Slashdot Mirror


Overconfidence May Be a Result of Social Politeness

An anonymous reader writes "Joyce Ehrlinger from Florida State University has researched this very phenomenon, and has led her to present a paper called 'Polite But Not Honest: How an Absence of Negative Social Feedback Contributes to Overconfidence' at the American Psychological Association's annual conference in Orlando on Friday. Social norms, Ehrlinger says, are the reason that we are averse to giving negative feedback. Her research recreated everyday social situations in which we hold back from giving our own negative views."

181 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Noooo by theRunicBard · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?

    1. Re:Noooo by SillyPerson · · Score: 1
      You suck!

      You're welcome.

  2. Except on the Internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    where anything goes!

  3. spoonful of sugar by iamnobody2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    negative feedback is acceptable if given constructively and pleasantly

    --
    nobody's perfect
    1. Re:spoonful of sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Look there is a difference between being an A-hole and just saying it like it is. But sugar coating and wrapping criticism in a shroud of BS is counter productive and often leads people to 'not get it'. If one does something wrong, say it, and say it straight forward, no sugar, no BS.

    2. Re:spoonful of sugar by vencs · · Score: 2

      negative feedback is acceptable if given constructively and pleasantly

      its a convincing point, but the problem seems to be with the three terms (negative, constructively, pleasantly) in the statement which are relative and vary from person to person.

    3. Re:spoonful of sugar by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Informative

      negative feedback is acceptable if given constructively and pleasantly

      Not always. When I was a kid, I was a real brat and a complete nuisance at school, both for my schoolmates and for teachers, and didn't realize it. School officials tried time and time again to talk to me "about my future", call my parents in to have a chat about my latest antics in a pleasant, non-hurtful, Mr. Mackey sort of way, to no avail.

      And one day, 20 kids ganged up on me and beat the shit out of me outside school. I got the message. It was one of the most important lessons of my life.

      So no, being pleasant isn't always constructive.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    4. Re:spoonful of sugar by steelfood · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Depends on the person. Some people take negative feedback hard, and become discouraged. Some people take it well, and become driven to do better.

      Same with positive feedback, actually. Some people take it poorly and become overconfident. Some see it only as an affirmation of their progress.

      The only difference is, the person giving feedback would feel worse for giving negative feedback and having the person take it badly, than giving positive feedback with the negative reaction. This kind of feedback is ultimately not about the person receiving it, it's about the person giving it. It's about feeling good for that person, rather than doing good.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    5. Re:spoonful of sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      After 17 years programming video games, I've found that the people who can't take criticism are known as artists.

    6. Re:spoonful of sugar by EzInKy · · Score: 4, Funny

      So humans evolved manners so they could avoid getting the shit kicked out of them by their peers! Who would have thought?

      --
      Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
    7. Re:spoonful of sugar by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      negative feedback is acceptable if given constructively and pleasantly

       
      That's a nice notion, but unfortunately it only works some of the time, as different people react differently to different stimuli
       
      Some takes direct criticism well, others may not.
       
      Some are enlightened by the hinted enclosed within the sweet-coating, but others do not
       
       

      Look there is a difference between being an A-hole and just saying it like it is. But sugar coating and wrapping criticism in a shroud of BS is counter productive and often leads people to 'not get it'.

      Not all "not getting it, some do
       
      As different people react differently to different stimuli, you do have to tailor-made (or customized) the criticism / sarcasm / suggestion to suit the personality of the intended target
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    8. Re:spoonful of sugar by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      ... people who can't take criticism are known as artists ...

       
      ... and architects

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    9. Re:spoonful of sugar by qu33ksilver · · Score: 1

      Depends on the person.

      This holds true for every theory. But I guess the basic idea is that people judge themselves by the reaction from their surroundings, in this case- the society.

      Lack of negative feedback is in no way the only factor in overconfidence. Too much of a positive feedback will also give overconfidence. But this theory is from a different perspective. Its just trying to point out that we are reluctant to give negative feedback and people might take it in a different way. I have to say that I do not totally agree with this view because I feel, unless you get positive feedback or what you can call "appreciation", we don't feel motivated to do better. How can a neutral situation make anybody overconfident ?

      Anyways, people will continue to make radical attempts to understand society. This is a weak one.

    10. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

      *swosh*

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    11. Re:spoonful of sugar by azalin · · Score: 1

      ... people who can't take criticism are known as artists ...

      ... and architects

      don't architects consider themselves to be artists?

    12. Re:spoonful of sugar by N1AK · · Score: 2

      And one day, 20 kids ganged up on me and beat the shit out of me outside school. I got the message. It was one of the most important lessons of my life.

      I got in a lot of fights as a kid and had a lot of issues. The more people tried to force me to do things the more I'd fight back. I got lucky and after leaving 3 schools ended up in a specialist one which had an ethos of non-confrontation and staff who were trained to reason with students. It was a school of about 30 kids that a normal school couldn't control and yet we left with decent grades and much more balanced lives. So although a beating may have done it for you, it might not work for many others.

    13. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 2

      I lived a year and a half with some friends in collective.
      We shared a fridge, and I had a top shelf...and i had a tendency to sorta pile my jars and such so they fell over. My rather...grumpy and several synonymous of that adjective friend did point that out.
      If something spilled it would land on his shit.

      One day I noticed some sticky brown sauce on his shelf and groceries...was a bit of a mystery at first, wasn't sure if it was a red wine vinegar bottle or not, until I assured him that it was.

      Well...I was embarrassed, and immediately went about cleaning the fridge. He got cross and started "lecturing" me with this really patronizing pop-psychology( this is the guy that called a house meeting to hold a dramatic soliloquies of the tragedy of the commons, subtle).
      I usually start calling him an hypocrite when he begins and how I actually clean up his pans when Its been standing on the stove for a day, but here I was an inconsiderate dumbfuck so I'll let him carry on, while I went about to clean the fridge feeling like a prick.
      He then smacks me on the head and tells me to look him in his eye when he's talking to me. Any willingness to be introspective to anything he said disappeared at that point, along with my planned barrage of apologies and assurances of re-compensations ....not to mention me for the first time saying "yes you are right" to one of "stern talking".
      My humility was used up so I just flipped him off and left.

      Now, you could claim i should just stand there and take it, and i know I wasn't Martha Stewart...but I get stubborn and argumentative if i feel i have a couple of justification to defend myself, especially when they tried to be so bloody "snobby" and theatrical. That stubbornness wasnt often rational but in some cases I had cause to defend myself...so whenever shouting match occoured there wasnt any feedback to be had. He though I was an impetuous child and I got annoyed, stubborn and dismissed him as a dramaqueen.
      Just glad that when I left my friendships were still intact. But yeah, by a tally you can easily say that had more to be annoyed about, but as much as a douchbag this makes me sound, the "stern but fair" approach failed, hey...I 'm still living like a pig!

      So yeah...if you are pessimist and feel you can only nip things in the bud with a pragmatic confrontation....well, I can't honestly say that they could do anything different to knock some sense into me, but just try to be patient by asking, then a bit of nagging....then find a way to shame me into submissin in a non-passive aggressive way....because the "though love" approach can easily backfire.

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    14. Re:spoonful of sugar by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Capitalise your sentences, you wanker.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    15. Re:spoonful of sugar by somersault · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone is claiming you should stand there and take it.. if someone was being that much of an asshole to my flatmates as well as just me, and then had the gall to physically hit me while I was trying to help tidy up, I'd probably punch him in the solar plexus. That might have shocked him enough to think about how much of an asshole he was being, or at least to stop treating you like a doormat.

      I often try to be patient with bad situations, and usually I'm quite shy and unwilling to risk insulting people, but if they actually threaten or insult me (or even worse, people I care about), I seem to develop a pair pretty quickly. It's one of the few times that I've noticed I naturally look people in the eye without feeling awkward.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    16. Re:spoonful of sugar by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      I though this site used American-english?

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    17. Re:spoonful of sugar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Don't know what you mean by 'best', but physical violence is used and is often effective.

      A quite reasonable interpretation of human history is that more issues have been settled by force than by reason. Sorry, just telling it like it is.

    18. Re:spoonful of sugar by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      A quite reasonable interpretation of human history is that more issues have been settled by force than by reason.

      Well, I don't think it's reasonable to beat people up merely for disagreeing with you.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    19. Re:spoonful of sugar by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's why GP is asking for more capitalism.

    20. Re:spoonful of sugar by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Do you believe explaining your reasonable belief will stop people who are currently kicking the crap out of you?

      What does that have to do with what I said? All I did was disagree with the actions of those who beat him up. I never said anything about believing that disagreeing will stop them.

      you seem to be unable to comprehend that something can happen or a state true regardless of whether or not you believe that is something that only reasonable, enlightened people would do, or represents a morally correct situation.

      No, that's just your own straw man.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    21. Re:spoonful of sugar by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Looks to me like I was mocking the ones who beat him up. I don't see where I said anything about him.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    22. Re:spoonful of sugar by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      > negative feedback is acceptable if given constructively and pleasantly

      You clearly need to hire a better class of mistress.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    23. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Some takes direct criticism well, others may not.

      How they take it is their problem, not yours. You only have to make sure that the information is delivered correctly.

    24. Re:spoonful of sugar by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      don't architects consider themselves to be artists?

      Which is why it was a hilarious two-way slight. In two words, no less.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    25. Re:spoonful of sugar by ultranova · · Score: 1

      How they take it is their problem, not yours. You only have to make sure that the information is delivered correctly.

