« first day (1288 days earlier)      last day (377 days later) » 

2:07 AM
It is holiday for me today (6th Jan), and you too?
 
 
5 hours later…
6:41 AM
@lila Nope. Regular working days here. The next holiday here will be Easter.
 
 
1 hour later…
7:57 AM
Yas, we have our own feelgood vaccination pictures from now on! No more enviously looking at those from other countries.
 
0
Q: talk to a friend that is not much reasonable about different opinions among people

BlackCrystalme, personally speak my mind. for example if someone ask my opinion about a shoe and if i think it is ugly i just say it. I'm not rude or don't want to be mean. it is ugly in my opinion but it may be a good shoe naturally. but people doesn't take this well most of time and i don't know why. if th...

 
@lila i wish XD
cause it's my birthday :)
Morning!
 
Ael
8:20 AM
@CaldeiraG Happy birthday!!!
 
@CaldeiraG Congratulations! :D
 
@Tinkeringbell we've vaccinated 10% of the country but I have yet to receive mine
 
Ael
@Tinkeringbell Apparently, all the EU members received the vaccine at the same time. And has a French person, my dad was very happy to learn that the Netherlands was slower than us when it cames to vaccinating its people :p
 
Thanks :)
Sweet 21, uff, i'm getting old
2
 
@Mithical Are they having a 'roadmap' there too? As far as I can tell, if the Moderna vaccin is approved they'll start vaccinating "my" group here in April/May
 
Ael
8:23 AM
(we were doing 30 vaccination per day, it was honestly ridiculuse)
 
@Tinkeringbell yes
 
30 per day is ... very slow XD We're just starting today but I think they'll do more than 30 a day XD
 
The military is stage two
 
Ah nice!
I learned yesterday though that's it's totally possible to make an appointment to get a vaccine even if you're not in the group that's getting vaccinations now XD A coworker of my mother made an appointment already, but she was supposed to be in a later group of healthcare workers...
So our system is horrible, as usual ;)
 
Ael
@Tinkeringbell Thankfully, we are quicker now. But the government received a lot of critics for how slow it was at the beginning
 
8:25 AM
I heard people who got covid aren't recommended to get a shot... Idk what are the consequences and whether I will be able to get mine then shrug
In other news I just got out of an interview for a job in Prague that went very well \o/
 
@Ael Same here, there was a pretty big debate here yesterday about how the government counted on other vaccines to be available before the Pfizer one, and as such didn't prepare a strategy that dealt with the extreme cold storage temperatures.
 
Ael
@avazula Congrats!
 
Thank you :)
 
@avazula That's weird, I hadn't heard that before... If there are serious downsides to getting one after having had covid that can mean some serious trouble for people that have had it asymptomatically!
@avazula This is good news!
 
Ael
8:44 AM
@Tinkeringbell I actually heard that it wasn't that useful to get the vaccine if you already had covid, but that it wasn't actually dangerous
 
That is weird given that AFAIK we have no proof of guaranteed immune resistance after getting it
Okay so I did a bit more research, and apparently we don't know yet how long antibodies last (first numbers indicate a six-months duration but it still needs to be backed up).
 
9:19 AM
@avazula nice, congrats :)
 
9:41 AM
0
Q: Problem with course software: discuss privatly or in group?

IvanaMy child is currently taking online lessons due to Corona lock-down. The teacher takes about 40 minutes to explain today's lesson and then the children (7, 8 year) do exercises online and offline with their parents. There is a problem with the math software. It is meant to be 'adaptive' but my ch...

 
10:18 AM
Wanted to write an answer myself until I saw this one. A loan never turns into a gift, no matter what the father says, it only turns into a loan that hasn't been repaid. So give him a check and repay the loan. — gnasher729 2 mins ago
#12478 gnasher729 (6113 rep) | A: Politely paying back a loan that turned into a gift? (score: 4) | posted 1014 days ago by (deleted user) | Toxicity 0.1286998 | Comment on inactive post | tps/fps: 0/0
If you gave what is supposed to be my money to a charity or even thought about it, you would be removed from my will, and I would ask for the loan to be paid back instantly. As Trebor said, it's a slap in the face. — gnasher729 2 mins ago
#12472 gnasher729 (6113 rep) | A: Politely paying back a loan that turned into a gift? (score: 9) | posted 1014 days ago by baldPrussian (31222 rep) | Toxicity 0.5611033 | Comment on inactive post | tps/fps: 0/0
Matched regex(es) ["chatty"]
 
@IPSCommentBot tp
 
Marked this comment as flaggable (tp). Currently marked 1tps/0fps. beep boop My human overlords won't let me flag that, so you'll have to do it yourself.
 
