Lol, one reason it's hard to talk to people about something I'm working through when there's a large inferential gap, is that when they misunderstand me and tell me what I think I sometimes believe them.

11Hazard2mo Example Me: "I'm thinking about possible alternatives typical ad revenue models of funding content creation and what it would take to switch, like what would it take to get eeeeeeveryone on patreon? Maybe we could eliminate some of the winner takes all popularity effects of selling eyeballs." Friend: somewhat indignantly "You're missing the point. Why would you think this could solve popularity contest? Patreon just shifts where that contest happens." Me: fumbles around trying to explain why I think patreon is a good idea, even though I DONT, and explicitly started the convo with I'm exploring possibilities, but because my thoughts aren't yet super clear I'm super into supporting something the other person thinks I think
4Dagon2mo This happens on LW as well, fairly often. It's hard to really introduce a topic in a way that people BELIEVE you when you say you're exploring concept space and looking for ideas related to this, rather than trying to evaluate this actual statement. It's still worth trying to get that across when you can. It's also important to know your audience/discussion partners. For many people, it's entirely predictable that when you say "I'm thinking about ... get everyone on patreon" they will react to the idea of getting their representation of "everyone" on their ideas of "patreon". In fact, I don't know what else you could possibly get. It may be better to try to frame your uncertainty about the problem, and explore that for awhile, before you consider solutions, especially solutions to possibly-related-but-different problems. WHY are you thinking about funding and revenue? Do you need money? Do you want to give money to someone? Do you want some person C to create more content and you think person D will fund them? It's worth it to explore where Patreon succeeds and fails at whatever goals you have, but first you have to identify the goals.

Separating two different points in my example, there's "You misunderstanding my point leads me to misunderstand my point" (the thing I think is the most interesting part) and there's also "blarg! Stop misunderstanding me!"

I'm with you on your suggestion of framing a discussion as uncertainty about a problem, to get less of the misunderstanding.

Hazard's Shortform Feed

by Hazard 2y4th Feb 2018159 comments


In light of reading through Raemon's shortform feed, I'm making my own. Here will be smaller ideas that are on my mind.