I think I am going to generalize, categorize, and make overly broad assumptions. Then I am going to charge it up with some accusatory language and holier than thou pontification. I am going to engage in double speak and use ad hominems so that everyone may know that I kick ass. For the cherry on top I am going to hold to my fair but limited point by rejecting out of hand every other view point.

That should generate some pretty heavy backlash, and with that backlash I will bask in my internet popularity. My 15 minutes of fame will last for all eternity.

So...you have been invited to speak at Stake Conference?

Ana

Mommy?

ddt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Mommy?


LOL I'm glad I wasn't taking a sip of my smoothie when I read that. It would now be all over my keyboard. I'm still laughing.

Oh, you must be my sister. She never says what she really means but expects me to understand what she's saying. Conversely, anything I say, she thinks I'm trying to say something else entirely. My brain doesn't work that way. Say what you mean, dammit!

Oh my god mine too. Where does that come from?? What causes it? It drives me absolutely bananas.

Sounds like my mom. I'm not sure my sister has picked this up fluently, the only sign I've seen of it is when I told her I resigned she wrote back, "I know that's not the REAL reason you resigned :-)."
But she's my mom's flying monkey, so I don't deal with her much.

I suppose it was a very passive aggressive post, but I wasn't really in the mood to single out any posters last night. Sometimes people take a small but legitimate idea and then doggedly defend the idea at the expense of broader understanding.

The whole idea that there is "good" to be found in some of the more oppressive religions is one of these small ideas. It may be true but to hold that idea up as a major pillar of understanding requires that you ignore points that are more relevant.

The other issue that I was passively trying to address is that some posters bring very valid points to a discussion. They then obscure their validity by engaging in ad hominens and the like. It doesn't change the fact that they are pointing out something important. It just makes it hard to see the forest for the trees. That may be my problem, but nonetheless it is a problem.

As Ana pointed out above, it all seems very Mormon.

It's cultural. There are lots of eastern cultures (such as India), where it's considered worse to be the one telling the bad news than to have to experience it. We outsourced some software development there for a while, and it was a nightmare. A conversation with an American software team would go something like this:

Me: "Will feature X be completed and QA'd by Friday?"
Them: "No. We had delays due to Y. We should have it done by next Wednesday, though."

A conversation with the Indian team was like this:

Me: "Will feature X be completed and QA'd by Friday?"
Them: "It may be. It could be done on Friday, yes."
Me: "What's your confidence the work will be done by then?"
Them: "Oh, we're very confident the work may be done."
Me: "What would prevent the work from being done by then?"
Them: "There is a possibility Y may introduce some delays."
Me: "How long of delays?"
Them: "When do you need it by?"
Me: "It matters less when I get it and more that it's done right. How long will the delays be?"
Them: "Well, we will try to get it by Friday. If we cannot, would Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday next work?"
Me: "Okay."

This is due to something called the power distance index, which is usually more prevalent in structured, hierarchical societies. You can read about it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hofstede%27s_cultural_dimensions_theory#Dimensions_of_national_cultures

So, lots of people behave this way due to cultural constraints, where those in authority expect bad or disagreeable information to be sugar-coated and massaged.

I resemble this post...

I thought this was going to be a post about FAIR, since they make a lot of points but do it poorly....