Differences in Communication Styles

[ken_sylvania]

In the recent Saturday Sabbath or Sunday I was accused of restating Bootstrap's comments inaccurately with my own spin. That was not at all my intention, and having read over the thread numerous times I'm still not seeing where I did that with the exception of those times where I restated what I understood Bootstrap to be saying and asked if I was understanding correctly. I'm going to repeat here my request for clarification on whether certain types of phrasing are offensive, and also my request to Bootstrap to point out the post or posts in that thread where I misrepresented what he said.

I may choose to share my understanding of Sabbath/Lord's Day/Day of Rest at some point, but I was hoping to understand what you were trying to say rather than sidetracking onto what my understanding might be.

Brother, I don’t mind you trying to restate what I’ve said—if it helps you understand me better, that’s fine. What would help even more is if you’d phrase it as a question: “Is this what you meant?” or “Do you think this?” Then I can answer plainly, instead of feeling like my words are being reinterpreted.

Occasionally people will reply to a comment by saying "You seem to be saying....x, y and z". Do you consider that acceptable, or is that the style you prefer for me to avoid?

How about if I ask "Were you meaning.... x, y and z"?
Or how about "were you meaning .....?" or "I thought you were saying ....., did I misunderstand you?"

Actually, I would really appreciate if you could point me to the things I've said in this thread where I restated your words inaccurately without it being somewhat of a question form, because I don't see where I did that.

Please no AI generated or AI assisted posts in this thread.

[JohnL]

Occasionally people will reply to a comment by saying "You seem to be saying....x, y and z". Do you consider that acceptable, or is that the style you prefer for me to avoid?

How about if I ask "Were you meaning.... x, y and z"?
Or how about "were you meaning .....?" or "I thought you were saying ....., did I misunderstand you?"

Actually, I would really appreciate if you could point me to the things I've said in this thread where I restated your words inaccurately without it being somewhat of a question form, because I don't see where I did that.

Please no AI generated or AI assisted posts in this thread.

I don't see a problem with the way you ask for clarification. I see your asking as a good low key way to avoid misunderstandings and assumptions. It's just an effort on your part to double check comprehension. That's a good thing.

Snarkiness, retaliation, nit-picking, aggressive humor or teasing cause problems in communication. Robert also mentioned the tendency on the part of some posts to be constantly correcting others is a problem in communicating with each other. Your questions for clarification don't do these things.

It is also okay to let people vent a little without having to correct them.

We grieve and express ourselves in those moments. Constant correction minimizes the grief process. It actually builds frustration and with frustration, people often strike out in pain for vengeance.

Sometimes it best to just shut up and listen.

[joshuabgood]

I think a best practice is to say "what I am hearing you say is....x, y, z. Am I hearing you right?"

[barnhart]

Some people feel a deep compulsion to have the last word. I think it's usually wisest to let them have it. Jesus didn't answer every question or address every point.

[Bootstrap]

!!! SNIP !!!

I may choose to share my understanding of Sabbath/Lord's Day/Day of Rest at some point, but I was hoping to understand what you were trying to say rather than sidetracking onto what my understanding might be.

Brother, I don’t mind you trying to restate what I’ve said—if it helps you understand me better, that’s fine. What would help even more is if you’d phrase it as a question: “Is this what you meant?” or “Do you think this?” Then I can answer plainly, instead of feeling like my words are being reinterpreted.

Occasionally people will reply to a comment by saying "You seem to be saying....x, y and z". Do you consider that acceptable, or is that the style you prefer for me to avoid?

How about if I ask "Were you meaning.... x, y and z"?
Or how about "were you meaning .....?" or "I thought you were saying ....., did I misunderstand you?"

Thanks for asking, Ken. I’d love it if you would take that approach — that’s exactly what I was asking for, and I believe I’ve said so several times in the thread you mentioned.

I don’t see this as an accusation on either side. What I’d really like is for us to keep our conversations centered on the topic itself, without the personal back-and-forth that sidetracks us. I don’t want our threads to turn into debates about who said what or whether someone was misrepresenting the other. What matters most to me is engaging the subject at hand as brothers, without giving or taking offense — and that’s where I’d like to put my energy.

So if we're discussing some topic, I may ask you to reframe a question along those lines before I answer it. Let's try that going forward, with an eye to keeping the focus on the topic.

[ohio jones]

!!! SNIP !!!

Brother, I don’t mind you trying to restate what I’ve said—if it helps you understand me better, that’s fine. What would help even more is if you’d phrase it as a question: “Is this what you meant?” or “Do you think this?” Then I can answer plainly, instead of feeling like my words are being reinterpreted.