      If you don't care about the end result, why get involved in the first place?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    26. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

      Thanks alot! I was making progress on my QT project, but now you made me feel unsure about myself.

      So now I'm just gonna crawl under the table and worry about the future.

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    27. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deorus · · Score: 1

      If you don't care about the end result, why get involved in the first place?

      I seldom get involved in anything except when I see people complain about something that I have a formed opinion about (in this case I am more interested in knowing whether I am right or in having my opinion refuted) or when my judgement is explicitly requested (in which case I would not be honest if I sugar coated my opinion). It is extremely uncommon for me to criticize anything directly unless it has a direct impact in my life and I can absolutely not adjust,

    28. Re:spoonful of sugar by Mysteryprize · · Score: 1

      In art school, there wasn't a lot of criticism, and they were nice about it -- tried to encourage you a lot. However, when I started working as an animator, if there was something wrong with a scene it had to be redone. If you didn't do it right, you didn't get paid. So, you learn pretty quickly not to be too sensitive to criticism.

    29. Re:spoonful of sugar by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      We're social animals.

    30. Re:spoonful of sugar by Deorus · · Score: 1

      Dummy. How they take it affects correct delivery. Accurate communication requires at least two people. You are clearly incapable of such.

      While that is true, that doesn't make me responsible for the misunderstanding. As you mentioned (and well), accurate communication requires at least two people, and both has responsibilities. The sender is responsible for ensuring that the message is clear, and the receiver is responsible for interpreting it right, so, again, NOT MY FUCKING PROBLEM,

    31. Re:spoonful of sugar by bkaul01 · · Score: 1

      In other words, you can't be bothered to worry about whether you're actually communicating effectively; you just broadcast a message and ignore the results. You may as well just stand on a street corner with a megaphone for all the good that'll do. I'm glad you're not responsible for designing network protocols. We'd have no parity, check bits, etc.

      The sender is responsible for ensuring that the message is clear to the recipient, and if it is not, should rephrase or retransmit accordingly.

    32. Re:spoonful of sugar by Grygus · · Score: 1

      If the student failed to learn, the teacher failed to teach.

    33. Re:spoonful of sugar by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Different approaches work on different people. The hard part is knowing who needs a kick in the ass and who needs tender loving care.

    34. Re:spoonful of sugar by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Straw man alert. Telling someone that they are worthless and will never amount to anything is not feedback. It's more like a value judgement or just an insult or verbal attack. Telling someone that they are doing something wrong OTOH is feedback and often quite helpful for the person being corrected. Ideally such criticisms should be specific and include at least some advice on how to improve.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  4. Not news by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's been just about impossible to criticize the religious beliefs of anyone for decades, and it's almost impossible to curb inappropriate and in-your-face religious behaviors because of the sacrosanct rule that religion is somehow immune to interference from the secular world, and that's why religious craziness around the world is on the rise.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Not news by gishzida · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ever try to tell a Libertarian that has drunk the kool-aide that their free market liberty is swapping big government inefficiency [ineffectiveness which protects all of us -- read Heinlein] for a Darwinian construct that has no moral or ethical foundation? Libertarian Religion [sorry the political party and their weak sister Tea Baggers] is bad for the present and worse for the future... Don't they realize the "death panels" of "free market health care insurance" is already sitting-- they're called actuaries?

      So irrationality does not occur in just religion... it happens in politics and probably every other human endevor... If we were rational we would be a lot different than we are...

      My mother used to say: "Just because they are polite, doesn't mean they are nice."

      Remember that the next time your boss politely makes irrational demands and leaves you holding the bag.

    2. Re:Not news by CheshireDragon · · Score: 2

      i think what he is going at is that it doesn't matter how wrong or bat shit a religious person is because they think they are always right and it doesn't matter how stupid or wrong they are because "God loves them no matter what."

      i could be wrong..

      --
      "That's right...I said it."
    3. Re:Not news by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So irrationality does not occur in just religion... it happens in politics and probably every other human endevor...

      Yes, but you can have political debates. You can't have true religious debates: when people run out of argument, they pull the "faith" card and the discussion is over. And we're all supposed to respect faith as if it was unattackable by definition.

      --
      "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    4. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is the point of arguing with religious persons? Religion requires one to ignore reality and the evidence to the contrary before them (that's why they have "faith"). You would not be a religious person if you did otherwise.

    5. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Decades or about a century or two ago religion was considered something personal and abstract. It was thought religion has evolved something that tells you to do the right thing but doesn't straightly tell what is the right thing in certain situation. You have to sort it out yourself.

      Humanity used to be so evolved they didn't think the religions that told you to vote certain parties or abolished you from eating certain foods, were ever coming back.

    6. Re:Not news by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 5, Informative
      I tend to believe rather like Thomas Jefferson, I think, on this matter.

      "I never told my own religion nor scrutinized that of another. I never attempted to make a convert, nor wished to change another's creed. I am satisfied that yours must be an excellent religion to have produced a life of such exemplary virtue and correctness. For it is in our lives, and not from our words, that our religion must be judged." -- Thomas Jefferson

      "But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." -- Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

      (But of course we have the objection that certain "religions" have done those very things, even today. In which case we might rightly oppose them.)

      "Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear." -- Thomas Jefferson, letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

    7. Re:Not news by fredgiblet · · Score: 2

      I think you aren't understanding his point (because he doesn't really convey it well). You can criticize religion, however doing so in the US makes you automatically the Bad Guy. It doesn't matter if you're right, all that matters is that you are attacking the sacred cow of religion and that's not allowed.

    8. Re:Not news by flonker · · Score: 1

      Faith is defined as "belief that is not based on proof." You can think of faith as being an axiom. "As classically conceived, an axiom is a premise so evident as to be accepted as true without controversy."

      That is why atheists arguing with believers is pointless. Each has their own axioms, and to change those would require an event that would cause them to re-examine their entire lives. An argument at a cocktail party or over teh interweb isn't going to do that.

    9. Re:Not news by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      You can criticize religion, however doing so in the US makes you automatically the Bad Guy.

      Being an atheist automatically divides you into a different group than most of America. It doesn't mean everyone will hate you, or that you can't criticize religion; it means you are a minority, and most people will think you are wrong.

      If you need to be comforted by the support of crowds, then don't be an atheist.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    10. Re:Not news by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's true at all. That's just the perspective of a religious person. To others, anyone who cuts religion any slack is automatically the Bad Guy.

    11. Re:Not news by u38cg · · Score: 1

      More underwriters and claims managers. Us actuaries just tell you what risks cost in the future and what to charge for them now.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    12. Re:Not news by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      Yes, but you can have political debates.

      You haven't actually been in any political debates have you?
       

      You can't have true religious debates: when people run out of argument, they pull the "faith" card and the discussion is over.

      People do the same thing in political debates too. Whether the issue is "which god is the almightiest" or "do people have a right to free health care", it's all faith.

    13. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you can have political debates.

      Surely you jest? When was the last time you heard a politician listen anyone except themselves or those who pays for their campaigns?

      There are no debates these days, all you get is two or more verbal combatants who will do their best to drag each other into the mud, while repeating their and (and those of their masters) talking-points over and over again like parrots.

    14. Re:Not news by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever try to tell a Libertarian that has drunk the kool-aide that their free market liberty is swapping big government inefficiency [ineffectiveness which protects all of us -- read Heinlein] for a Darwinian construct that has no moral or ethical foundation?

      Ever try to argue rather than just tell people stuff? In a legitimate argument, you'd be corrected in that government, especially "big" government, is also a construct, possibly Darwinian as well, which has no moral or ethical foundation either. That's the case for most of human endeavors and tools. The hammer can be used to build a house or cave in someone's face. The hammer doesn't care which.

      Libertarian Religion [sorry the political party and their weak sister Tea Baggers] is bad for the present and worse for the future...

      Use of the excessively insulting term, "tea baggers" is not a sign of a serious argument. Calling a belief a "religion" merely because you disagree with it is not a sign of a serious argument.

      Don't they realize the "death panels" of "free market health care insurance" is already sitting-- they're called actuaries?

      No, and you don't either. The actuary just reports actual rates of some occurrence, here, death, illness, etc in a population. They make no decision over how much treatment is enough.

      When treatment is not a function of the wallet of the patient, then someone has to decide when too much treatment has been given. It almost never will be the patient and family who isn't paying the cost of their treatment directly. That's when the so-called "death panels" come in. Someone has to control costs or the medical system in question ceases to function.

    15. Re:Not news by khallow · · Score: 1
      It still is. And the same sort of people who disagree now, disagreed then.

      Humanity used to be so evolved they didn't think the religions that told you to vote certain parties or abolished you from eating certain foods, were ever coming back.

      Never happened. Never will.

    16. Re:Not news by khallow · · Score: 1

      There's also the matter of self-interest. For example, the fact of whether or not I benefit from a particular public policy change doesn't change no matter how or for how long someone argues.

    17. Re:Not news by khallow · · Score: 1

      When was the last time you heard a politician listen anyone except themselves or those who pays for their campaigns?

      Quite often at the legislative level. The handwritten note is taken quite seriously by most of the US House of Representatives, for example.

    18. Re:Not news by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but since atheism would appeal best to those not in need of artificial comforts, it probably works out fine.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    19. Re:Not news by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Ever try to tell a Libertarian that has drunk the kool-aide that their free market liberty is swapping big government inefficiency [ineffectiveness which protects all of us -- read Heinlein] for a Darwinian construct that has no moral or ethical foundation?

