[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;)

Miller, Jeremy JMILLER at ci.albany.or.us
Wed Jun 19 00:26:53 UTC 2002


> > ... or have been skirted while addressing the trivial bits. 
>  It's somewhat
> > ironic to accuse others of misdirection while doing a good job of it
> > yourself. :)
> >
> >
> Here,  you lose me.  Because I have asked the most piercing and direct
> questions,  and none answered in two days.

Yes, you have.  But you've also skipped some direct questions yourself.  Not
that it's really a big deal... this conversation isn't the only thing people
do with their lives and you may choose to skip them, for any reason.
Probably lack of time.  Or other parts of the conversation interest them
more.  It's OK to point something out (by repeating it, probably) again if
you really want it answered, and might get an answer quicker than just a cry
of "foul".

I'm sure I've committed a few myself... no harm done.


But anyway, since you are repeating them... I'm game.

> Quesitions like can a person delegate more authority than he 
> has,

Should they?  No.  Can they attempt to, and maybe get away with it if it
isn't noticed?  Yes.  By misleading others to believe that he has more
authority than they really do.  If no one catches on in time, he has
functionally succeeded.

>  and can
> his delegate have more authority than the person he serves?

Should they?  No.  Can they?  Yes, as a result of a deception as described
above.  Although it probably wasn't a smart move by the delegator.  :)


> Questions like,  can a country attack itself?

No.

However, a country can split into multiple peices.  (Whether any piece
recognizes any other other as a seperate entity is another issue... probably
to be decided by war.)  They resulting pieces are fairly likely to attack
each other.  One might consider not referring to the former country as a
"country"... and simply call it an unstable region or "former countryname"
until things settle down.  Unless you choose to recognize one or more of
them, of course.

One might call the situation tribal warfare... depending on how the split
happened and what your definition of tribe is.


> The reason no one connects the dots is because they don't answer the
> questions I ask as steeping stones toward understanding.
> 

In that case, you could try to tell them that this is what you are trying to
do, and repeat the question.

Funny thing is... I do that exact same thing all the time.  In my experience
it tends to work better if you don't present it simply as "stepping stones
toward understanding".  It comes across as condescending, and can really
turn people off.  It makes it sound like "understanding" is a state of
belief that is exactly equal to your belief, and there is only one road to
get there.  (Neither of which is true.  Understanding equals comprehension
of what you mean and why.) A lot of people really hate that.

I do something like this:  "I'm asking questions in order to show you what I
think/believe, and to show a logical path on how I got there.  Can you
follow along, so as to better understand my point?"  Trust me, it works...
as long as you don't get upset and start arguing over every single little
point that they disagree with (there probably will be some) as you go along.
Doing that always seems to decend into an eternal argument.  For those, say
"OK, we'll get back to that in a bit... I think foo, and you think fee.  But
considering foo, here is my next question" or something like that.

Basically, don't use the stepping stones as a club when someone doesn't want
to step on the next one.  Skip over it, and be clear that you are skipping
over it.  They may change their mind later, once they figure out where you
are going.  Suprisingly, they often do.  They at least get a good idea of
where you are coming from and why, even if they decide to disagree in the
end.





More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list