@IPSCommentBot tp
 
Marked this comment as flaggable (tp). Currently marked 1tps/0fps. beep boop My human overlords won't let me flag that, so you'll have to do it yourself.
 
10:53 AM
I spy a face I haven't seen for ages :D Hi @Imus o/
 
o/
 
How's life for you these days?
 
I'm escaping work for a bit and read your question
 
Ooohhh. Thoughts? :D
Escaping work is always nice. I took advantage of a meeting that ended early to write the question ;)
 
I both find it really interesting and at the same time a complete garbage :p
really overexagerating here tho, so don't take it personally
 
10:55 AM
Hahaha you realize you're framing, right? :P
 
My initial thought was that you "need to frame a problem to have any meaningful discussion in the first place"
 
complete garbage :( Is there anything I can do to improve it to just partial rubbish?
 
@Imus Imust be imagining it...
 
@Mithical I really am here :)
not sure for how long tho :p
 
@Imus True, something needs to be framed as problematic for someone... if both people agree it's not problematic there's no discussion XD
 
10:57 AM
0
Q: How to effectively counteract framing as a behavior?

TinkeringbellI've recently learned about 'framing' through an interesting podcast. It described framing as a tactic that uses words or images to emphasize certain aspects of a topic, with the goal of convincing others to have a similar opinion on that topic. Which in itself is nice, but emphasizing one aspect...

 
'Framing' is the use of single words or images though to 'frame' complex problems. I can edit that in :)
 
I don't know if "framing" really works as a word, tho it may be because of the lack of an actual word describing what you intend to adress here
which is why I struggled figuring out what your point was in the first place XD
 
Yeah the podcast just called it 'framing' XD
 
sure, but doesn't mean you should also call it that ;)
I think the issue is more about "biased framing"
as in: you provide a context, but in such a way that your own bias looks like the preferable viewpoint
(not sure if that's worded right)
where the logical respons is "you know there is another way to look at this problem you're pointing out right?"
which you called "re-framing"
 
@Imus Except that my logical respons failed :P en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… it's a thing in English too, so it's not like the Dutch podcast came up with a term themselves ;)
 
11:02 AM
but did it fail because it was wrong, or because they didn't want to change their opinion on the topic and would attack your alternative viewpoint in any way possible?
 
@Imus No clue. I can ask about improving my own behavior though if anyone on here knows a way to do better :P I can't ask them to change others ;)
 
my answer to your "asked question" would be a frame challenge :)
 
Give it a few weeks then at least :P Let's see if someone can come up with a straight answer that says 'yes, this is possible and here's how you do it' first ;)
 
shortly sumarized: you don't. You can't. Either you don't start a discussion, or you want a discussion and try to adress the points where they are "wrong".
which, in case of framing, is by pointing out why they frame it as such in the first place
which is exactly what you asked not to do with a re-frame
 
@Imus I do want to have a discussion where I can address points that I think are wrong... I also want that discussion to not start with the un-nuancedness of a frame though ;)
Imagine a political debate where the leader would ask 'Well, so what are your thoughts on rich privilege'
 
11:08 AM
"which privilege?"
 
Now imagine one where the leader would ask 'Apparently not everyone in this country can grow up without poverty, what do you think of that'
@Imus ;) You're right, I should've nuanced that.
 