      Except that Darwin knew better. "Survival of the fittest" as interpreted by ideologues assumes that only the biggest, baddest, nastiest and most selfish will succeed. No cute little kittens or butterflies for them. No altruism for the sake of the whole (species) at the expense of the individual.

      Free markets aren't usually stable even absent external (e.g. government) meddling. They tend to degenerate into monopolies thanks to positive feedback processes. Or, more succinctly: "Nothing Succeeds like Success".

    20. Re:Not news by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It is. At least according to my mother. She always said "don't argue with crazy people".

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    21. Re:Not news by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, if God loves those loonies, then God is the top asshole himself...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:Not news by ultranova · · Score: 2

      Yes, but you can have political debates. You can't have true religious debates: when people run out of argument, they pull the "faith" card and the discussion is over.

      From what I've seen, both political and religious debates tend to degenerate into "everyone who disagrees with me is evil or stupid or both" pretty fast. There are numerous reasons for this, from trying to oversimplify the world to a kind of magical thinking where everything will be fine if you just perform certain rituals (oppose anything Obama does; bash gays; vote Republican; etc). However, the most important reason is that people who have common political or religious beliefs tend to cluster together and form groups, and membership in said groups becomes part of the identity of their members; thus any attack against the group is considered an attack against its members, and reacted to accordingly.

      And we're all supposed to respect faith as if it was unattackable by definition.

      The problem is the word you use here: attack. People don't "debate" politics or religion, they fight for dominance for their group. Historically, these fights tended to escalate into all-out wars, which is what respecting faith is trying to prevent. And of course people being people means that this gets abused.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    23. Re:Not news by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but since atheism would appeal best to those not in need of artificial comforts, it probably works out fine.

      You would hope so, but if you've ever hung out with a crowd of 'skeptics,' you would realize that often they very much do need the comfort of a crowd.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    24. Re:Not news by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

      Okay, that doesn't describe me, but I know enough to realize that's fair.

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    25. Re:Not news by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Good. Needing the comfort of crowds will do nothing but cause you problems.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    26. Re:Not news by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Wow, started good and just went downhill by rolling into trolldome and insults. Try to stay away from that and your posts will be more powerful.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:Not news by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 1

      Use of the excessively insulting term, "tea baggers" is not a sign of a serious argument.

      I think most people realized that when members of the Tea Party started calling themselves that...

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    28. Re:Not news by khallow · · Score: 1

      And stopped calling themselves that when other people whispered to them what "tea bagger" means to certain people.

    29. Re:Not news by r0ball · · Score: 1

      ["Big" government has no moral or ethical foundation...like a hammer]? +5 Insightful?? This is social politeness gone mad....

      And are you saying that the limit of each individual patient's wallet is a better arbiter of whether sufficient treatment has been given than a human being balancing the finite resources of the system with health equality as a guiding principle?

    30. Re:Not news by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

      bah! you just want to fit a Tie around my neck and remove my slipper'n'socks attire!

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    31. Re:Not news by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      No. I want to set your pants on fire!

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    32. Re:Not news by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      The free market will always solve a problem - that much of the religion is true. However the solution may not be optimum. The best example of this is what is going to happen to human civilization due to our use of the free market to guide our energy production. Barring technical miracle (You better pray for one!) fossil fuels will be used until all that is left is so deeply buried that the net energy production from digging them up is less than 50%. At that point we will try to turn to alternatives, but will not be able to quickly enough since the energy needed to build an alternative infrastructure will be too expensive. What I mean by "quickly enough" is quickly enough to prevent a massive die-off of humanity. The optimum solution would be to abrogate the free market by governmental fiat, building enough nuclear fission power plants so that electricity becomes so inexpensive that the free market in transportation builds an all-electric transportation system infrastructure.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    33. Re:Not news by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      That's the problem with those who criticize libertarianism: their criticisms are almost always irrational. The problem with libertarianism is that libertarians are dishonest about the implications of their politics. If a children's parents cannot find a job the children and their parents should not be prevented from starving to death is a valid representation of libertarian politics that most libertarians would attempt to deny. That principle (and attendant dishonesty) is a good example of why I have largely abandoned libertarianism, except for the part about not not legislating morality via prohibition.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
  5. Joyce Ehrlinger is Stupid by ClassicASP · · Score: 3, Funny

    Joyce Ehrlinger from Florida State University is stupid! She has absolutely no idea what she's talking about! Pure rubbish! She should just drop out of the American Psychological Association right now and save us all a bunch of pain and headache! She has no idea what she's talking about! None! Pure bullox!

  6. Counterpoint by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anonymous Coward: FROST PIST

    What the Moderators do: -5 Off Topic
    What the Anonymous Coward sees: +5 Attention.

    This is not how negative feedback was supposed to work.

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:Counterpoint by Shempster · · Score: 1

      Anonymous Coward: FROST PIST

      What the Moderators do: -5 Off Topic What the Anonymous Coward sees: +5 Attention.

      This is not how negative feedback was supposed to work.

      Who cares? Don't drop AC feature. Slashdot without anonymity option would be far less interesting and entertaining. Too many people worrying about what the mods are going to think or do? No thanks.

    2. Re:Counterpoint by TrekkieGod · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anonymous Coward: FROST PIST

      What the Moderators do: -5 Off Topic What the Anonymous Coward sees: +5 Attention.

      This is not how negative feedback was supposed to work.

      The goal of the moderation here isn't to teach the dude the error of his ways. It wasn't meant to punish him. I don't care if he was gratified by the "attention" he got. If he did, more power to him, let him keep posting it.

      The point is that I don't browse at -1, so I didn't see his comment. Slashdot was therefore a better experience for me, and the moderation worked exceedingly well.

      --

      Warning: Opinions known to be heavily biased.

  7. Retort by AnotherAnonymousUser · · Score: 1

    Well your faith in your friends is yours.

  8. It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Politeness" does not mean no negative feedback... and never has.

    One can be polite, and even friendly, while still giving negative feedback. This "no negative feedback" bullshit is a result of those defunct social theories that we had to bolster kids' self-esteem at the cost of truth.

    As far as I am aware, this is the first time this has been a significant problem. As polite as societies have been in the past, negative feedback has never, to the best of my knowledge, been a problem.

    1. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It has to do with education taking over teaching.

      If I pay someone money to teach me, say, playing piano or tennis, I expect him to point out my weaknesses. No matter how polite he is, he probably won't keep me motivated if I never seem to develop in playing. (I've taught guitar myself and seen this every time.)

      The problem is there is nowadays no goal education is aiming to. It's just something vague about "growing up". With no goals and no measure you've personally chosen you can not feel your progress, and consequently it is very hard to keep motivated. The self esteem and feeling good is all there is left to motivate you.

      My advice is: ditch education. Growing up happens naturally. Just do stuff and get better in it. (Provided it is legal :-)

    2. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would add to your point that to even frame the discussion using only "positive" and "negative" feedback means one is already caught up in the same tired old dialectic rattrap that has defined much of man's social, ethical, economic, and governmental structures since the days of Marx.

      When a person has grown up in a dialectic culture system, they really don't know anything other than "positive" and "negative" and in essence, their ability to communicate, in full, has been crippled. Of course the degree of crippling varies from individual to individual, as one would expect.

      One of the ways "negative" feedback is proffered politely in the modern world is via the "let me play devil's advocate for a moment" mechanism. It depersonalizes the negativity using the "safe word" (phrase) and the discussion can go on without someone's emotional train jumping off the rails due to a "negativity" overload.

      Ehrlinger's findings are themselves so "polite" to the point of being somewhat inane. "Overconfidence" is hardly the right word. I might use "socially inept and generally obnoxious". It might be mildly obnoxious most of the time, but it is obnoxious all the same.

    3. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I agree completely with you but want to go further by saying that the deduction that the researcher has made is too simplistic to be correct.

      My argument is based on cultural comparison. I have recently visited a few countries around the world and the three that seem relevant here are England, Switzerland and Japan.

      I would summarise that in general the culture of these counties is one of absolute politeness. People from these cultures do not generally "make a fuss" in public.

      However, of all the people around the world that I know this "overconfidence" is a predominantly American trait. Sure, plenty of tossers (as such a person would be called in the local language) in the UK and Australia, but many many more of them in the USA.

      So there must be some other mechanism that creates it, because being polite doesn't seem to be it.

    4. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by mordred99 · · Score: 1

      While I agree 100% with you, read the title of the paper. "Politeness and not being honest." So it is that people are being too polite and not being honest and telling the truth. That is the crux of the issue. That whole concept "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything." If people are "sparing the rod" then you end up with spoiling the child.

      I am not trying to be a cliche machine, but at the end of the day, all of this is known. The problem is society and political correctness want people to not tell people the "uncomfortable truth".

    5. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As far as I am aware, this is the first time this has been a significant problem. As polite as societies have been in the past, negative feedback has never, to the best of my knowledge, been a problem.

      In the interest of honesty, I have to tell you that you are overestimating your knowledge on the subject. You know absolutely knothing about how much this has been a problem in the past.

    6. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by cr_nucleus · · Score: 1

      One can be polite, and even friendly, while still giving negative feedback. This "no negative feedback" bullshit is a result of those defunct social theories that we had to bolster kids' self-esteem at the cost of truth.

