Subject: Re: Understanding Erik Naggum From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 06 Oct 2002 22:24:28 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Christopher Browne | Naughty, naughty; that's not in keeping with the "positive reinforcement" | methodology. Actually, I think the whole "positive reinforcement methodology" is really a manipulative name for a manipulative and dishonest methodology that causes people to lose touch with reality and live in a cocoon of good feelings when they really should wake the hell up and deal with it. It appears that proponents for this "methodology" are pretty incompetent at reading what people actually write, too, preferring to blather on with their own agenda. Actually /listening/ is hard work. It is made harder by mind games and multiple wrappers around the real meat, and it appears that those who prefer nice wrapping paper are quite happy not to open the packages. | The "positive reinforcement" methodology would go something along the | following lines: While humorous, I find it much more disrespectful than a direct approach, which at the very least retains the ability for the victim to respond. The snotty arrogance that some people seem to prefer over directness has as its primary result that the victim has no recourse. This is useful if you have no intention of letting the other guy learn anything and no intention of letting him recover from his mistake by actually improving. One of my old signatures might be apropos. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Sufficiently advanced political correctness is indistinguishable from sarcasm.