Conversation & social matters are so variable and vibe based that I think trying to get grip on something like 'likability' via a metric like 'contributions ratio' seems absurd.
Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
61–70 of 131 posts
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
> from How to Win Friends and Influence People[0] by Dale Carnegie Implementing the advice in this book too literally makes for very inauthentic sounding conversation. After reading this book, I found it easy to spot other people who had read it and were trying the techniques on me. For example, when someone uses my name 10 different times in a private conversation for no obvious reason, I have a good idea that they’…
Mentioning the other persons name is also a trick to remember it, perhaps that’s why they repeat it.
Was gonna say the same thing. I try to repeat the person’s name quite a bit so it can get drilled into my head…
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#63Just a side note, something I've been using lately to monitor how much I talk in meetings is something called Read.ai - https://www.read.ai/ There's a bunch of other neat features, but monitoring talk time is what I use the most. It works in real-time as a bot on Google meet and Zoom (the two platforms I use). I believe it should work on other video platforms as well. Just sign up and it'll start joining meetings on…
wow, that sounds dangerous and an active security risk to any company or individual who did not consent to it and counter intuitive to really anything meaningful at all. The organization that came up with this idea probably is raking it selling other company data to third party organizations and governments. This itself looks like an ad.
> wow, that sounds dangerous and an active security risk to any company or individual who did not consent to it and counter intuitive to really anything meaningful at all.
I assume you're speaking about read.ai (not the rest of my comment)? For what it's worth, the bot starts every conversation with a pop up "are you willing to record this conversation" if you or any party selects no or type "opt out" in the chat at any time it'll leave. You can also set it to only show up when invited.
Conversations are often recorded in the space I'm in (for note taking purposes). So it's fairly convenient. There's A LOT of apps that record meetings for you. Zoom even has this as an option built into their application.
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#64The research paper (PDF link):
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Quinn-Hirschi/publicati...
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#65Just a side note, something I've been using lately to monitor how much I talk in meetings is something called Read.ai - https://www.read.ai/ There's a bunch of other neat features, but monitoring talk time is what I use the most. It works in real-time as a bot on Google meet and Zoom (the two platforms I use). I believe it should work on other video platforms as well. Just sign up and it'll start joining meetings on…
wow, that sounds dangerous and an active security risk to any company or individual who did not consent to it and counter intuitive to really anything meaningful at all. The organization that came up with this idea probably is raking it selling other company data to third party organizations and governments. This itself looks like an ad.
I recall one of these transcription bots recently sending out an email summary to everyone on the invite and creeping everyone out. Don’t remember if this was the specific one or not.
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
wow, that sounds dangerous and an active security risk to any company or individual who did not consent to it and counter intuitive to really anything meaningful at all. The organization that came up with this idea probably is raking it selling other company data to third party organizations and governments. This itself looks like an ad.
I recall one of these transcription bots recently sending out an email summary to everyone on the invite and creeping everyone out. Don’t remember if this was the specific one or not.
I could see that, but I think it really depends on your use case.
I could see having the ability to search all my meetings to find a clip of a conversation / meeting notes with a client would be invaluable. Otherwise I look like an idiot and contact the client again and ask a question they've already answered.
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
My own personal and very much anecdotal experience of this is that's a very American view of conversations; they like to talk about themselves, what they're doing, what they've just bought, their aspirations, etc, while Europeans (and especially Brits) would find such questioning to be bad form and even privacy invasive. Obviously exceptions exist on both sides, but speaking generally.
What would you suggest as a cultural guideline for an American conversing with a European or Brit?
Assume they are insecure and looking for a passive-aggressive way to cut you down to their level. The British^W English are quite adept at doing this in a way where you won't realize until the next day that they were insulting you.
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#68As with everything else, it seems, my anecdotal experience suggests a balance is usually the best overall answer. People with diarrhea of the mouth aren't much fun to talk to, but either are people who won't say more than three words at a time. Same with what you talk about. People like to talk about themselves, but many of them are interested in hearing about you too. Just keep it under control, and lob that convers…
Why not?
Since you got answered in downvotes I suspect the answer is "because people will switch languages on you"
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
> from How to Win Friends and Influence People[0] by Dale Carnegie Implementing the advice in this book too literally makes for very inauthentic sounding conversation. After reading this book, I found it easy to spot other people who had read it and were trying the techniques on me. For example, when someone uses my name 10 different times in a private conversation for no obvious reason, I have a good idea that they’…
IMO the book itself addressed that point by suggesting that you try to find something to genuinely like about each person you engage with. The formulaic approach isn't meant to be the end goal, it's just a way to go from zero to some sort of common ground, from which a genuine connection can develop. It's really helpful for people who are totally inept at human conversation (like me) but it's just a starting place. N…
Dale's book is generic heuristics, hacks, and common sense advice mixed.
Nonviolent communication is more like cult/pseudoscience/horse manure mix.
Re: Mistaken beliefs about how much to talk in conversations
#70"It is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it." (Maurice Switzer)
Posting a pay-walled link is essentially click-bait advertising.
Shame on you... =P