The problem with subjective impressions

[Jud]

23 hours ago, marce said:

What was an interesting forum full of lively debate

Debate doesn’t interest me in the least. I get more than enough in my day job. 🙂

 

What this place used to be full of years ago was a bunch of people trying to *help* each other as we all learned a little more about computer/digital audio. Learning more is what interests me.

 

It’s easily possible to be helpful and informative without debating.

[Jud]

1 hour ago, marce said:

Still is, just no reference to physics, electronics, engineering or perception allowed, pure belief only, even the faintest sniff of technical intrusion is often met with discord, such as a recent thread on master clocks where relevant technical intrusions were shot down before they even began.

 

Where I work, some genius decreed that response letters should reiterate and then reply point by point to every customer or regulator complaint, so we could be sure we had completely answered all complaints and questions. All of our responses were of the form “You say..., but *we* say....” They were all extended arguments in written form. For any customer or regulator to say we were right, it meant admitting they were wrong.

 

I put a stop to it. We now simply make  our points plainly, concisely and respectfully, being pleasant where that is  possible without being supercilious. No one has to think about whether they’re admitting they’re wrong; they can just consider what we’ve said on its own merits.

 

The applicability to this forum is that contributions can lead to different conclusions on their own merits without being oppositional or argumentative. I know that you for one have a lot of technical knowledge to contribute and read your posts with interest because of it. Of course even contributions that aren’t argumentative may be received with an argument. 🙂 That can’t be helped, unfortunately.

 

I have no illusions that people will change much, if at all. But it would be nice if everyone could try to keep being helpful in mind.

[Jud]

33 minutes ago, Solstice380 said:

 

I know that you have a pretty good grasp on some science fundamentals, but an area where you aren't as familiar as law is the scientific / engineering world.  I have been published in refereed journals and been a reviewer.  In the science world you have to tell someone specifically where and why their assumptions or conclusions aren't / can't be correct.  There are no ifs, ands or buts - it's all physics.  Somebody failed to tell the cold-fusion folks they had their heads somewhere besides in the lab.  There are nicer ways to say it, perhaps, but as scientists and engineers it is our responsibility to not let the idiots of the world try to make shit up as they go.  People also aren't always good at communication (No, really?) so the way they write conflates facts with subjective impressions.  And, some just don't know the difference in their own mind.

 

Let me pose a hypothetical situation involving communication between an engineer and a layperson.

 

You're an engineer, and your neighbor tells you about a fuel additive he's using in his car that you know for a fact can't work. Do you figure you'll get a more positive reception confronting him as directly as possible, or trying to help him understand in a friendly way that this stuff won't work?

 

You explain to him it won't work and why, but he persists in believing and in purchasing the additive. Do you suppose you'll meet with better success if you repeatedly explain to him why he's wrong?

[Jud]

53 minutes ago, Solstice380 said:

I know that you have a pretty good grasp on some science fundamentals

 

One additional thought: The only reason I have any grasp at all of science fundamentals is because I listen to people like you. And that's a whole lot easier when it's a pleasant interaction.

 

Obviously the layperson in these interactions can make it unpleasant - I'm not absolving laypeople of their own responsibility at all.

[Jud]