What's more helpful is giving me feedback in which I can use to improve future interactions rather than saying that because I don't know where I went wrong! You could say like, when you said this, I didn't get it, rather than saying I didn't get it because then I'm like, er, didn't get what exactly lol.
Well really the whole thing to be honest. It seemed like you had a good point you wanted to share, but it's constructed in a...less-than-good manner. It kinda sounds like something I would type after a few drinks. Great idea, poorly worded.
If you could give me a few examples that you found poorly worded or confusing, that'd be great! I mean, I understand what I wrote and it's hard for me to go, "Well, what didn't I understand about what I just wrote? Er...nothing, or else I wouldn't of wrote it!" lol. But obviously you're not me so there will be a difference in how we understand things.
You need to write it like you are speaking to Jr. High kids, so they can understand it. It is the official language of the GARM. DD
Okay, I don't understand the sentence. Can you clarify or write it a different way? I don't get this either. If you could clarify who you mean by "they," then maybe it would make more sense.
Thanks, yeah sure! Joe: Democrats are idiots because blah blah and Republicans are smart because blah blah. Bob: No, Republicans are idiots because of yadda yadda and Democrats are idiots because yadda yadda. There's no empathy between these two guys, no connection. They're two TVs facing each other. The least they understand is the other person's political position and that's it. They ignore every other part of the argument just attack the fact that they're a Democrat or Republican. Two people understanding each other, or trying to, would be more like Joe: Democrats are idiots because of blah blah and Republicans are smart because blah blah. Bob: I'm a Democrat. Why do you think blah blah is dumb of them? Joe: I didn't know you were Democrat. I'd like to know why you're a Democrat but I think blah blah is dumb because blah blah. Bob: I get your point but I disagree because blah blah. Here, there's an acknowledgment of what the other person is saying and an understanding of why they said it. That is confusing, you're right, I use they to refer to two different groups. "[DD's defenders] attack by making it seem as if [DD's attackers] are idiots for not seeing such subversive sarcasm and/or projecting their [DD's defender's] emotions onto [DD's attackers] by asking why are you [DD's attackers] mad?" The projection is that the Defenders' are mad and they make an assumption that the Attackers' are also mad. That's angering to the Attacker's because people don't like being told what they're feeling and that they're weird for feeling them. It's especially effective if the Attacker's weren't mad to begin with because then anything they say will look like denial or defensive. Of course, that makes the Attacker's mad knowing that they'll be perceived that way and it's mission accomplished for the Defender's.
Some people may not catch what DD is doing, but others just don't pay enough attention to him to know what he normally does or is doing.....sometimes I find it easier to assume he's serious than to travel back 50 posts to find out. As long as you don't reply more than once or twice you'll be ok
I think you are completely wrong about the emotions. Wait, as an independent, which side do I make fun of, republicans or democrats? Oh screw it, I will make fun of them both. DD