Occasionally people will reply to a comment by saying "You seem to be saying....x, y and z". Do you consider that acceptable, or is that the style you prefer for me to avoid?

How about if I ask "Were you meaning.... x, y and z"?
Or how about "were you meaning .....?" or "I thought you were saying ....., did I misunderstand you?"

Thanks for asking, Ken. I’d love it if you would take that approach — that’s exactly what I was asking for, and I believe I’ve said so several times in the thread you mentioned.

When I read that thread, here's what I see (condensed):

Were you meaning that God commands a day of rest?

In that context, were you meaning to say that the Sabbath was made for the Jews, not the Jews for the Sabbath? ... Did I misunderstand you?

There were a couple other posts where that was not done, but note the time stamps above. It looked to me like he was already making some attempt to do what you were asking for, before you asked, and the reaction seemed not to recognize that. So the entire conflict seemed rather confusing to me as an observer.

A similar thing happened here, where I thought I was following the advice given by another poster about how they modeled communication, only to be accused of targeting and nitpicking.

Reconciling different communication styles really does take a lot of work.

[Bootstrap]

Reconciling different communication styles really does take a lot of work.

Indeed, and I appreciate your help. The parts you excerpted are easier for me to answer than the complete posts, especially in context of the thread. I'd rather answer them in a thread about the topic rather than a thread about differences in communication styles.

I asked JohnL if that would be OK:

viewtopic.php?p=282588#p282588

[ken_sylvania]

!!! SNIP !!!

Brother, I don’t mind you trying to restate what I’ve said—if it helps you understand me better, that’s fine. What would help even more is if you’d phrase it as a question: “Is this what you meant?” or “Do you think this?” Then I can answer plainly, instead of feeling like my words are being reinterpreted.

Occasionally people will reply to a comment by saying "You seem to be saying....x, y and z". Do you consider that acceptable, or is that the style you prefer for me to avoid?

How about if I ask "Were you meaning.... x, y and z"?
Or how about "were you meaning .....?" or "I thought you were saying ....., did I misunderstand you?"

Thanks for asking, Ken. I’d love it if you would take that approach — that’s exactly what I was asking for, and I believe I’ve said so several times in the thread you mentioned.

All but one of those examples were taken from my posts in that same exact thread during the 24 hours or so before your post in which you said that such a thing would be helpful. So I really don't understand what you're asking me to do differently.

I don’t see this as an accusation on either side. What I’d really like is for us to keep our conversations centered on the topic itself, without the personal back-and-forth that sidetracks us. I don’t want our threads to turn into debates about who said what or whether someone was misrepresenting the other. What matters most to me is engaging the subject at hand as brothers, without giving or taking offense — and that’s where I’d like to put my energy.

Thanks. I thought that you were saying in the other thread that I was restating your views rather than allowing you to speak for yourself. Did I misunderstand you? Were you objecting to my style of posting? or not?

I agree about not wanting to give or take offense - unfortunately unless you can help me to get some kind of clarity about how I offended you in the Sabbath thread I don't know how to avoid it in the future.

So if we're discussing some topic, I may ask you to reframe a question along those lines before I answer it. Let's try that going forward, with an eye to keeping the focus on the topic.

I read this as implying that some of my posts (or questions maybe?) in the Sabbath thread could have benefited by having been reframed. Do you think that is the case? How about quoting here a couple of those posts that should have been reframed so I can better understand what you're talking about?

[JohnL]

I read this as implying that some of my posts (or questions maybe?) in the Sabbath thread could have benefited by having been reframed. Do you think that is the case? How about quoting here a couple of those posts that should have been reframed so I can better understand what you're talking about?

I personally didn’t see anything wrong with your questions, ken_sylvania. If someone wants another’s questions reframed then I have to ask why. Here are some reasons I’ve come across in dealing with others.
-Is it a manipulative effort in order to control the questioner?
-Are they afraid of the question itself especially when they realize their statements don’t really sit well so they stall and create a distraction?
-Are they upset at the question and try to appear superior in order to avoid the question?
-Do they have language learning disabilities?
-Is English not their native tongue?

[ken_sylvania]

I read this as implying that some of my posts (or questions maybe?) in the Sabbath thread could have benefited by having been reframed. Do you think that is the case? How about quoting here a couple of those posts that should have been reframed so I can better understand what you're talking about?

I personally didn’t see anything wrong with your questions, ken_sylvania. If someone wants another’s questions reframed then I have to ask why. Here are some reasons I’ve come across in dealing with others.
...

Thank you, but I imagine for those of us who tend toward similar styles we won't see any problem with other people who write like we do.

My intent for this thread is not to solicit support for my communication style, but to learn and improve. I'm hoping to learn how to improve my communication.