"you are absolutely right, so let's start by figuring out who can't, why they can't and try to solve that instead of just pointing fingers to those "who are privileged" "
(depending on what you own agenda is ofcourse)
 
I at least would prefer the discussion that follows the second one a lot more, as it would tell me a lot more about what politicians are thinking of doing about a concrete point
@Imus In this case, it was just casual chat with a person in a place that encourages such chatter :)
 
which you get by just asking"which privilege" after their miss framing :)
 
Just to be sure : when your friends criticize you, are they always using sentences like "why are you playing dark souls when there are fun games like ori and something" When you only use "kpop is crap" ? It is important to know if you friend might also says "Dark soul is crap" like you or if they maintain a level of "it does nto suit my taste" that you don't. — Walfrat 38 secs ago
#26622 Walfrat (304 rep) | Q: Talking to a friend that isn't much reasonable about people different opinions (score: 0) | posted 3 hours ago by BlackCrystal (889 rep) | edited 1 hours ago by Tinkeringbell (31954 rep) | Toxicity 0.8123946 | High toxicity | tps/fps: 0/0
Matched regex(es) ["possible-aic"]
 
11:11 AM
Perhaps. But then the debate or chat is either over quickly... or it ends with a 'well you're just privileged' frame reinforcement.
I think that podcast was absolutely right that frames are a.) Great ways to convince a person in one word and b.) Great ways to get people stuck in a place where they're no longer able to nuance.
If you believe the frame, everything else is made to fit it.
 
trying to find the name of the falacy in that situation. Where you attack the person instead of the argument they're making. "you're white/rich/... so whatever you say is invalid"
 
ad-hominem ;)
 
thx :)
but yeah, if they go that route, then no discussion was possible in the first place
at least not on that topic
And I agree with you on that "conclusion" that such framing has that effect. I'm only disagreeing on the part where you could "fix" it by pointing out that that is what they're doing
 
Hey, that's how I tried to fix it so far, and I too have realized that that doesn't work. ;)
Perhaps there's some debating technique or rhetoric out there that says 'hey, a frame is such and such a fallacy, and here's how you counter that'... I just haven't been able to find it
 
I'm thinking of some random quote I read on the interwebs somewhere: "don't argue with stupid people. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"
 
11:17 AM
Don't wrestle with pigs, you both get muddy and the pig likes it ;)
And lift your feet so the level of discussion can pass underneath :P
 
The "frame" itself is too general a term to have such a rhetoric generally aplicable I think
just like how "privilege" by itself can't be countered
some people ARE privileged, and because of it have certain things others cannot have
but using terms like "white privilege" is both racist and an over generalisation. Those are the points you can adress, not the privilege itself
 
You're... making the point I already made: The usage of e.g. 'white privilege' is an example of framing behavior, and that's a point that can be addressed, not the frame of privilege itself?
 
0
Q: Asking teacher to fix course software in group chat to speed up resolution

IvanaMy child is currently taking online lessons due to Corona lock-down. The teacher takes about 40 minutes to explain today's lesson and then the children (7, 8 year) do exercises online and offline with their parents. There is a problem with the math software. It is meant to be 'adaptive' but my ch...

 
Again?!
 
@Tinkeringbell See, perhaps I just have trouble with the wording of the question, and we're fully agreeing on the underlying problem that should be adressed (or can't be in the first place)
you're just framing too much :p
 
11:29 AM
Hahahaha
I'm sorry! I tried to explain the nuances of the word and the situation as much as I could without writing a novel XD
 
well, got a contract directly with the company and a slight raise :)
great news
 
I think the issue is that people have a certain inherent bias. Which will show in how they formulate their points, and how they act towards things that go against that bias.
How to get them to consider changing that bias is indeed too much to ask in a question here. Which you're kinda pointing towards still trying I guess?
Take the "pro-life" framing. Someone who is inherently against anything other than carrying out the pragnency and views not doing so as murder would see this as the only actual option of naming that idea. Either you are "pro life" or you are a murderer.
Trying to adress that bias is inherently going to cause conflict no matter what you do. Either reframing it, pointing out their bias (calling it a biased framing), ... because it conflicts with their belief
Hency why I think your question posted here isn't going to work either way. It's inherently impossible to adress the framing without causing the same conflict as by reframing
Which comes back to my initial statement. In which I find it a really interesting question, but I personally believe it's impossible in the first place. Which I show by framing it as complete garbage ;) :p
(now remembering we have users here who are on the autism spectrum and might not understand the nuances I intend with calling it "complete garbage". I in no way actually think it litteraly is a garbage question. The wording is meant as a joke, which I assume tink understood as such. As pointed out in the end, it is based on my disagreement with the premise hence why I chose a term with a negative meaning to jokingly point it out.)
 
@CaldeiraG Woohoo!
 
