![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Separating the feature from the user
Feb. 2nd, 2009 12:52 pmThoughts on making your feature-discussion sessions more productive and less antagonistic!
So in discussions about LJ, people have their opinions about assorted features and the people who use them.
There's this great little pattern where someone states their absolute dislike of a feature, generally based on too many people doing it wrong, and people who use and like the feature will get drawn into a (often heated) discussion about how good the feature in fact is, and how they personally are Doing It Right.
The obvious part of the problem is when the complaint is in fact addressing the user, and not the behavior or (best of all) the feature. Consider the following comparable statements:
I hate people who set their background to bright pink.
I hate it when people set their background to bright pink.
I hate backgrounds set to bright pink.
( The first is a clear invitation to an irritated slapfest, as people who have their backgrounds set to bright pink may wind up insulted... )
A less obvious cause is when the people who use and like the feature fear that someone else's dissatisfaction with the feature will result in that feature being taken away. ( People who love the feature want to make themselves known, sometimes to the point of wanting to drown out the voice of the person who does not like the feature. )
People who use and like the feature may have taken the original statement about the first party's dislike of the feature as a value judgment about them, personally, or a class of people like them. ( This happens no matter what way the statement has been worded, but is always worst when the phrasing is about the people using the feature rather than the feature itself. )
A discussion about how much someone is irritated by others' use of a feature and would never like to see it should be guided into two particular productive avenues: first, what specifically about that feature irks them, and how it could be made to not irk them when they are presented with it; second, what technical tools could be made available to them so that they are not faced with it. Technical tools for the writer to avoid irking the reader is another possible productive spin-off.
So in discussions about LJ, people have their opinions about assorted features and the people who use them.
There's this great little pattern where someone states their absolute dislike of a feature, generally based on too many people doing it wrong, and people who use and like the feature will get drawn into a (often heated) discussion about how good the feature in fact is, and how they personally are Doing It Right.
The obvious part of the problem is when the complaint is in fact addressing the user, and not the behavior or (best of all) the feature. Consider the following comparable statements:
I hate people who set their background to bright pink.
I hate it when people set their background to bright pink.
I hate backgrounds set to bright pink.
( The first is a clear invitation to an irritated slapfest, as people who have their backgrounds set to bright pink may wind up insulted... )
A less obvious cause is when the people who use and like the feature fear that someone else's dissatisfaction with the feature will result in that feature being taken away. ( People who love the feature want to make themselves known, sometimes to the point of wanting to drown out the voice of the person who does not like the feature. )
People who use and like the feature may have taken the original statement about the first party's dislike of the feature as a value judgment about them, personally, or a class of people like them. ( This happens no matter what way the statement has been worded, but is always worst when the phrasing is about the people using the feature rather than the feature itself. )
A discussion about how much someone is irritated by others' use of a feature and would never like to see it should be guided into two particular productive avenues: first, what specifically about that feature irks them, and how it could be made to not irk them when they are presented with it; second, what technical tools could be made available to them so that they are not faced with it. Technical tools for the writer to avoid irking the reader is another possible productive spin-off.
