod discretion, what if I were to go to the places I have authority over and ban everyone who says or has said anything positive or supportive about Luigi Mangione or what he did? Would I be able to accomplish this without being called a PTB? After all, that is how this all started, and again, that would be an “unspoken rule” on its own that can be chalked up to mod discretion, now wouldn’t it? Those are the terms.
I await your choice.
I understood both of those just fine, even understanding the first one before even attempting the second one. Not saying this to throw shade on anyone, but it wasn’t impossible if I stayed with it because you’re supposed to be steady with it.
When saying something complicated (not because of its word choice but because of its premise), is it not typical or natural to tend to choose what one says based on what will expand more easily and what one considers accurate? Suppose you were describing an attitude. You could say “they have a lot of hate”, with “hate” being a recognizable word. Or you could say “they have a lot of disdain”, which is more specific than “hate” but which might be more accurate. You could choose a word for the vibes, the simplicity, the accuracy, the generalization, the speed, etc. and I tend to choose precision because of transparency and because I am anti-lazy.
The problem comes when someone is confused and I offer to paraphrase and they give me the cold shoulder due to displeasure (as well as saying they don’t understand something to be avoidant, which, and I’m serious when I say this, you can often guess based on how they do the first thing and inconsistently exaggerate the issue just to dominate the vibes). I am not entitled to anything, none of you are entitled to anything, and I try to make things as easy as I can and be negotiative (quick note, let’s use this word negotiative as an example… I literally couldn’t fit that in any other way and still have the effect I was aiming for), but then the reaction turns into a weaponized fad rather than something genuine, and I can prove this. Again, transparency. That guides a lot of my habits.
Paragraph 1:
The second version is, obviously, easier to read and understand, and thus more accessible and a better way to get your point across. Its not that your post is impossible to understand, its that it is harder to understand (and, to read, and to gain context for - a 5 minute screen recording scrolling through a thread?) than it should be for no gain.
Paragraph 2:
Yes, you make choices based on “what will expand more easily and what one considers accurate”, undeniable fact. But an equal part of the writing process is making those same choices with the reader in mind. You can maintain precision while still making your communication more easily understood and succinct. These are not in opposition to one another, they are in service of the same goal - communicating with others.
Paragraph 3:
That is a problem, for sure. I make no debate about the existence of those who behave wilfully ignorant. I agree with 90% of what you wrote in this paragraph, but:
You say transparency guides your habits, but I hope that you can accept feedback that the way you are communicating in the OP and your linked post are not resulting in transparency, but opacity.
It wasn’t for a lack of trying.
I have no doubt you put a lot of effort into your post! Its not meant as a personal attack or anything malicious, just what hopefully comes across as a well-intended bit of feedback when it seems like you might have a lot of less well-intended stuff coming your way.