@CaldeiraG woop woop! party time! (on your own at home as a responsible person in these troubling times ofcourse)
 
11:45 AM
@Imus No, I'm fine with people having biases or opinions, I'm asking about countering a behavior where a bias or opinion is presented in a single word and as such denies nuance
 
Sure, but the problem remains that it also implies they acknowledge it as a bias in the first place, does it not?
 
Not really? Just that they acknowledge they've used a certain technique to communicate their opinion/bias
 
"being pro life isn't just an opinion/bias, it's the only actual option."
if you're not interested in nuance in the first place you don't want to have the framing pointed out either
Perhaps there we have my issue with your question :) I'm assuming that if someone uses such a framing (possibly unconsciously) it implies they are so strongly convinced about it that anything you do to point that out would feel like an attack towards them
I'm trying to figure out in which way I could be wrong so we can point your question in that direction, but I don't really see it clear enough to help you improve it :)
best case I just "am wrong" and someone answeres it nicely ^.^
 
12:20 PM
@Tinkeringbell :)
@Imus what is going out XD
 
@CaldeiraG you see, there's this whole world outside your own house (shocking I know) where you have to venture in from time to time to gather vital resources like food (and booze if you're that kind of person) ... not everyone has the luxury to fully go without such dangerous endeavors
 
@Imus Perhaps you're right and it is... in which case I think I need brainwashing? :P
 
@Tinkeringbell nah, just be content with not expecting an open discussion with people who are not (actually) open for discussions. Is all
In those cases (or a least about topics they don't want to discuss about), ending with "let's agree to disagree" is typically the best outcome anyway
For example, if you would try to discuss politics with me (which I don't care about typically) I might instead amuse myself in trying to just piss you off as subtly as I can, which results in you feeling bad trying to discuss politics with me and hopefully try other topics in the future. win-win on my end :D
 
12:37 PM
Hahaha well that's a tactic too :P
I should've probably added that I know this acquaintance from, and our conversations take place in, a place that actually revolves around discussion. So if I expect to not have discussions, or expecting they aren't open to discussion isn't really accurate: If either of us was, we wouldn't be in that online place :)
 
True, tho still depends a lot on the topic
I'm generally open for discussion, but there are certain topics that I'll just pass on because either I don't care to form my own opinion in the first place, or know I'm too stuck in it that it would take too much effort to learn enough to change it that I wouldn't like it either
 
@Imus Yeah, perhaps. Still, that's not what my acquaintance did, they actively brought this point up.
 
oh sure, they are really pastionate about converting you to their point of view ... just not the other way around ;)
 
Hahaha that would be disappointing to learn that about them only now then. We've had some pretty respectful and engaging talks and exchanges of thoughts in the past!
If they were like that, I don't think I'd have become acquainted to them ;)
 
Ael
1:26 PM
@Tinkeringbell I am really not sure I understand your question but, I don't see how it's possible to not frame something. So, really, you can't make people "stop using frame around [you]"
 
I pointed this out earlier too, but that's more because of the use of the word "framing" has a different conotation in tink's question.
See it more as a "biased framing word". A specific way to name something (for example pro-life) that contains a specific bias to nudge the target audience to align with your view, or put them into the oposition rather than on equal ground
 
Ael
@Imus But aren't every word biased one way or another?
I sometimes can't even agree about "what color is this object" with my sister
 
true, but some inherently more than others. Calling it "against abortion" has a way different conotation then "pro-life" for example
 
It's okay. I've deleted the question, if it's this unclear I shall just have to muddle on myself XD
Before I get worthless answers again like the last one did.
 
hehe
 
1:32 PM
Maybe one day I'll find a way in which it can be edited and made clear.
 
@Ael This could also be another reason why formulating the question better is pretty hard. Sometimes it's obvious that someone chooses specific way to push their agenda, other times it's just a lack of non-bias words ... so hard not to describe it with the framing tink talks about
 
Actually, no, I'm not going to delete it. Take a look at the first paragraph now please, does it clarify it's about the techniques used to frame?
 
I don't think so, but still because my interned meaning of "frame" differs from what you mean with it.
Framing for me is providing context for some topic. You need the context to have something to talk about. Otherwise any opinions about it is meaningless. For example, if we want to discuss whether or not "blue is a nice color", there is a huge difference between takling about the sky or talking about skin color (the latter could imply blue being nice as someone who likes abuse). Framing here means we are talking about the same thing.
I also agree with Ael that framing something inherently contains a specific bias. Our language has involved in such a way that purely objectively stating certain topics is impossible.
 
