It is the shoulder shrug, the smile (or frown), the body language that makes face to face conservation flow. Those things are missing from written discussions. It is also a way to avoid arguments and maintain a discussions at a low decibel level.
Printable View
It is the shoulder shrug, the smile (or frown), the body language that makes face to face conservation flow. Those things are missing from written discussions. It is also a way to avoid arguments and maintain a discussions at a low decibel level.
Not good to drink and drive. IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Y
Nabber, same about Chevy 350s, everybody's got one. That's a hot rod joke.
You won't often find me talking about my opinion, or saying "I think". It's redundant. Whenever I see "I think," I think, "who cares what you think, tell me what you do."
yes
Not good to be a part of stupid topic's IMHO. Oops.
ahhhh. but when you leave off 'i think...' or 'i feel like it might be because......', especially in the forum format, it reads more like a statement of fact.
whether a statement is opinion or fact is, well, in the best case debatable.
in forums, i think it does help to use qualifying terms like 'i think', even though it is redundent, it's more than that because the reader, (me for example), won't feel compelled to challange it as a statement of fact that i have to question....
a person isn't lessoned by admitting and saying 'i don't know', there's no shame in it. in my professional life, i have found that saying 'i don't know' has earned me more respect than the other way around.
If one do not believe it is a fact, why say it?Quote:
Originally Posted by squarepeg
good question. for me, i don't hold too many absolute truths or facts. not saying i don't have some, but for me, to represent something as truth or fact, (always imho anyway), is more than i can say for almost anything i've written on beesource.
i'llbeederned! maybe i'm taking this way to serious. :)
Even the phrase "for me" means essentially the same.
'for me' is another perfect qualifier for online and other discussions. the canadians put there qualifier on the end, 'eh?
I like that quality.Quote:
Originally Posted by squarepeg
ayntbeelieving it! just got a pm that said 'squarepeg for president'!
wrote back sayin' i probably wouldn't make a good one, but it was jmho.
I think you are right, you agree with people far too often! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by squarepeg
No doubt once that was announced it would lead to someone looking for the "round hole", and that would lead to big trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by squarepeg
:ws:
:D
and for those who really don't know what a round hole has to do with squarepeg:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_peg_in_a_round_hole
glad to see ya'll knew it was a joke. (left the emoticons off on purpose)
I think it is a skill set, you either have it or you don't. Authors have it, engineers don't have it. The push today is to retrain engineers to have "communication skills" that are not natural to an engineer. What you end up with is a salesman or a very mediocre engineer. Not someone that could put a man on the moon.Quote:
Originally Posted by julysun
Wow,Quote:
Originally Posted by Acebird
I'm going to have to strongly disagree strongly with you there. Engineers that have good communication skills, whether naturally or trough training, are far better at their jobs and usually more successful than those with poor communication skills. Engineers rarely design in a vacuum. They need to be able to communicate with their co-workers both verbally and through writing to effectively get their thoughts across. I've seen first hand how poor tech writing skills can really hurt a project.
I have stereotypical engineering communication skills and it hurt me. I should have made an effort to learn better skills but didn't. My spouse has wonderful communication skills and it has definitely helped me tremendously in his engineering career. He'll tell you that he has these skills because he made an effort to learn them.
Ha Ha, that's an interesting little aside.
To me, the trade with the REALLY BAD communication skills are computer engineers. Just can't get a message across, even to an audience trying hard to understand. Although I have met the odd one who is great at it so there's no firm rule. A computer engineer WITH great communication skills will likely go far.
But as to talking only in absolutes if you believe what you are saying - no. Most of us who have grown in knowledge over our time with bees will realise some of the things we once thought to be facts, are not, and some generally accepted facts, are more likely probables, or maybes. Far better to discuss in a way that leaves things open to other opinions without obvious dissagreement.
And to the issue raised that this is a stupid thread, in who'se opinion? ;) But who cares? I'm talking on stupid threads all the time LOL!
The really sad thing Solomon, is that you actually think that your opinions represent primary facts. Over and over and over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solomon Parker
Again, everybody has one.
I actually try to be very careful about saying "I think" when it is just my conclusion or something. It is meant to let the reader know not to take it as reliable information. If I say I know or I saw. those are indisputable. I also say I have heard or I have seen form other sources. Again it is with intent that any one else decide for themselves the reliability of that information. But if I say my hive swarm. nobody has any grounds to argue that. If I say they swarmed and I think it was because I over fed them. It is an invitation for anyone to add their thoughts as well.
I think, I believe, and I have heard are all signals to second guess anything I have shared.