Chris Jenkinson wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I agree that people with conditions such as Asperger's will tend to gravitate here. The anonymity can help them to feel that they can contribute on an equal footing with everyone else. The downside is that in return for being treated like everyone else, they must act like everyone else. The Wikipedian community cannot make particular allowances for these conditions when to do so would conflict with a person's anonymity.
Our particular allowances for them would be nothing more than more civility and more presumption of good faith, same as for everyone else. I'm not arguing for anything more than this.
When otherwise normal little kids use this technique, and it works it becomes a learned strategy that they take into later life.
Do you have a solution?
It's a little late for us to undo bad parenting. Beyond that we shouldn't be too quick to give in to obvious whines. Sometimes when you put kids to sleep you just have to let them cry themselves to sleep.
The sentiments there are good but not always practical. I can get far more attention with a pointed one-liner than with a long detailed analysis of a situation. That has nothing to do with the validity of my assessment. When it comes to answering messages one needs to be selective. Answering every message can be a physical impossibility.
You raise fair practical points. A pointed one liner is good but if people interpret it as rude then it is not good, even if you think they are being overly sensitive.
An effective one liner is often instinctive, though some need to be thought out. The ones that don't work more often get met with a shrug rather than an offended feeling.
Answering every message may be a physical impossibility, but that doesn't mean that an attempt shouldn't be made.
There are some messages to which you can add nothing. At some point threads just get talked out.
Ec