@Imus Okay yeah then your definition of 'framing' is inherently wrong :P You're confusing it with contextualizing ;)
You need context to discuss whether blue is a nice color.
But you're framing blue as 'nice' by saying it's a nice color.
 
sure, but try opening a discussion about pro-life where you state you are against abortion without framing it in a biased way
 
1:45 PM
What I'm asking is how to counter rhetorical tactics without resorting to the same rhetorical tactic myself.
@Imus You're turning it around... it's about having a discussion about abortion without framing it as pro-life/pro-choice.
 
sure, but how to frame it then?
 
Not having a discussion about pro-life without having an opinion about abortion ;)
 
yes yes, but I mean, you need to have some context and give it a name. No matter what you name it, some side will call out your bias (or disagreement with their bias) which means you yourself are still "framing" it in some way
 
@Imus That's exactly it: You can talk about the actual facts, reasons, downsides and benefits if you don't go 'pick between pro-life or pro-choice'.
 
fact 1: you are killing someone
hard to discuss it further if they don't want to diverge from that standpoint
so it doesn't matter that they point it as "pro life"
the problem is their bias
not the choice of words
well, the choice of words comes from their bias. So you can't fix how they choose their words without ending up with the same result, is what I'm trying to say
 
1:50 PM
I'm a bit concerned by the future of this conversation ... the example you've chosen is loaded with feelings for a lot of people. I know that's the one mentioned in the question, but is there any chance you could use an example that has lighter political implications please?
 
If anyone has one, I'd be happy to include it in the question too. ;)
 
@avazula Just to clear it up in case this was not obvious. I'm not interested in discussing whether or not abortion is a good idea here. I'm specifically using this loaded term as an example, because everyone can see that there is an obvious inherent bias with it
 
@Imus The point is... the 'frame' is often waaaaay more biased than the actual opinion, which makes nuance impossible.
 
@Tinkeringbell or you point out the bias and start by trying to understand where that bias comes from ?
which leads to nuance
 
1:54 PM
I know. I just wanted to remind everyone that this is a public chat in which people can hop in an any moment and react strongly to some of what was said here without easily find the rest of the context
 
@avazula good point. Tho it's hard to pick a different topic that challenges a specific bias (where that bias is clear) while not provicing strong feelings from people who have that bias
if you have any example that may work, feel free to propose one and I'd gladly use it
 
@Imus That's... I don't know why you're this set on 'bias'. Framing is a communication technique used for expressing opinions, not necessarily biases. Biases are a step below opinions on the ladder: Biases are what can make you have certain opinions. An opinion isn't by definition a bias.
 
Off the top of my head I can't find one, no. Sorry.
 
In fact, an opinion is most likely formed by a whole interweaving web of biases.
 
@Tinkeringbell precicely because I think the framing itself isn't inherently an issue
and I use "bias" to make that distinction
 
1:58 PM
I'm lost. I'm asking how to counter a set of rhetorical techniques that the literature classifies as 'framing'. How then is that set of techniques not inherently an issue?
 
But just to give in my two cents given that it's an issue I meet quite often both in professional and leisure settings: I don't think you can. If someone reacts strongly when exposed to this information, chances are they won't change their mind until they're willingly looking up for this information and inform themselves on the matter.
When someone rejects something that was established as "right" or "real" by science or any other authority, it's most likely they're blinded by their feelings for some reason (not saying it's wrong in any way, we all have topics that make us feel that way). And from my experience, no amount of facts will make them change their mind until they make the choice to read/learn more about it
I have countless examples that pop in my mind right now
I used to be violently attacked because of my religious beliefs back in college because them finding out about my beliefs reminded them of their own abusive situations related to religion and couldn't accept how my beliefs made me feel or helped me in any way, because it was too painful to accept it could be any other way than all the pain it brought them before in their lives.
 
Sure avazula, I think tinks idea is not to change their mind, but to see if you can have a discussion to broader both their and your understanding of the topic with a more complete context starting from a neutral ground. The framing they point out in their question forces the discussion to only their side without being open to any oposing ideas which makes discussing it inhenently difficult
so Tink is looking for a way to specifically adressing this form of framing as a technique to force the discussion to that side, and allow a more neutral start instead
which I personally think is impossible to achieve
 
I think I understood Tink's point. What I'm saying is that, from my personal experience, I don't think it can be done. I tried, trust me I tried. Maybe it's just that I haven't found the technique yet either (hence me not answering with a frame challenge).
 