      I believe that it's related to the widespread confusion of form and substance.
      You can point at issues in someone's performance in a very nice manner and alternatively you can give some praise in a very displeasing way.

      It could also be connected to the fact that it's often confusing to like and not like something at the same time and possibly for the very same reasons (btw, that's ambivalence).

      Encouraging someone does not require lying.

    7. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Shempster · · Score: 1

      Lets say you have 2 daughters, both love drawing, coloring, & art in general. The younger one has obvious amazing talent, the other average. Are you going to say "sweetie, your sister is far superior to you when it comes to drawing, just look! OMG! You on the otherhand, should give up."??

    8. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Grygus · · Score: 2

      It is fear; what you are seeing is overcompensation. Americans have been bombarded constantly with fear by our media, politicians, and even entertainment for a couple of decades now, at least. We are a terrified nation, and that is why we have so much bluster. There are things for which we can rightly be proud, but we've lost all perspective. There is no purposeful evil behind it; it has made a few people very, very wealthy. That's all.

    9. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Grygus · · Score: 1

      No, but not because it's the nice thing to do. I wouldn't say that because art is about expression, not competition. It doesn't matter at all that her sister is better.

    10. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      But encouraging someone is not always appropriate. In those cases, negative feedback can be perfectly justified. (E.g., "With all due respect, sir, if you allow your dog to defecate in my flower bed again, you will cease to own a dog.")

    11. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      I would explain that we all have our talents, it just sometimes takes time to find the right one. Then encourage her to find one.

    12. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      " There is no purposeful evil behind it; it has made a few people very, very wealthy. That's all."

      Of course there's purposeful evil behind it. Some people like money. Others like power. Others like both. And many of them will do a great deal of evil to get it.

    13. Re:It's all that old "Self Esteem" nonsense. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      Mitt Romney is actually a pretty good example. He made his money basically as a corporate raider: buying healthy or slightly struggling corporations, firing everybody, and selling off their assets for a profit.

      Short-term profits for a few versus long-term profits for many is both societally and economically dysfunctional; there is extremely good justification for calling it "evil". And it was certainly purposeful.

  9. Re:That's where subtle hints and irony get in. by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Then use sarcasm, which is a form of irony everybody understands. Be prepared to get your teeth knocked out regularly though, because good sarcasm usually insults the intended recipient a lot more than plain statements.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  10. Overconfidence may be a weakness by pegasustonans · · Score: 4, Funny

    But what's the alternative when you're running an empire? Faith in your friends?

    I don't think so.

    --
    And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
    1. Re:Overconfidence may be a weakness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The average person of today is not made of the right stuff to run empires. The assertion is laughable. For the most part, those that are destined for the path of empire, are not raised in the artificial and limited "positive" and "negative" worldview framework, but the continuum of reality. Which includes every form of positive, negative, and mixture thereof.

      Rather, it is the "slave" class that is raised to be afraid of the full range of human emotion and communication. Of course this leads to pervasive dishonesty and corruption which is why we end up with huge failures like Fukushima. It gets very hard to cut the crap and get to authentic facts and make quality decisions using facts. Most of the world is like this -- long on crap and short on facts -- including the individuals, the corporations, and the governments. Nothing of quality can be built on a foundation of dishonesty.

      But you can go back to running your empire. Even if it is only in your favorite online game.

    2. Re:Overconfidence may be a weakness by pegasustonans · · Score: 1

      The average person of today is not made of the right stuff to run empires. The assertion is laughable. For the most part, those that are destined for the path of empire, are not raised in the artificial and limited "positive" and "negative" worldview framework, but the continuum of reality. Which includes every form of positive, negative, and mixture thereof.

      Rather, it is the "slave" class that is raised to be afraid of the full range of human emotion and communication. Of course this leads to pervasive dishonesty and corruption which is why we end up with huge failures like Fukushima. It gets very hard to cut the crap and get to authentic facts and make quality decisions using facts. Most of the world is like this -- long on crap and short on facts -- including the individuals, the corporations, and the governments. Nothing of quality can be built on a foundation of dishonesty.

      But you can go back to running your empire. Even if it is only in your favorite online game.

      I guess you're not a Star Wars fan.

      --
      And all our yesterdays have lighted fools The way to dusty death. --Will
  11. Re:That's strange... by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Joke aside, that's because your fellow slashdotters can destroy your comment reputation *anonymously*. You'd be surprised how ordinary, polite folks can turn into nasty, mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces. TFA was dealing with people who know and see each other, and go out of their way to avoid social confrontation.

    This said, you deserve your comment reputation ruined :)

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  12. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by CheshireDragon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No, I think it means that people are going to generally be nice and say good job when you did actually suck. Therefore making you overconfident.
    This is why i always speak the truth, no matter how blunt.

    That is where the phrase, "Honesty doesn't always win friends, but it influences people." comes from.....I think

    --
    "That's right...I said it."
  13. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Funny

    You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?

    Please tell that to Hillary Clinton

    No, Hillary was his wife. You're thinking about Monica...

  14. David Wong's Take by ForgedArtificer · · Score: 3, Interesting
    --
    The right to offend is central to the right to free speech.
  15. Re:That's where subtle hints and irony get in. by gedankenhoren · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have noticed two things related to this:

    1. The term `irony` is often used to refer to heavily-veiled passive aggression.

    1a. I think Millon provides a great description of the sort of behavior we all have encountered, although no longer (as of DSM-IV) considered a personality disorder: "They cannot decide whether to adhere to the desires of others [...] or to to turn to themselves [...], whether to be obediently dependent on others or defiantly resistant and independent of them, whether to take the initiative in mastering their world or to sit idly by, passively awaiting the leadership of others; they vacillate, then, like the proverbial donkey, moving first one way and then the other, never quite settling on which bale of hay is best. [...] ...only one essential trait is specified in characterizing the passive-aggressive personality type, that of resistance to external demands" (Millon 1981, Disorders of Personality, 244-245).

    1b. I think (1a) is part of the reason why you might say that "Americans don't get irony... [a]t all". You might be confusing their lack of appreciation for irony with their recognition of and consequent disregard for passive aggression. Also, irony is highly culturally dependent.

    2. My preferred method of dealing with the chronically overconfident is to ask kind and honest questions. I do not use irony; I do not use passive aggression; I do not throw punches. Instead, I assume that these people are telling the truth or overcompensating b/c of some hidden anxiety. In the first case, I think they're wrong; in the second, I think they're in need of growth. For either, I've found that the best response is to be gentle and to learn about their presuppositions.

  16. That's why there are internet message boards by infidel_heathen · · Score: 1

    For honest feedback, there is nothing like anonymity. You guys all suck ass by the way...

    1. Re:That's why there are internet message boards by infidel_heathen · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the honest feedback. Now off to the gym I go! (The internet works once again! My hypothesis is proven.)

  17. Re:Ive got your negative feedback by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
    negative feedback is good, positive feedback is bad, at least in audio systems.

    Depends if you want volume or quality, like everywhere else!

    --
    Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
  18. Expected Value by dcollins · · Score: 2

    My interpretation: Social politeness did not spring up out of nowhere accidentally. There are good reasons for it. One is: The expected value to myself, if I were to correct some total stranger -- and risk their displeasure, argumentation, lost time, possible hostility -- is pretty much nil.

    What do I care if some doofus loudmouth on the bus, or a convenience store, or a random psychological experiment I got thrown in, thinks they're funny or has nutjob political or religious beliefs? The chance of my opinion changing them is close to zero. Aside from that, the time and hassle expense to my day is probably significant; the chance of their reacting in a defensive and hostile manner is pretty high. Aside from that, my chance of running into them again ever in my life, such that I receive some later benefit is also nil. Hence the politeness protocol of smiling noncommittally and getting the hell away from them.

    (Side issue: I've never understand "road age" of the ilk "I'll teach that bastard a lesson!". Given someone that cuts you off, you'll never see them again, so any lesson you could conceivably give won't generate you any benefit. Let 'em go and maximize your distance from the crazies.)

    Now, if someone is being truly irrational and is an intimate of yours, such that you have to deal with them all the time, then the equation changes; being honest with them will hopefully improve your mutual relationship and time spent together. Conjecture -- Perhaps a society which increases mobility, depersonalization, and time spent with strangers has a propensity to become more and more dishonest and delusional.

    --
    We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    1. Re:Expected Value by red+crab · · Score: 1

      What do I care if some doofus loudmouth on the bus, or a convenience store, or a random psychological experiment I got thrown in, thinks they're funny or has nutjob political or religious beliefs? The chance of my opinion changing them is close to zero.

      That's a good argument. I am losing my mod points to post this. Your point is that we are polite (sic impersonal) to people whom we aren't closely associated. That's true up to an extent but we are living in a society that actually encourages overconfident (sic rude) and boisterous behavior. In a family, the assertive sibling prevails over the quieter ones, more looked after by the parents, at work the loudmouth employee prevails over his peers and is more favored by the boss. Consciously or subconsciously we all appreciate overconfident behavior unless it affects us personally. But there is a visible shift in social perception of overconfidence, what was considered overconfident behavior in past (say 60's) is now more acceptable, and a standard behavior more or less.

  19. Well... by matunos · · Score: 2

    Any conversation over the internet should quickly solve that problem.

  20. dont forget the converse. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    According to this theory, if you are dont get negative feedback it makes you confident so you act polite and dishonest then conversely if you get a lot of negative feedback it makes you unsure of yourself so you are rude but truthful. I get a lot of flack for pointing these kind of things out but this this theory is total bunk.

