When I hope someone understands conversational energy flows, interpretating via a clean slate, listening to intent, purpose, & human need. For a moment this *thing* just IS? Whether true or not does not matter. Feels like gathering around a campfire.

Instead I'm challenged to prove claim's existence, via critical thinking, mental puzzle solving pathway. Proof before belief an effort is valid? Feels like drawing a sword ready for battle where winning is the focus.

We men very often fall into that puzzle solving pathway. To an outsider this is an extra step required from them, to suitably fit the conversation into *your* mental model.

Energetically demanding someone take that extra step to resolve the crisis in your brain, is not the outsider's duty.

Seen a lot of struggle with that over the last week. Completely unaware their attempt to outwardly resolve an internal crisis is perceived by the outsider as a provocation ⚔️

@david_ross
If you make a post that is hard to understand to anyone other than you, because you have weird definitions of some words, inconsistent with how most of other people understand those words, then don't be surprised that people either ask you to define those words, or assume a meaning that is different from what you intended.

If you don't care if people understand your post, why publish it?
If you do care, pls put some effort to help them understand.

@david_ross
(and by "you" I don't mean you specifically)

@david_ross @Wolf480pl I think writing to learn is a valid activity. As such, the audience is incidental. Keeping a diary online invites people to read it but does not automatically invite them to comment or ask questions even the medium affords just that. Public activities are not always invitations. Conversely, I’m happy to ignore or unfollow where my mental model does not fit what other people use the medium for.

@kensanata @david_ross @Wolf480pl > Public activities are not always invitations.

If, as the famous maxim goes, "the medium is the message", posting on a medium expressly designed for low-effort interaction is an invitation to interact, whether people intend that or not. If people aren't inviting comments, why post on a federated #microblog? Why not a normal blog with comments turned off?

@kensanata @david_ross @Wolf480pl I think a huge part of the current Masto-drama results from people joining what they think is a little private club (something like an invite-only mailing list or Loomio group), but is actually a huge public #BarCamp, where the purpose of being here is to connect and learn, and the social norm is to strike up conversations with strangers in the coffee queue.

@strypey @david_ross @Wolf480pl I think your prescribing the metaphor, the purpose and the social norm, here. And that’s exactly the problem. We need to find ways for multiple metaphors, purposes and social norms to be acceptable without leading to expectation mismatch.

@kensanata @david_ross @Wolf480pl
If someone gets in an elevator, and gets grumpy at anyone who tells them it's only good for going up and down, for "prescribing the metaphor, the purpose and the social norm" *shrug*, they're going to have a bad time in elevators, and so is anyone who finds themselves in an elevator with them. Not sure if anything can be done about that.

@strypey @david_ross @Wolf480pl Some people in elevators like to stare into empty space and others don’t mind a little chat. To know the difference and act accordingly is how we increase good times in elevators.

@kensanata @david_ross @Wolf480pl LOL I get the point you are trying to make. I guess I can only refer back to my "the medium is the message" comment, and maybe @Wolf480pl 's comment here
https://pinafore.social/statuses/100182590299687034
If a stranger talked to me in an elevator (or on the bus), I would be surprised. Not so in a public bar, especially when there's a band playing. Horses for courses.

@strypey @david_ross @Wolf480pl I understand the point about the medium is the message, about the affordances the current user interface provides. I just don’t see the benefit of chatting up people at bars when they are grumpy and clearly not interested. There is nothing to be gained. A thumbs up might be appreciated but more than that? Dubious. But much also depends on sending the right signals, of course.

@strypey @david_ross @Wolf480pl I certainly know the exasperation when I perceive somebody as friendly and inviting and then I start commenting on their stuff and they suddenly turn around and complain about it. “WTF!?” But even then, it’s best to just move on. Insisting on my right to speak but they’ll just say I have no right to be heard and we’d both be right to no avail.

@kensanata @david_ross @Wolf480pl I think this is kind of missing the mark too. I've never seen anyone object to being asked to "untag me" or whatever. The problems start when someone reacts to a reply their don't like with something like 'you have no right to say that here' which is a) objectively wrong, and b) some of the richest #TrollFood I can think of. IMHO such people are self-abusing when they do this *shrug* #NotMyProblem

@strypey I do agree with the assessment that by putting things on the platform, these people expose themselves to just the kind of drive-by comments they then object to. And while I respect their wish to not get comments from me, I do roll my eyes in these situations. Perhaps we'd all love to see a certain kind of public and are sometimes disappointed in the actual people we do meet.

@karl @strypey But the possibility of public response does not invalidate other wishes. You definitely have the right write a comment, referring to their public post. But do you have a right to mention them, to direct unwanted attention on them, to appear in their threads? I want to move beyond a legalistic argument (yes it is legal) or a UI argument (yes it is afforded) to a culture of politeness and appropriateness. How appropriate is it? It depends!

@kensanata @karl this is fascinating. Because the other side of it, do you have a right to comment without giving credit the originator of the discourse? In academic discourse this is beyond just being rude, it's plagiarism, and is the closest thing the #IvoryTower has to hanging offence. Again, once someone specifically *asks* to be untagged/ not mentioned (and not just vaguely hints at it), fair enough, but I've never seen anyone disrespect that.

@strypey @karl I guess you could link to the conversation because that gives credit and allows verification without intrigue? After all in academia you don’t actually the people you cite, you just put their name and a “link” in your bibliography and point readers there.