People like you paint a target on your own back. It makes it so easy.

Alright thanks

Because it’s water.

You’d have to settle for close enough here. You might even drink from the same glass. Beyond that … until we invent telepathy.

With a bit of careful effort we can improve the process.

In fields where communication matters more we have several methods for that.

Get a glass of water and taste it. It tastes like that.

You could stand next to the guy while you both look at the relevant thing. That’s a pretty good way.

Another way would be to use the same method for looking at the relevant thing. Let’s call it “an experimental method”. Because it delivers an experience.

Makes sense. If we try, if we are careful, the quality of our communication can be vastly improved.

In my own particular field I often first try to ensure that all participants in the conversation share the same experience.

All language is not created equal. There is language with vast context (irl, face to face, between acquaintances, in a shared ultrarich physical environment) and language with minimal context (social media). That’s a big important difference.

I agree. And criteria for the moderators too of course.

What do you suppose it implies? What signs might we expect?

What do you suppose it implies?

Ah yes, the days of IRC chat.

I’m shooting for an objective, real-value kind of perspective here.

Surely we aren’t striving for quantity over quality. Because that’s where this sorta leads

Jump for that low hanging fruit little buddy

This ignores the case of a private insult issued to the moderator, pre or post censorship.

A moderator might disagree.

There’s a narrowness, a deludedness, that tends to come with experthood. I prefer the wideness

Well I stated that I think the opposite clearly enough.

I appreciate the depth but ya. Wideness

Good bye