    OH SHIT! PARADOX!

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  21. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Always? That's a good way to end up unemployed and with no friends to be blunt with.

    Which is why he's obviously lying.

  22. Re:That's strange... by user+flynn · · Score: 1

    It is the bigger pussies face to face that are the bigger dicks online.

    You'll like this then:
        Nobody better ever mess with you online! :)

    --
    In the distance you hear an ominous moo.
  23. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by mrgiles · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree with always being honest, but disagree with the need to be blunt. I have learned over the years that it is better to work with people than against them.

  24. "You didn't lose, you were the last winner" by manwargi · · Score: 4, Interesting

    George Carlin totally warned us.

  25. No, tell that to Monica Lewinsky by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    >>"You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?"
    >"Please tell that to Hillary Clinton"

    No, tell that to Monica Lewinsky. Because she did suck. Or at least the president told us so, and, he was the spouse to Hillary Clinton at the time.

  26. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by azalin · · Score: 1

    You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?

    Please tell that to Hillary Clinton

    No, Hillary was his wife. You're thinking about Monica...

    Suckers...

  27. negative feedback by greycortex · · Score: 1

    At my job, I guess I'm not socially polite at all. I give negative feed back all of the time. There's no positive way to tell someone that they did a horrible, horrible job, and they need to re-do it after formulating a coherent plan.

  28. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

    You mean if no one tells me I suck, I won't think I suck?

    Please tell that to Hillary Clinton

    No, Hillary was his wife. You're thinking about Monica...

    Suckers...

    Hillary too?

  29. true especially in the workplace by sick_soul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In my experience this overconfidence as a result of politeness is true in my workplace, and in past workplaces as well.

    Being generally polite, and not giving explicit negative feedback to annoying, unfunny, awkward, disrupting people finds justification in a kind of tacit, unconscious consent to be accepting and tolerant of everyone.
    This works kinda all right, and makes it for a peaceful, sometimes even happy environment, and reduces the chances for conflict.

    I have witnessed two scenarios where this politeness strategy fails utterly to both create a pleasant environment and to avoid conflict.

    One scenario is that of a massively disrupting individual, who is not aware of the consequences of his words and actions.
    Sometimes, like a current temporary colleague of mine, the guy is actually not a bad person at all, he is just not very perceptive of subtle signals (like awkward silences etc), looks very much emotionally vulnerable and unstable, which makes it undesirable to confront him about the issue, and has probably never been explicitly and seriously criticized for his disruptive behavior, resulting in a combination of fragility and overconfidence.
    Responding to such an individual seems to cause problems whichever strategy is employed (honesty, politeness, etc).

    The other scenario is that of a smart, socially-aware, perceptive, self-serving truly evil person.
    These people analyze these social situations carefully and are able to detect these weaknesses in the social construct, and take advantage of them. They are therefore able to belittle, disrupt, take advantage of, subvert, out-compete their co-workers, because they know that if they are subtle enough, if they target their attacks carefully enough, nobody will directly accuse them of anything.

    Note that I know that I myself have issues with detecting more subtle messages, and I know that my ego is vulnerable to lack of negative feedback as well. I try to ask people around me for truthful advice when in doubt, but in general I profit from this tolerant, polite social construct as well.

    I am not sure about how to organize a better social construct that is both honest and peaceful and tolerant, and I am not sure it is possible to do it in a perfect way for all situations and for all compositions of individuals.
    It seems to be a long standing problem with establishing and enforcing norms in societies.

    1. Re:true especially in the workplace by ForgedArtificer · · Score: 1

      Having certain social perception issues myself I often find myself having to specifically ask my coworkers to tell me if I am making them awkward, offending or upsetting them as often if they don't tell me, I have no idea and cannot correct my own behaviour.

      --
      The right to offend is central to the right to free speech.
    2. Re:true especially in the workplace by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      One scenario is that of a massively disrupting individual, who is not aware of the consequences of his words and actions.

      Ah .. manager!

      The other scenario is that of a smart, socially-aware, perceptive, self-serving truly evil person.

      And let me guess? Salesperson?

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:true especially in the workplace by Shempster · · Score: 1

      The other scenario is that of a smart, socially-aware, perceptive, self-serving truly evil person. These people analyze these social situations carefully and are able to detect these weaknesses in the social construct, and take advantage of them. They are therefore able to belittle, disrupt, take advantage of, subvert, out-compete their co-workers, because they know that if they are subtle enough, if they target their attacks carefully enough, nobody will directly accuse them of anything.

      Not being sexist. Are we talking epic girl on girl battles for dominance, or evil scheming overpaid executive?

  30. Re:Why Muslims think they're the religion of peace by gorgonymus+gorgward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In every office, standing by the water cooler, there is a person. Let's call him Joe. Joe tells stories about his weekend, followed by jokes about his in-laws, and everyone politely laughs as they shuffle around him to get their cup of water. "Why does Joe continue telling these jokes?" everyone wonders.

    That's the first few lines of TFA.
    Later:

    Since society has taught us not to hurt other people's feelings, we rarely hear the truth about ourselves, even when we really deserve it. And sometimes that politesse can have negative ramifications.

    Now, let's translate them to other people who do not share your understanding of Islam:

    In every office, standing by the water cooler, there is a person. Let's call him Achmed. Achmed tells stories about his religion, followed by assumptions about how it is a religion of peace, and everyone politely agrees as they shuffle around him to get their cup of water. "Will he cut my head off if I tell him I think that is total BS?" everyone wonders.

    [...]

    Since society has taught us to expect our head to be cut off by any muslim we disagree with, we rarely hear the truth about ourselves, even when we really deserve it. And sometimes that fear can have negative ramifications.

    Except that you didn't read TFA and just shat a comment out of your hate filled mouth (keyboard).

    Why should I care (and why am I feeding the troll)?

    I'm not a muslim/theist anymore, but I was born muslim and have some family and friends who still are.

    None of them have ever cut my head off or that of any other person who disagreed with them. Nevertheless everyday I see scum such as you spewing hate left and right about shit you don't even care to try to understand and getting ignored (at best) or modded +1 I-too-hate/fear-muslims.

    (Yea I'm new here, I expect people to RTFA)

  31. Re:this is why internet "haterz" are a GOOD THING by MLease · · Score: 1

    Problem is, many (if not most) "internet haterz" are just trolling, acting out, and generally trying to be disruptive. They're not being honest, just spiteful.

    --
    I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
  32. nitpick by aepervius · · Score: 2

    "It's been just about impossible to criticize the religious beliefs of anyone for decades"

    Try millenia, "blasphemy" at least in western Europe is very old, with punishment varying depending on the century & country.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  33. A bit of negative feedback. by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

    Sir, you are irrational...if every third post you make is to confirm that you don't regard large swatch of people individuals because it dosent fit the narrative of the social hysteria you and your circle jerk keeps howling.
    Then you are an extremist, I'm sure you and the rest of your "band gallant knights of western civillisation" are proud to hold the line and have uncovered the great of leftist establishment driving the nation to suicide.

    You are probably frustrated, by the creeping horde you keep see being blocked out by the sheeple, people calling you a moron and epithets.
    To think...calling you...a concerned citizen born rightwise...with the rest of your nationborn...that hold their head high.

    Must irritate you...make you stubborn and thus irrational.. must take a strong will to break out of that cycle.

    --
    My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
    1. Re:A bit of negative feedback. by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      Sir, you are irrational...if every third post you make is to confirm that you don't regard large swatch of people individuals because it dosent fit the narrative of the social hysteria you and your circle jerk keeps howling. Then you are an extremist, I'm sure you and the rest of your "band gallant knights of western civillisation" are proud to hold the line and have uncovered the great of leftist establishment driving the nation to suicide.

      You are probably frustrated, by the creeping horde you keep see being blocked out by the sheeple, people calling you a moron and epithets. To think...calling you...a concerned citizen born rightwise...with the rest of your nationborn...that hold their head high.

      Must irritate you...make you stubborn and thus irrational.. must take a strong will to break out of that cycle.

      I think you don't understand the true nature of Islam and what it teaches. However I do feel that perhaps I have been thinking about the negatives on Islam more than the positives of the freedoms I support and that my religion and other good religions bring.

    2. Re:A bit of negative feedback. by Deus.1.01 · · Score: 1

        However I do feel that perhaps I have been thinking about the negatives on Islam more than the positives of the freedoms I support and that my religion and other good religions bring.

      Then promise me, make me sleep better at night by knowing me that you really hold the enlightenment ideals so close to your hearth that you fear loosing it, and not just uttered as a guttural inchorerent battlecry calling for "the greater good".
      Atleast show me that you are better then the devils you have conjured up.

      Dont burn the village to save it.
      Laws, justice, freedom and pursuit of happiness...FOR ALL.

      OK, I think I'm seeing to much of the past here, but...don't you see why Im worried by this rhetoric? And morso people with the head so full of doublethink they'd need to be enrolled again at preschool.

      I think you don't understand the true nature of Islam and what it teaches.

      Let theologians argue how many angles can dance on the head of a pin, I'm an atheist...if were 16 years younger I'd been an obnoxious atheist brat, pulling scriptures out of the annoted bibles online shoving it in your face, saying "THIS IS WHAT YOU BELIVE IN", you would want to strangle pretty quickly i assure you.

      What i truly care about, are people....even if they happen to be labled as muslim, jews, gypsies....people...

