Comment on do you use non violent communication at the workplace?

• dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The dictionary definition reflects common usage, and we are only having this discussion because I backed up someone else who had the same thought based on, you know, common usage. I’m happy to hear the trivialization for the scenario I described doesnt happen based on your experience. I still don’t like the wording, but then, I don’t have to.

  source

  • dustyData@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    This whole post—not just this comment thread—is precisely the definition of “my ignorance is equal to your expertise”. Bunch of people spouting opinions from common understanding on things they don’t understand. It’s not the first time that common usage of groups of people is entirely off with scientific facts. Like, the whole point of OP is that they disagree with something because they don’t understand it. It’s a tale as old as time itself. If we only followed common usage you would not be using soap and treatment for fever would still be bloodletting.

    source

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I will also say I like the part where I gave you the win in a cordial thread of the no stupid questions community wherein I admitted I understand the historical value of the term now even though I don’t like it, but you couldnt accept. When you can’t convince me to like it you just gotta tell me what my problem is, downvote every comment, and go home.

      The problem here may well be opinion vs expertise, but every time someone brings up skilled and unskilled labor (for example) I do it. As do all of us experts who have an important message, and we should be doing it patiently and without judgement.

      So let me, at the close, suggest to you that you go back to the very top and see how your attempt at direct, nonviolent communication came up way short. I think there is value in the approach and there’s value in expertise, but for an “expert” in the field, I find this exchange to be equal parts tone deaf, insightful, and ultimately officious/petulant/immature. This sure felt like some undergraduate level dick measuring bullshit to me 🤷.

      Next time I hope you try to destigmatize mental health issues broadly not specifically, and someone calls you out in the same way every time you short circuit a discussion by suggesting that’s why whoever you’re addressing “doesn’t get it”.

      Have a great day!

      source

      • dustyData@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I’m sorry, What?

        I invite you to go to the top of the thread too. The part where I made a comment to a third person, not you BTW, and then you decided to interject with aggression and insults. You tell me who is the petulant child. Because I did gave you the benefit of the doubt and attempted to deescalate this idiotic conversation being patient and reasonable. But you had to win the conversation, didn’t you?

        You gave me the win? Do you think all conversations are about win or lose conditions? That’s the most immature and stupid way to go about communication in general, and specially the internet. This is precisely the kind of Manichean worldview I identified and referred to previously. I don’t need your win, not everything is win-lose, not everything is black and white.

        Then you try and give me a lesson? Yes, I have downvoted the whole conversation because after the second reply or so, this whole thread has not contributed at all to Lemmy as a whole and I regret the time I have invested in trying to educate a childish doorknob. I will not be replying anymore. Have a day.

        source
    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works ⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Let it be a lesson when you write your book to choose a better name, then. You won’t have to work against the grain. It will also go easier if you don’t suggest that anyone who disagrees with you has some form of mental health disorder, but that would be nit picking.

      source