Even when I ask what should I say instead?, people go ‘ooh, no, I wouldn’t say it like that’ instead of answering the fucking question.
I’ve had this argument in a wide variety of contexts and tones-of-voice. All of them get the same asinine responses. This goes beyond resting bitch font, where people interpret whatever I write in the shittiest way possible. I’m starting to think the topic is just cursed. Like it’s impossible to have a sensible conversation about Valve’s market share. All efforts descend into snipping about the commenter, or spiral out into nonsense and denial.
I beg of you, prove me wrong. What should I say instead?
I still think there is some communication issue, but I re-read your original comment and I am quite lost about what your point was: you say Valve is monopoly BUT it’s not evil (from another thread you linked) and you don’t propose to dismantle it. So, what should the readers do with the newly acquired knowledge?
If you want to warn, then warn directly, if you want to call to action, do so. If you want people to just think for themselves, you will get nothing except people thinking you fail to make a point and arguing with you because they came up with that result by thinking for themselves
What would that look like, besides what I’ve done?
I don’t think any of you know what you want. You act like I’ve done something wrong, and when pressed on what exactly that is, you cannot provide a reason, but will not re-examine the assertion. Any amount of context is the wrong amount, any approach is the wrong approach, any tone is the wrong tone. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.
And this is over agreement. I’m used to people getting weird when they insist Steam isn’t an obvious monopoly. The exact same weirdness becomes novel when it’s from people insisting it’s too obvious. I’m getting shit on both for explaining why being a monopoly is not intrinsically evil, and for explaining why we should be concerned about them anyway… and I’m getting shit on as though I did neither of those things… in the same comment. Baffling.
They seem to ask how to phrase the same thing in such a way that you can’t come and reply that their tone is condescending.
Much passive, very aggression, I find it hard to side with people this snarky :(
Even when I ask what should I say instead?, people go ‘ooh, no, I wouldn’t say it like that’ instead of answering the fucking question.
I’ve had this argument in a wide variety of contexts and tones-of-voice. All of them get the same asinine responses. This goes beyond resting bitch font, where people interpret whatever I write in the shittiest way possible. I’m starting to think the topic is just cursed. Like it’s impossible to have a sensible conversation about Valve’s market share. All efforts descend into snipping about the commenter, or spiral out into nonsense and denial.
I beg of you, prove me wrong. What should I say instead?
Yeah, I can’t answer your question either, because I find it may be either hard or impossible to come up with an answer
Then it’s not a me problem. And you shouldn’t act like it is.
I really want you to understand that no one in this thread is out to get you
They said, continuing to make this about me, instead of the actual topic.
Still offering a fat lot of nothing in terms of constructive criticism for this tone-policing.
I still think there is some communication issue, but I re-read your original comment and I am quite lost about what your point was: you say Valve is monopoly BUT it’s not evil (from another thread you linked) and you don’t propose to dismantle it. So, what should the readers do with the newly acquired knowledge?
If you want to warn, then warn directly, if you want to call to action, do so. If you want people to just think for themselves, you will get nothing except people thinking you fail to make a point and arguing with you because they came up with that result by thinking for themselves
What would that look like, besides what I’ve done?
I don’t think any of you know what you want. You act like I’ve done something wrong, and when pressed on what exactly that is, you cannot provide a reason, but will not re-examine the assertion. Any amount of context is the wrong amount, any approach is the wrong approach, any tone is the wrong tone. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer.
And this is over agreement. I’m used to people getting weird when they insist Steam isn’t an obvious monopoly. The exact same weirdness becomes novel when it’s from people insisting it’s too obvious. I’m getting shit on both for explaining why being a monopoly is not intrinsically evil, and for explaining why we should be concerned about them anyway… and I’m getting shit on as though I did neither of those things… in the same comment. Baffling.