      And i get extra concerned about these people and their children are passively marked of as underminers of society, the logic behind this? .Again..are you excactly the same as a quaker, Coptichs...the cunts and Marlboro?
      I wouldnt add those distitnction and just guess and tell you what you belived it.

      How many fucking similarities can you see between some beer guzzling Bosniaks to the cunt in Mekka that sentenced a Lebaneese TV-show host when he entered the country for the pilgrimage, because he pretended he was psychic.

      Fucking hell, nevermind the vast regional distances and with each population ...or....or.....WHAT ABOUT THE FUCKING CONCEPT OF INDIVIDUALS!

      I'm not saying that every muslim is an angel, yes there might be rapist, yes...there might be robbers or extremist douchebags being born and raised.

      People are people....just that..I SWEAR to you...a second...a THIRD generation immigrant...growing up...YOU think he's gonna care about the shithole he came from.

      People are people...you need to met them first...before you can judge them, if you cant meet them all...then don't pretend you can understand their impact....people surprises...for good and ill.

      Life is full of surprises and variation, and im ignorant of most of it...why do you claim you know 1 billion people?.

      Sorry for the lack of spelling, tired...want to finish this.

      --
      My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.
  34. Re:It's what politicians suck for breakfast by mwvdlee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Or you'd end up with politicians who reluctantly take upon themselves a big responsibility instead of a sociopath's powergrab.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  35. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is especially annoying when learning a language. I *want* people telling me all the time when I'm saying a word wrong or phrasing something poorly. But for most people, if they can understand what you meant to say, they just leave it at that. I just found out recently that after all this time, all of the times I had meant to say "I have been (verb-ing)" I'd instead been saying "I had been (verb-ing)". That's not a little mistake! Geez, people, why didn't anybody call me on it until now?

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  36. Re:That's where subtle hints and irony get in. by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    Then use sarcasm

    My gods, it's Doug Pirhana!

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  37. Re:That's strange... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Obligatory Penny Arcade: http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  38. True in US by X10 · · Score: 1

    It depends on where you are. In the Netherlands, social norms do not prevent people from giving negative feedback. But most men are still overconfident.

    --
    no, I don't have a sig
  39. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 1

    Yeah, phrasing is important. I once told an author who had me proofread their work that my main critique was that it was an Idiot Plot. It's a technical term, but the author sure didn't perceive it that way, and was very much not happy with me... It would have been much more effective to simply say, "Now why didn't character X do the logical course of action, Y, and completely avoid this whole mess?"

    Sort of like this. ;)

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  40. This is very much an American cultural thing by ricky-road-flats · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I hate to bring up something like Americal Idol (and its predecessor Pop Idol) in somewhere like Slashdot, but I think it's relevant.

    In the UK Pop Idol, the judges were always honest - if they found someone who couldn't sing, they told them they couldn't sing. They told them to not give up the day job, to abandon their dream of being a pop star. On the flip side, if they were good, the judges said so - and because of that it really meant something.

    In the few bits of American Idol I've seen, it's totally different. The judges (I seem to remember Paula Abdul and Randy Jackson in particular) when presented with someone who clearly didn't have a hope in hell of becoming a star of any kind, tied themselves in knots trying to say something positive. They just didn't ahve it in them to say "You're not a singer, forget about it". They'd say "You need to work hard to improve your rhythm" or " You're great but you're just not what we're looking for", and so on. Simon Cowell gave much more honest opinions and built a huge business out of doing it - but he was seen as Captain Negativity, the joke one, with the other two encouraging the no-hopers to keep their dream.

    The result? People in the UK who got that negative feedback accept (sometimes reluctantly) that they won't ever be a star and go back to singing in the shower and leading a normal life. People in the US don't have that reality check, so keep on trying, making themselves look more and more ridiculous, desperate and above all untalented.

  41. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by obarthelemy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This may be US specific. As a French student in the US, I was amazed at how much attention was paid to feelings, and how little was paid to, you know, tangible reality, such as who was right or wrong in clear-cut cases where there *was* a right and wrong answer.

    Constant praise and tip-toeing around issues not only inspires overconfidence, it also deprives people from a chance to correct their mistake, and to learn to handle failure. And since people are not *that* stupid, it also gives them a strong sense that everything is fake. Constant praise is very much like no praise.

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  42. Depends on why you're being critical by brokeninside · · Score: 1

    If the goal is to get the other person to listen and reflect upon the criticism, then saying it "straight forward, no sugar, no BS" is counter-productive in the vast majority of cases.

  43. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 1

    So how, exactly, is it better for me to have been going for a long time saying "had been" when I meant "have been", instead of being corrected once and that being the end of it?

    Nothing sticks in the brain so well as being corrected. The more embarrassing or humiliating the correction, the more it sticks in the brain. I'm never going to forget saying "defective pants" (instead of jeans) or saying I eat "moldy potatoes" (instead of "lots of potatoes") or things like that. Because the mistakes were dramatic enough that people took the time to correct me.

    Of course I need to know how to roll past mistakes. But I also need to know how to speak correctly!

    FYI, I have no classroom.

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  44. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I first started learning Japanese (not my current language of study) and was traveling in Japan, I was taught an important rule by another person learning the language: you know you're getting good at the language when people *stop* complimenting you on how well you speak it.

    Over here, the rule is a bit different: you know you're getting good based on how often strangers try to switch the language of the conversation to English.

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  45. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by RaceProUK · · Score: 2

    Yes there is. You can verb a noun, and you can noun a verb.

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  46. Re:That's strange... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

    Joke aside, that's because your fellow slashdotters can destroy your comment reputation *anonymously*. You'd be surprised how ordinary, polite folks can turn into nasty, mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces. TFA was dealing with people who know and see each other, and go out of their way to avoid social confrontation.

    This said, you deserve your comment reputation ruined :)

    How do you know they're only nasty mean sonsabitches when they can hide their names and faces? I'm a nasty mean sonofabitch to talk to all the time, and if anyone discovers they have a problem with that, I'm happy to knock their teeth out and fuck their sister.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  47. Re:Why Muslims think they're the religion of peace by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
    There is another way to work GP's bias into the cover story's water cooler paragraph:

    In every office, standing by the water cooler, there is a person. Let's call him Joe. Joe tells stories about his vacation to the Middle East, followed by racist jokes about Muslims, and everyone politely laughs as they shuffle around him to get their cup of water. "Why does Joe continue telling these jokes?" everyone wonders.

  48. I bet you don't.... by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    Well, you are very quick to criticise me for saying that Islam isn't peaceful. I bet you don't criticise Muslims who say that apostates should be killed, support honour killings, oppress women, etc.

    1. Re:I bet you don't.... by gorgonymus+gorgward · · Score: 1
      I don't want to dwell on this, but I guess I owe an answer, so here goes:

      First, the article talks about politeness as in "fear of hurting others' feelings" and never about raw fear, as in "fear of getting killed". I was pointing out that your comment was off-topic and offensive.

      Second, about the "Islam isn't peaceful" part: Islam does have a set of rules about war, most of them seek to "humanize" war and pretty much disagree with the crazy shit that is done in the "name of Islam". The BBC has a summary of the rules.

      Last, I do criticize muslims who do crazy shit or muslims who support people who do crazy shit. I do not criticize them for being muslim, but for being batshit crazy.

      (And by the way, when I say that I'm not muslim/theist any longer, it's not because I disagree with Islam as a religion (or any other religion in fact), it's just that I stopped believing in God or gods, and the first and most important condition of being a muslim is faith in the existence of God)

  49. With almost ninety guns per one hundred people. by bdwoolman · · Score: 2

    The US is perhaps a good place to be polite. Robert A. Heinlein noted, "An armed society is a polite society." Okay. That may be a bit of hyperbolic humor. But, whatever the reason, in my experience your cross-cultural observation is correct.

    I once had a French boss. An editor to be exact. He was blunt to the point of cruelty from my point of view. Others also found him so -- especially the Americans. But we published a damned good magazine. And I learned a lot from him. And, to be fair, he was as hard on himself as he was on us. Brits are also a bit more blunt than Americans I have observed.

    Personally, I make a distinction between constructive honesty and brutal frankness. That said, people in a workplace need to develop a thick hide or standards never get raised. However, create too much of a negative atmosphere and potentially good ideas are suppressed. Finally, when finishing a product you need somebody in charge with a sharp eye and a sharp tongue.

    "Woolman, if you don't come in Sunday and fix this copy, then don't bother to come in Monday. Now get out."

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
  50. Slack, huh? by SteveFoerster · · Score: 1

    To others, anyone who cuts religion any slack is automatically the Bad Guy.

    Unless it's the Church of the SubGenius, of course.

    --
    Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
  51. Re: The Rise of Cowell by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Is it any wonder why rarefied blunt appraisal is so highly rewarded? Perhaps underconfidence is responsible for this incessant need to be liked?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  52. This kinda explains the current problems in the UK by Aceticon · · Score: 1

    The UK is by far the most hypocritical place I've ever lived in with regards to honest feedback - around here the feedback you hear is always a 7 or an 8 on a scale of 10 (everything is great or wonderful, even when it's shit), to the point that if you comment that something was "nice" (i.e. a 6 out of 10), people feel insulted (you see, "nice" is what people say around here when they mean "not nice").

    Coming from Holland (home to some of the most direct, straight-talking people in the face of the planet), the whole British Politness sounds majorly deceitful.

