"What I’ve Learned Answering Questions for 20 Years"
Two decades? Wow.

by Leo A. Notenboom

"It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."

https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/

Enjoy!

On 15/08/2023 22:06, David Brooks wrote:
> "What I’ve Learned Answering Questions for 20 Years"
> Two decades? Wow.
>
> by Leo A. Notenboom
>
> "It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."
>
> https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/
>
> Enjoy!

Watch and listen here if you'd prefer:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abnENEJbpQE

"David Brooks" wrote:
> "It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."
>
> https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/

"Literacy matters (and it's much worse than you think)"

Actually, I do notice how bad it is.

"Long rambling questions, questions that do anything but actually ask
a question, questions that come close to being a loose collection of
random words".

There's also the very brief questions that give no useful information
on what the issue really is or enough to be able to help.

On 15/08/2023 22:06, David Brooks wrote:
> "What I’ve Learned Answering Questions for 20 Years"
> Two decades? Wow.
>
> by Leo A. Notenboom
>
> "It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."
>
> https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/
>
> Enjoy!
"Of course, folks who are change-resistant suffer the most. Not only are
they the most negatively impacted at a personal level by the
inevitability of change, but their resistance makes it difficult to get
them answers. Mired in the desire for things to be the way they used to
be, offering solutions for the way things are is often ignored or
outright rejected.

It’s particularly frustrating for me, as not only do I embrace change, I
see it as a choice… a choice people are unwilling to make. They suffer
needlessly as a result.

Empathy is everything"

It is isn't it. If you simply don't have any (and we know there are some
here who don't) 'how could' you ever be inspired to make a better choice
when such a choice doesn't directly appear to make things better for them?

They 'like' hitting their partner, they don't have the empathy to see
(so care) why the partner doesn't enjoy it the same way so why would
they stop?

If you don't have empathy you can't have the morality that requires it.

"Why shouldn't I cause an animal to suffer and die just so I have have a
bacon sandwich ... I like bacon sandwiches ...", with no thought what so
ever than any animals, sentient beings with more intelligence than their
dog or a 3 year old child has have to 'live' in unnatural circumstances
to then be gassed to death whilst squealing and desperately gasping for
a breath that doesn't burn their throats and lungs before passing out
and having their throats cut.

https://ibb.co/r4RXXqd

Or they could just eat something else but why would they, it's not them
that should suffer by doing that right?

Or 'I'm entertained watching an animal being taunted and tormented and
tortured before being killed, it's really good!'

https://ibb.co/R9Hgtng

Where is the empathy? Where is the compassion? Where is the kindness?
Where in the understanding that those beings suffer just as we do?

Cheers, T i m

On 15/08/2023 23:34, Apd wrote:
> "David Brooks" wrote:
>> "It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."
>>
>> https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/
>
> "Literacy matters (and it's much worse than you think)"
>
> Actually, I do notice how bad it is.
>
> "Long rambling questions, questions that do anything but actually ask
> a question, questions that come close to being a loose collection of
> random words".

But that depends on the medium and the point of the writer.

If you are on a discussion group the purpose is 'discussion'. So whilst
straight simple questions or answers aren't wrong, they aren't
discussions as such. You also have to cater for the hard of thinking
where you might need to 'signpost' things that others might not need ...
making something more verbose in the hope it will reduce the unnecessary
conversations because a reader can't read into the writing and get a
reasonable feel about the posters knowledge.

You post a list of tests you have done that should indicate a reasonable
level of knowledge and someone asks if you have switched it on.

Or it might be that they want to cut off any strawmen / rabbit holes
people with a different agenda might try and take to topic to.
>
> There's also the very brief questions that give no useful information
> on what the issue really is or enough to be able to help.
>
Which can actually be perfectly sufficient because the sender actually
wants to stimulate any level of conversation, like David often does
here. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On 16/08/2023 12:11, T i m wrote:
> On 15/08/2023 22:06, David Brooks wrote:
>> "What I’ve Learned Answering Questions for 20 Years"
>> Two decades? Wow.
>>
>> by Leo A. Notenboom
>>
>> "It was 20 years ago today I started having something to say."
>>
>> https://askleo.com/what-ive-learned-answering-questions-for-20-years/
>>
>> Enjoy!
> "Of course, folks who are change-resistant suffer the most. Not only are
> they the most negatively impacted at a personal level by the
> inevitability of change, but their resistance makes it difficult to get
> them answers. Mired in the desire for things to be the way they used to
> be, offering solutions for the way things are is often ignored or
> outright rejected.
>
> It’s particularly frustrating for me, as not only do I embrace change, I
> see it as a choice… a choice people are unwilling to make. They suffer
> needlessly as a result.
>
> Empathy is everything"
>
> It is isn't it. If you simply don't have any (and we know there are some
> here who don't) 'how could' you ever be inspired to make a better choice
> when such a choice doesn't directly appear to make things better for them?
>
> They 'like' hitting their partner, they don't have the empathy to see
> (so care) why the partner doesn't enjoy it the same way so why would
> they stop?
>
> If you don't have empathy you can't have the morality that requires it.
>
> "Why shouldn't I cause an animal to suffer and die just so I have have a
> bacon sandwich ... I like bacon sandwiches ...", with no thought what so
> ever than any animals, sentient beings with more intelligence than their
> dog or a 3 year old child has have to 'live' in unnatural circumstances
> to then be gassed to death whilst squealing and desperately gasping for
> a breath that doesn't burn their throats and lungs before passing out
> and having their throats cut.
>
> https://ibb.co/r4RXXqd
>
> Or they could just eat something else but why would they, it's not them
> that should suffer by doing that right?
>
> Or 'I'm entertained watching an animal being taunted and tormented and
> tortured before being killed, it's really good!'
>
> https://ibb.co/R9Hgtng
>
> Where is the empathy? Where is the compassion? Where is the kindness?
> Where in the understanding that those beings suffer just as we do?

I'm sure you've inspired other folk reading here to reconsider their
views and actions, Tim.

--
David