I think we can all agree that we WISH there is a way to achieve what tink wants :)
 
I don't know. I personally believe there's nothing in for me if the person I'm talking to isn't willing to try to understand my point of view, let alone listen to facts I'm giving them.
But since I started working in science I learned that even science is biased so now I just read a ton, with different theories made about the facts I'm exposed to, and then decide what to do with it.
 
2:07 PM
@avazula let me reword it then: We all wish it was possible to have a conversation about any topic where people are willing to listen to each other without feeling the need to attack based on feelings
 
@avazula I remembered the podcast talked about 'tax relief' too... So I edited the Q (again) to use that example: interpersonal.stackexchange.com/q/26625/1599.. I still used pro-life/pro-choice as an example of re-framing though, as I can't remember 'tax relief' ever getting a counter-frame
@Imus ^^
 
@Imus I got what you meant the first time. What I'm implying is that I don't think it's possible for many people, and given that how often I find myself in such a situation, I've come to believe it's just part of being human ... so why regret something that is inherent to our nature?
 
@avazula This sounds more like 'counter-arguments' though (giving facts is more counter arguing?) than actually addressing the behavior?
 
@Tinkeringbell but isn't the behaviour inherent because of their beliefs about the topic? So trying to adress the framing (as a bad thing) would also mean "personally attacking their belief" ?
 
I think that when you're explaining what framing is you're simply stating facts since you're talking about an established theory about human behaviour ... So I personally fail to see the difference
 
2:11 PM
@Imus That would depend on the other person. Like I said, this was in an environment that specifically encourages sharing your opinions but also having them challenged by others. If someone then says this is attacking their belief, they probably shouldn't be there. That would've also been out of character for this acquaintance.
 
perhaps they're missing the negative aspect of their framing ?
 
@avazula Hmm, yeah, that's an interesting one.
 
@Tinkeringbell maybe another train of thought about this specific person in that situation. They had their opinion on something, and instead of trying to argue about the topic you attack their choice of words instead
could that possibly explain why they reacted in a specific way?
 
@Imus I did not attack their choice of words, nor did I attack the rhetorical technique used as much as try to explain this was happening, and talk about how it does not encourage nuance?
An attack would've been way more than what I did (IMO).
An attack is offensive, I think I stayed pretty clearly in the defensive.
 
are you saying I'm wrong? (<- defensive, but still makes you feel attacked right?)
@Tinkeringbell it's not because there are far more aggresive forms of attack that your couldn't be taken as an attack on their opinion as well. Or at least feel that way. I'm not saying that this means you did something wrong, but might explain why they too went on the defensive (and responded in a less logical, but more feelings-based way)
 
2:21 PM
Wuh..
@Imus Pffft. That again, would be very out of character and not appropriate for the context this conversation was in.
I can only say that I did what I did in the question ;)
It's disappointing to see this many 'can't be done' though. That means the world is f-ed XD
 
not the world entirely ... just the majority of people
 
That's a very pessimistic way to look at things ^^
 
@Tinkeringbell let's hope you are right about this and it was a one-off thing. I wouldn't be surprised if they consider you trying to use things like "framing" in character either and were hoping for a different kind of conversation, hence just gave up instead :p
 
@avazula Perhaps it is, but I can't deny I see more and more of those single words used to describe complex social problems and override facts with the fictional meaning ascribed to that word. :/
 
To me it's a matter of trying to find meaning beyond the exact words that were used
 
2:27 PM
Society is breaking apart, I think.
 