    The worse thing is that they do this to the kids at school: every kid is a special person and they can't be told negative things, so they're all told how great they are and get good grades for bad work (around here, there is a huge amount of grade inflation in the national tests, to the point that getting the highest grade is common).

    Unsurprisingly, the UK produces nothing, has the highest debt levels in the world, specializes in Finance and Lawyering and has huge levels of white collar crime (of which the LIBOR scandal is just the tip).

  53. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Don't say that about the US! You made me feel bad. ooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhh

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  54. Re: Family Ursidae Evacuate In the Wilderness? by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Perhaps more apropos: Do new architects overdo structural integrity?

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  55. Re:Why Muslims think they're the religion of peace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You wooshed the point.

    People are being polite because they fear something. One company I worked with they actually held classes on how not to offend people. Why? 1 or 2 dicks took advantage of the negative feedback sort of thing to be just jerks. Companies got sued. So they swung to the other end of the spectrum. Being very polite... The whole I have bitten in my lip is starting to heal after years of nearly biting it off... Oh and you get off the PC bandwagon? Oh its sensitivity classes for you. Being branded a dick. Then eventually they fire you for 'not being a team player'. THAT is why people do it.

    Would you rather have a visit from your boss or 3 HR people who flew in just to talk to you? So you keep your mouth shut and head low and jump somewhere else if it gets bad enough...

  56. math scores by KernelMuncher · · Score: 1

    This phenomenon is likely behind the fact that US kids think they are great at math (but they aren't) and Asian kids think they are not good (but they are). This has been well documented in the education literature. Just another consequence of the "trophy for everybody" mentality of the USA.

  57. Big problem for geeks in Japan. by Kaz+Kylheku · · Score: 1

    A: Konnichiwa
    B: Waaa, nihongo jouzu desu ne!!! :)

    1. Re:Big problem for geeks in Japan. by 4pins · · Score: 1

      A: Konnichiwa B: Waaa, nihongo jouzu desu ne!!! :)

      A: Hello

      B: Wow, you are skilled in Japaneses.

      I hope this helps someone.

      --
      I will not mourn that which I never had to lose. - Unknown
    2. Re:Big problem for geeks in Japan. by Jens+Egon · · Score: 1

      At least you know those people are just trying to be (unreasonably) nice.

      It's worse when someone decides their incomprehensible English is better than your incomprehensible Japanese.

  58. etiquette by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

    There isn't much difference between 'etiquette' and 'codependency.'

  59. Re:That's where subtle hints and irony get in. by Inda · · Score: 1

    I don't mean to insult you but your tombstone teeth are not your best feature.

    I jest. I don't know you from Adam. I'm sure your tombstone teeth fit your mouth perfectly.

    Oops, I did it again. Honestly, I'm jesting. I did start with "I don't mean to insult you"

    People of adult age rarely get their teeth kicked in. You'd break their shoes for starters.

    Sorry, honestly, I really am. Your other posts on this thread have been very thoughtful for someone with a mouth like a graveyard.

    Seriously, being sarcastic in the UK doesn't get your head kicked in. Being nasty doesn't either. It's preferable to silence. My european colleagues all think we tease too much, and I don't think we tease enough. What's my point? I dunno, I just like teasing people. I like to see if they have thick skin.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  60. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Inda · · Score: 1

    We like that though. We being the intelligent English people from England. We like the way you make words up. It wasn't that long ago that making up English words was fashionable. OK, it was a long time ago, but it still happens today and we still like it.

    My German friend used the word "Prepone" in conversation not so long back. The opposite of "Postpone", he meant. He made it up. I knew what he meant, but it's not an English word. It turns out that the Indians made it up too. Great. Fantastic. Not a word I'll ever use, but who cares?

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  61. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Requiem18th · · Score: 2

    An interesting implication is that, since people expect to be praised for a mediocre job, actually getting criticized means you must have done something beyond terrible. Basically you have to calibrate your response according to how people will perceive it. If the person did an slightly bad job, show disappointment. If they did a really bad job, show disapproval. If they did a really bad job, criticize it. If they did a catastrophically terrible job, then it's time to let lose hell.

    --
    But... the future refused to change.
  62. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    I once told an author who had me proofread their work that my main critique was that it was an Idiot Plot.

    A writer, on fact any artist, should welcome blunt honesty, because theres way too little of it, and is always constructive, whereas positive feedback is not. I get a swelled head sometimes from comments in my journals praising my writing, until I realize that ten times as many people who've seen it probably hate it than love it -- but the ones who hate it don't bother commenting or coming back, which is exactly what this researcher has found.

    BTW, why did you link to an entertainment site that's firewalled off in many workplaces, when wikipedia has an entry on the subject?

    In literary criticism, idiot plot refers to "a plot which is kept in motion solely by virtue of the fact that everybody involved is an idiot,"[1] otherwise "they'd immediately figure out everything and the movie would be over."[2] It is a narrative where its conflict comes from characters not recognizing, or not being told, key information that would resolve the conflict, often because of plot contrivance. The only thing that prevents the conflict's resolution is the character's constant avoidance or obliviousness of it throughout the plot, even if it was already obvious to the viewer, so the characters are all "idiots" in that they are too obtuse to simply resolve the conflict immediately.

    Reviewing Prime in 2005 critic Roger Ebert said "I can forgive and even embrace an Idiot Plot in its proper place (consider Astaire and Rogers in Top Hat). But when the characters have depth and their decisions have consequences, I grow restless when their misunderstandings could be ended by words that the screenplay refuses to allow them to utter."[3] Alternate formulations describe only the protagonist as being an idiot.

    Damon Knight, in In Search of Wonder, attributes the first use of the term to science fiction author and critic James Blish.[1] Knight went on to coin the term second-order idiot plot, "in which not merely the principals, but everybody in the whole society has to be a grade-A idiot, or the story couldn't happen."[1]

    See also: Comedy of errors

  63. Except for in two arenas... by kwakmunkee · · Score: 1

    I'll bet this research hits two singularities: politics and YouTube. Argue the difference between politeness and positive feedback as you like, but I rarely see either employed here.

  64. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by BronsCon · · Score: 1

    This. Fake and insecure people annoy the piss out of me.

    I have relatively few friends (51 if you ask Facebook, and that includes family; less if you count people I actually hang out with [or would if they weren't on the other side of the country]) and I recognize the reason for this as my blatant honesty. Those people who remain in my life appreciate the honesty, which is why I'm typically the first person they come to; everyone else did not, they were fake and they wanted me to be fake, as well, and I'm happier without them in my life. It's my nature to not try to screw people over and lie to them at every opportunity. If that's what someone wants, they'll be happier elsewhere and I'll be happier not trying to conform to that.

    At every job I've ever worked, there has been that group of honest people, looking out for the customers and the company, shunned by those who would rather take what they can to get themselves ahead in life. I've always been in that group, because, like I said, it's just my nature to not try to screw people over and lie to them at every opportunity. There are companies out there, mostly startups and small businesses, that are staffed with similar-minded people. I've found a company like this and not only am I a lot happier at work, my honesty ("that idea sucks", "that product won't sell", "this guy just wants to rip us off", "that shirt doesn't make you look gay, but your boyfriend does") has helped steer the company to a position where they can afford to pay me more than anyone I've ever worked with at any other company has made.

    Honesty really is the best policy and you're not doing peple any favors by telling them what they want to hear. Sure, everyone likes a "yes man" and your boss will promote you, give you bigger raises, and invite you to his birthday party, but when the bullshit backfires, don't think for a second that he's gonna take the blame; you'll be the first one out the door. Just provide an essential service (if you can't do that in your position, you're in too big of a company or too small of a position) and be honest when people come to you for advice. If your function in essential, preferably unique, they can't shitcan you for saying something they didn't want to hear; at worst, they simply stop asking you.

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  65. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by zornzlemon · · Score: 1

    You are an idiot.

  66. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 1

    Why did you assume that the language I was talking about was English?

    Also, a lot of times, coined words are to try to express concepts that don't exist in other languages. For example, a common nickname for the bankers who caused the Icelandic financial crisis is the "útrásarvíkingar". Víkingar is, of course, "vikings", but there's no direct English equivalent for "útrás"; the term is generally translated as "outvasion vikings", since útrás is the opposite of innrás, "invasion".

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  67. Go deeper? by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

    The problem lies in taking the judgement of others more seriously than reflection and criticizing yourself. Modern herd man has no self and is just flapping in the breeze. But of course, it's not polite to point that out towards a specific individual. We can all agree that it's generally a problem, or a problem of other people, but beyond that... "who are you to criticize me?"

    Yet the more grounded and peaceful you yourself become, the easier it is to notice wobblyness in others, and I think if one keeps that up long enough, they might also find a way to criticize without making the other feel bad, that is, without them feeling attacked. There is a way of calmly stating things with strong, yet cleaminded conviction, that is pretty much impossible to fuck with.

    We don't like to be criticized, but who doesn't love being schooled in a way that may be harsh in that it breaks previously held beliefs, but is still well-meant? We all do and receive that in little ways all the time (when someone pressed the wrong button at the elevator, it's no biggie to press the right one while smiling at them, is it.. and when someone dropped something, they also don't mind if you point that out to them, or even pick it up for them). It's just when it comes closer to the ego, or even lack of self, when it all can get hairy fast. But the principle is the same IMHO.

    My slashdot post history proves what a shitty hypocrite I am when I say the above things, but they're still true as far as I can tell.

