Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Probably because you never STATED it was hypothetical.
This forum operates with certain unwritten rules of conduct, which in turn (at least for the long-time members) creates certain expectations.
How hard would it be to preface posts with "I'm not anorexic, but..."? That would go a long way toward eliminating confusion. You've seen how people react to posts that don't follow the "rules" - wouldn't it be worth the time taken to clarify?
I don't know about you, but I feel the unwritten rule of conduct is that it's polite not to make hidden assumptions.
Isn't there an unwritten rule against "putting words into someone's mouth" as the expression goes?
I don't know about you, but I feel the unwritten rule of conduct is that it's polite not to make hidden assumptions.
Isn't there an unwritten rule against "putting words into someone's mouth"?
True, but when you are using the medium of written words, you need some context when questions are asked. You generally don't know anything about the person so a little background helps with a frame of reference so you can reply more specifically.
It doesn't help that quite a few people here don't have a good grasp of the English language, and not just the ESOLs either.
I don't know about you, but I feel the unwritten rule of conduct is that it's polite not to make hidden assumptions.
Isn't there an unwritten rule against "putting words into someone's mouth" as the expression goes?
Polite? Yes. Human? No.
We ALL make assumptions. On an online forum, since we cannot SEE the poster's expression or HEAR the inflections in their speech, let alone READ their minds, it's hardly surprising that we assume.
As for "putting words into someone's mouth" - if the poster doesn't craft their initial post well enough, I see that as the electronic equivalent of being speechless - hence, the crowd's desire to fill that empty mouth with words of their own. Have you ever spoken (in the RW) with a stutterer? Were you able to keep yourself from supplying their words FOR them? Even if you had the admirable ability to refrain from doing that, I would bet that mentally you were filling in the blanks - just what happened here, IMO.
True, but when you are using the medium of written words, you need some context when questions are asked. You generally don't know anything about the person so a little background helps with a frame of reference so you can reply more specifically.
Yeah, but that's why you ask for the context, rather than assuming (and/or psychologically projecting your own).
True, but when you are using the medium of written words, you need some context when questions are asked. You generally don't know anything about the person so a little background helps with a frame of reference so you can reply more specifically.
It doesn't help that quite a few people here don't have a good grasp of the English language, and not just the ESOLs either.
Yep. I'd say 90% of the misunderstandings here occur because of the great variance in English fluency. Plus, even the best of speakers can have trouble writing, which is perfectly understandable (and keeps editors in business *cough*).
Yep. I'd say 90% of the misunderstandings here occur because of the great variance in English fluency. Plus, even the best of speakers can have trouble writing, which is perfectly understandable (and keeps editors in business *cough*).
And conversely the worst speakers can be very eloquent and literate. But I know we can't all be English majors
We ALL make assumptions. On an online forum, since we cannot SEE the poster's expression or HEAR the inflections in their speech, let alone READ their minds, it's hardly surprising that we assume.
As for "putting words into someone's mouth" - if the poster doesn't craft their initial post well enough, I see that as the electronic equivalent of being speechless - hence, the crowd's desire to fill that empty mouth with words of their own. Have you ever spoken (in the RW) with a stutterer? Were you able to keep yourself from supplying their words FOR them? Even if you had the admirable ability to refrain from doing that, I would bet that mentally you were filling in the blanks - just what happened here, IMO.
We obviously all assume some things. But would it actually kill people to ask for more context rather than go on adding excesses of their own meanings (which are often filled with their own biases) which the poster didn't intend.
I'm not talking about a conversation like this, when I mean "putting words in people's mouths":
"Hey, how about you and I go to that restaurant downtown next week."
"Which one? Is it the...."
"The one we always went to, after work last year."
Of course that's a typical part of an ordinary conversation, that go on countless times every day.
When I talk to people, I notice often people are trying to "read between the lines" too hard based on too little and end up seeing something that isn't there. Don't think so highly of yourself that you fancy yourself a mind reader who knows exactly what I want based on a few lines I speak or write without asking for more details.
Sometimes, even just bringing up an issue (social, political, psychological, whatever) can make people then spout mindless rants on their own views, even though I didn't ask for that discussion (and I'm speaking in general here, not specifically on forums, in case you asked).
Say, I was curious as to a certain policy X, and ask how it works in a certain state or even another country. Hell, there are a number of reasons why I'm interested in that -- maybe I want to visit there. Maybe my friend is from there, he brought it up that he does things differently there. Maybe I'm just curious as to how it differs from what I'm used to.
What would be uncalled for is "You support policy X? Only (insert name of ideology A) don't support policy X! You must be an A-supporter because otherwise you wouldn't question it. I really hate people who believe A, because they also believe B, C and D.". No, I didn't even say what my views on it were. I just asked how it worked over there, and anyone who has basic communication skills can see why that's not called for. I use a politics example just as an example, but that happens lots of times in all forms of miscommunication. Get what I'm driving at?
Last edited by Stumbler.; 01-13-2011 at 10:54 AM..
Absolutely. I run into this all the time in real life.
But I still think this is a different beast. If we (as responders to a post) have to play "500 Questions" to get to the meat of the matter, this board would exceed its bandwidth in minutes. As Djuna said, here it's the posters responsibility to communicate succinctly, to ward off the possibility of misunderstandings.
No, assumption isn't good, but sometimes it's the only game in town.
An example - I just received a rep from (another) unsigned person who commented negatively on another thread I had posted in. They totally misunderstood / did not have the whole story behind my post. If they had left a name I would have taken the time to more clearly explain my post, but because I wasn't precise enough in my words and I cannot reach them they'll never know.
I forced them to assume because my post wasn't clear enough. Totally MY fault. Now I'll have to live with that shame forever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