Ael
@Tinkeringbell Does it though? People still can and do change their minds. So, even if framing is an issue, it apparently doesn't prevent people from changing their mind
 
I choose my words very carefully most of the time because of that, and yet people will try and assume things I haven't said
Maybe that's why I find linguistics so fascinating
 
@Ael The problem with 'framing' is that those mind changes are then not so much rooted in careful examination of the facts, but just in how good a single word can make you feel.
@avazula I should really learn more linguistics myself. I just don't know where I'll ever find the time without giving up another hobby... and I like my current hobbies :D
 
You've got your whole life ahead
Just don't learn French
It's a lost cause
 
Ael
@Tinkeringbell I mean, the framing can help but those people probably heard more than one word before changing their mind ^^
 
2:32 PM
@avazula Which is a pretty sorry excuse to not study something you could use now ;)
@Ael Nah, that was the point of the podcast: Counter arguments, facts, aren't as useful in convincing someone as using a single word that makes them feel good.
@avazula I already learned French in high school. It used to be pretty good too, I used to read books in French without much trouble. After 12 years though, not much is left except 'Bonjour' and 'Je suis une baguette' (don't ask).
 
@Tinkeringbell That's even funnier coming from someone who theoretically has 8 years ahead of them to live
I've always lived that way though (maybe as a consequence), always interested by so many things at once
 
@avazula ;) Next time my boss asks me which things I want to learn this year, I'll just say I have the rest of my life to learn them :P
And true. There's just too much interesting things to do at once :)
(and a bunch of less interesting things that prevent doing the interesting ones :P Like running unit tests)
 
Don't get me started on unit tests
 
Okay, different thing then: People complaining the software isn't working when they're just feeding it wrong data?
Have solved 2 tickets today that were 'Here's your problem'.
One even included "We checked, it's not that"
 
I had a nice one as well yesterday
"I reproduce the bug. But it's not a bug. It's not a feature either. Your data is just corrupted"
 
2:49 PM
Yeah. I'm supposed to build software that automatically adds data to a map. But that does require the data that we're getting to meet certain standards, and we're developing checks for those standards.
Hopefully, from next week on we'll be taking a massive step back and first look at how we can make it clearer not only that the data is wrong, but also which data is wrong.
The problem is that my co-worker and I don't have full control over the drawing tool contractors use, so we're totally dependent on someone else to fix that.
 
That sucks
 
Yeah, it's not ideal.
On the other hand, I don't think I would want to be responsible for that so...
Apparently changes to that tool are often blocked by contractors with the argument that it's more work, so they will charge more XD
 
Money money money
 
Yep. It all boils down to money (at least the job does)
 
3:47 PM
hi
 
Hello
 
@CaldeiraG Nice, happy birthday to you! Now you need to change the number in your profile, it is still 20 :D
 
German saying: "There are no stupid questions, there are only stupid answers". That's what our maths teacher taught us. — gnasher729 2 mins ago
#3427 gnasher729 (6113 rep) | A: How to get more co-operation from a teacher who discourages a student from asking questions to clear his confusion? (score: 14) | posted 1217 days ago by Crazy Cucumber (4411 rep) | Toxicity 0.8113899 | High toxicity | Comment on inactive post | tps/fps: 0/0
 
@IPSCommentBot Dutch saying: "Who sows, shall reap". Meaning that stupid answers are prompted by stupid questions ;)
@IPSCommentBot tp
 
Marked this comment as flaggable (tp). Currently marked 1tps/0fps. beep boop My human overlords won't let me flag that, so you'll have to do it yourself.
 
4:05 PM
@Tinkeringbell perhaps make the distinction between the intent behind the question? A question asked with the intent of understanding something you currently don't cannot be stupid. A question intended as a troll on the other hand ... I fully agree with your saying :D
 
@Imus It all depends on the metrics used to determine stupidity, yes ;) A question with the intent to understand something could still be stupid if it's asked of the wrong person ;)
A question used to troll isn't inherently stupid if it's reacting to trolling.
 
@lila eheh thanks for reminding :)
and thanks :)
 
 
2 hours later…
6:28 PM
Agreed. Even a bland (but subjective) "I don't like KPop" is better than the (seemingly objective) statement "KPop is crap". — Llewellyn 1 min ago
#26628 Llewellyn (170 rep) | A: Talking to a friend that isn't much reasonable about people different opinions (score: 1) | posted 34 minutes ago by OldPadawan (19792 rep) | Toxicity 0.8484769 | High toxicity | tps/fps: 0/0
Matched regex(es) ["chatty"]
 
@IPSCommentBot tp
 
Marked this comment as flaggable (tp). Currently marked 1tps/0fps. beep boop My human overlords won't let me flag that, so you'll have to do it yourself.
 

« first day (1288 days earlier)      last day (377 days later) »