  68. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Rei · · Score: 1

    BTW, why did you link to an entertainment site that's firewalled off in many workplaces

    First hit on Google. And strangely not firewalled here.

    --
    The chloride owes the sodium money.
  69. As usual, the problem starts with parents by flibbidyfloo · · Score: 2

    IMO the problem starts with a generation of parents that were told to only give positive feedback and encourage every little effort by their child to improve "self esteem". These children grew into adults that don't know how to handle *any* criticism, even when constructive. This resulted in social norms against being critical, even in a constructive way, because too many people were getting butt-hurt over every little criticism.

    And that's how we get a generation of jerks who think they are perfect.

  70. Re:you can be both honest and compassionate by funky_vibes · · Score: 1

    Why should it matter unless you're a loser who can't improve?
    "That's pretty good" is a lie, and people who talk to you like that are not your friends. I'd get a new instructor if they talked down to me like that.

  71. This is idea is also applicable to by PJ6 · · Score: 1

    the perpetuation of obvious falsehoods within a specific culture or ideology, for lack of active (if impolite) correction.

  72. Prepone [Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton] by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    My German friend used the word "Prepone" in conversation not so long back. The opposite of "Postpone", he meant. He made it up.

    No, he didn't. That's a common word... in Indian English ("Indian" here to be understood as meaning "from India").

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_English#Vocabulary_and_colloquialisms
    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/prepone

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
  73. Heinlein said it best by sgtrock · · Score: 1

    On good manners:

    For me, politeness is a sine qua non of civilization.

    Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untraveled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as 'empty,' 'meaningless,' or 'dishonest,' and scorn to use them. No matter how 'pure' their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.

    On the subject of honesty:

    What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what 'the stars foretell,' avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable 'verdict of history'--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!

    The point is, if you are going to treat someone with real politeness, you should be prepared to tell them the whole truth. Tell it objectively, tell it honestly, and with every consideration of how they might perceive the message. But tell the truth! Anything less does them a great disservice.

  74. the bad news pall bearer by epine · · Score: 2

    Makini Brice, I know you can write better ... if only someone would deliver the sad news: you have no brain, or your choose not to use it. You can't even come up with "bell the cat" or "free rider problem" while you pussy-foot through the bullshit slough? Not even the five-bell go-to cliches handed out as black-tie MSM fig leaves of faux decorum by the maitre-d' at the Michelin-rated nudist resort? Shame on you.

    I've belled more than my fair share of cats in my day, including some with a history of emergency admission into psychiatric care. What happens when you offer a concerned a thoughtful glimmer of reality to a person who knows, deep down, that their own reality is a little thin on the ground? In simple terms, the person usually goes binary: either you have to sign up to provide the reality augmentation service 24x7 or they want you to fuck off as promptly as possible. These people crave little windows onto a stable system of reality like Heroin junkies. They aren't in it for a once-a-week booster shot. All or nothing, not much in between.

    I've done this, too, at the other end of the spectrum: with fantastically sane and competent people who might have some bright ember of self-destruction that turns a small removable discontinuity--a pinhole of infernal blackness--into a swollen vortex of life sucking creosote-toffee. In this world, as you approach the center, the shortest distance between any two points is a spiral of infinite length. You kind of have to make a fire break by cutting down a lot of healthy trees and tossing them into the inferno, which will surely curl your toe hairs in response to the insult. Bonus: if you don't flinch, they come back for more. You have to stand there in the cross-hairs of the flame thrower attached to a gasoline pumper truck and go: let's get rid of the knife. What knife? The folded knife in your back pocket. What pocket? The back pocket that prevents your ass from bursting right through those insanely tight jeans. When dealing with the flame-thrower that burns like hell, you need to bear in mind that even a small penknife can cut your balls off. The trick is to fight over the knife and not the flame thrower. This is difficult and fraught--you need to dial your asbestos underwear up to 11 and keep it there for weeks at a time. At the end of the day your affection is carried off to the burn ward with 3rd degree burns over 80% of its body, but sometimes after it all blows over, a very nice memorial wreath is erected in your honour at Vimy Ridge.

    I'm a bit of a writer at heart, so I sometimes dabble in the occult arts where "what's in it for me" has no answer a sane person would recognize. A sane person laughs at water-cooler Joe's latest bad joke and gets the hell out.

  75. Politeness leads to Overconfidence? by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

    If that were really the case, then I suppose the Japanese must be most overconfident society that has ever existed.

    1. Re:Politeness leads to Overconfidence? by Bengie · · Score: 1

      Do they even know how to argue?

  76. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    You consider 51 friends to be few? Are you serious? That's way too many. Do you spend 5 minutes a week interacting with each of them? I assume you need some kind of scheduling software to deal with all of them. I have one friend and consider that to be way more than I need. If I found out that a friend of mine had 50 other friends I would stop being friends with him immediately. I would imagine being friends with 51 people must be pretty much a full time job. What a waste of time.

    As far as "fake" and "insecure" being related, in my experience, overconfident, arrogant people are much more likely to be fake than insecure people. Also in my experience, confident people, especially in the US, tend to be overconfident about pretty much everything, consistently overestimating all their abilities and personality traits.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  77. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    As a teacher of ESL, I can tell you that your focus on having people correct your speech will not help you get better at speaking.

    Counterintuitive. Citation desperately needed. If you are talking about correcting a student for less than perfect pronunciation then I can see how constant corrections would be harmful, but any major error in grammar, vocabulary, or even pronunciation should be corrected immediately before they become habits.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  78. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by couchslug · · Score: 1

    "This is why i always speak the truth, no matter how blunt."

    Good job!

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  79. Dunning-Kruger effect by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

    Obligatory link to the Dunning-Kruger effect.

    Although the Dunning-Kruger effect was put forward in 1999, David Dunning and Justin Kruger have quoted Charles Darwin ("Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge")[3] and Bertrand Russell ("One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision")[4] as authors who have recognised the phenomenon.

    Meanwhile, people with true ability tended to underestimate their relative competence. Roughly, participants who found tasks to be relatively easy erroneously assumed, to some extent, that the tasks must also be easy for others.

    Not only that, but I would imagine that overestimating your abilities may make it more difficult to improve, because you already think so highly of your skills. The only thing confidence, whether warranted by your skills or attributes or not, is good for is scoring chicks. Girls are compulsively attracted to confidence whether the confidence is justified or not. If you are not confident you pretty much have to fake it if you want an attractive girlfriend. For everything else confidence just makes it less likely that you will ever improve your skills.

    I've often thought that women have a greater tendency to overestimate their attractiveness than men, and I have to wonder if they receive more positive feedback about their looks even if they are rather ordinary looking and less negative feedback because they aren't typically the ones doing the asking. I've certainly met more women who seem to overestimate how hot they are than men.

    --
    Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  80. Re:honest? or arrogant? by Bengie · · Score: 2

    I like people who speak their mind, it lets me know who they are. No surprises, no backstabbing, you get what you see.

  81. Has she been on the net??? by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

    "Social norms, Ehrlinger says, are the reason that we are averse to giving negative feedback. Her research recreated everyday social situations in which we hold back from giving our own negative views."

    Somebody introduce her to the internet so she can test her hypothesis... perhaps on /. LOL

    --
    The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
  82. You're fat, and you can't sing. by jep305 · · Score: 1

    I've noticed that, unlike Americans, Colombians have no qualms about telling someone he looks fat. "Man, you've gained a lot of weight, buddy -- better hit the gym." Polite Americans would not do that.

    I've also met very few fat Colombians and a whole lot of fat Americans. And don't get your panties in a twist -- I'm a fat American myself, but I'm working on it. Yes, I said "fat" -- not "big boned", "overweight", "thick", or any other euphemism for fat. Fat is fat.

    Maybe some honesty about being fat would make some fat people get off their fat asses and do something about it.

    On a different subject with the same theme: Have you ever met anyone who thinks she can sing, but she really has at best a mediocre voice? Know why? Its because all her life, her mommy and daddy told her she had a beautiful singing voice. Then every time she sang for her friends, they would reinforce that fiction. Now she leaps out of her seat at every possible opportunity to sing, and just makes everyone embarrassed. If nobody had lied to her all those years, she could just make a fool of herself at karaoke like the rest of us, but instead she has to make us all cringe at every occasion.

    --
    In Reason We Trust
  83. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by cavebison · · Score: 1

    I think it means that people are going to generally be nice and say good job when you did actually suck.

    I wonder if it is actually being *nice*, or just not wanting to enter into an uncomfortable social situation.

    We do lots of things for selfish reasons while convincing ourselves it was the "nice" or "right" thing to do.

  84. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by tkalfigo · · Score: 1

    I agree with that. Speaking 4 foreign languages, I have the utmost appreciation for people who gladly assume the role of correcting me in real-time and in real-life conditions. Unfortunately, as the OP states, usually it's just the girlfriend that assumes this role consistently and that only after I make it clear multiple times that "I am not offended by it. If you really want to help me improve, please correct me all the time". And yes, the girlfriend is real and doesn't get paid for it or other services rendered.

  85. Re:Please tell that to Hillary Clinton by Finite9 · · Score: 1

    hey I get this all the time. moved to non-english speaking country 12 yrs ago, and almost no-one corrected me when after I became more or less understandable. It's just because they don't want to offend you, or can't be bothered to correct you because it would interrupt the flow of conversation. In most cases it's unconscious.

    --
    "Everyone knows that vi vi vi is the number of the beast" -- Richard Stallman