20 Aug 2020, 4:14 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:18 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:25 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:33 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
IsabellaLinton wrote:
That's difficult sometimes and one of the main problems with text-only conversations. I'm sure we've all had that problem where we are misinterpreted, and I hope we have all apologised for those times. In other instances it's reasonable to infer or suspect a negative intent if there are direct / indirect slights against others, negative or accusatory language, repetitive patterns of ill-will, a history of that person not listening to advice about how to change their writing style, or a history of that person not ignoring those who expressed upset. Of course that should be clarified as well, and if it wasn't the intention there should also be an apology. We know all this and it's not rocket science, so I realise I didn't really answer your question. I thought there was a specific etymology you wanted me to deconstruct.
I rely a lot on recognising patterns of behaviour and sometimes communication both here and IRL - it has been extremely useful to me, particularly at work and to avoid abusive relationships. Past behaviour predicts future behaviour and all that - isolated incidents don't count.
This was how I have learned to spot trolls. I recognized a pattern and I am sure it is possible for trolls to change their behaviors to come off as genuine so they will slip through.
It is also possible for someone to be mistaken as a troll because of a behavior they do that is consistent of a troll.
20 Aug 2020, 4:38 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:40 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:42 pm
20 Aug 2020, 4:45 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Fnord wrote:
So instead of a linguist, I should be asking for input from an FBI Profiler/Psychologist, right?
You could do a lot worse than either. Some of those guys are pretty good.
Philosophers and Ethicists are quite savvy too.
20 Aug 2020, 4:51 pm
IsabellaLinton wrote:
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Fnord wrote:
So instead of a linguist, I should be asking for input from an FBI Profiler/Psychologist, right?
You could do a lot worse than either. Some of those guys are pretty good.
Philosophers and Ethicists are quite savvy too.
Especially those not afraid of empiricism
20 Aug 2020, 4:53 pm
20 Aug 2020, 5:05 pm
20 Aug 2020, 5:05 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Personally, I disagree that you cannot deduce intent fairly accurately (not 100%) from a person you're very familiar with.
.
.
Also some people are easier to read than others and some are predictable , I also think it depends on how much 'people watching' you have done ( ooh that's sounds pervy
)
20 Aug 2020, 5:10 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Personally, I disagree that you cannot deduce intent fairly accurately (not 100%) from a person you're very familiar with.
Assumptions? That's a whole different kettle of tea or should I say can of worms.
Assumptions? That's a whole different kettle of tea or should I say can of worms.
You know what they say about assumptions, especially when there's no evidence or if the evidence is contradictory.
Another problem is when people are deemed guilty by association. There's nothing quite like being judged by proxy.
Pretty sure that's called prejudice, or generalisation, or just plain malice.
20 Aug 2020, 5:13 pm
Oh_no_its_Ferris wrote:
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Personally, I disagree that you cannot deduce intent fairly accurately (not 100%) from a person you're very familiar with.
.
.
Also some people are easier to read than others and some are predictable , I also think it depends on how much 'people watching' you have done ( ooh that's sounds pervy
)What about PMs?
A Private message.. if someone needs a bit of guidance or seems to be broaching things in an offensive or otherwise unhealthy for the forum way... Wd be good surely.
Esp as 'we' have tendency not to see from rhe other people's point of view esp in the moment whe making a point for exanplw..
Theory of mind..
I know Id appreciate if sum1 PMed me to let me know as Im always wondering myself..
Do you guys ever get the feeling of... being a bull in a china shop, as they say?
Thats how it feels socially fr me including here and this bull (which leads me to think maybe others too) would always appreciate being led out of the china shop by a well meaning person who can see it happening..
Rather than trod over ppls feelings/sensibilities/ruin the flow of a thread..
but never be told n realize after the fact (if that)
Have to say have seen theory of mind issues being understood here time n time again .. Where in other forums that person wd be heckled/demonized instantly
20 Aug 2020, 5:22 pm
blooiejagwa wrote:
Oh_no_its_Ferris wrote:
BenderRodriguez wrote:
Personally, I disagree that you cannot deduce intent fairly accurately (not 100%) from a person you're very familiar with.
.
.
Also some people are easier to read than others and some are predictable , I also think it depends on how much 'people watching' you have done ( ooh that's sounds pervy
)What about PMs?
It's probably a lot easier to spot red flags in PM's especially if you have already been burned so to speak.
I think I may of totally misunderstood your post. A PM might be a good idea but it depends on the relationship you have and your diplomatic skills .
20 Aug 2020, 5:52 pm
BenderRodriguez wrote:
League_Girl wrote:
This was how I have learned to spot trolls. I recognized a pattern and I am sure it is possible for trolls to change their behaviors to come off as genuine so they will slip through.
It is also possible for someone to be mistaken as a troll because of a behavior they do that is consistent of a troll.
True on both accounts but what I noticed is that most people have a very hard time disguising their pet peeves and core believes for a long time.
Also, patterns of language and expression can be a dead give-away.
Works particularly well for sock-puppets.
I have no idea how many "sock puppets" I have had here. Someone had leaked one of the mod logs somewhere else from here and I couldn't believe the insanity of these old mods we had and it seemed like they thought I had all these sock puppet accounts.
