Wrote a new blog in which I explain to you all what patronising means.🙄
davidchivers.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-cu…
davidchivers.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-cu…
The type of patronising behaviour I mean here is not the rude and condescending type (which is obviously bad) but when you explain to someone that already knows that info.
You may be offended because the other person has made a judgement about the likelihood of you knowing.
You may be offended because the other person has made a judgement about the likelihood of you knowing.
But it could be the person who was explaining just wants to make sure that the other person knows and does not want to commit the curse of knowledge: the situation in conversations where you wrongly assume the other person knows what you know (e.g. happens a lot with jargon).
Coincidently I come to similar conclusions as @TomChivers new piece - we need to politely define what we are talking about.
https://twitter.com/TomChivers/status/1379748465048227842
The EXTREMELY LAME real solution is to write down the likelihood of the other person knowing, then explain it. The other person should then write down the likelihood of what they think, you should think is the likelihood of them knowing. Then compare.
Do not do this irl ->
"I estimated a 70% probability of you knowing, but this was no higher than the threshold level of certainty I needed of 80%, which is why I explained to you what patronising means."
"I estimated a 70% probability of you knowing, but this was no higher than the threshold level of certainty I needed of 80%, which is why I explained to you what patronising means."
I too have my own xkcd comic which relates to my post. This is a contractual requirement as part of my franchise agreement with the Chivers Corporation... 
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
