Message from @fallot
Discord ID: 283593897706520576
he is reasonable, and does do that
my point is that even by being reasonable, he would cast such a pall that the effect would be far greater than (perhaps deep down) desired
look at the comments for John Craig's articles
his attitude is very different, yet he doesn't tolerate bullshit
some of the comments sections offer unprecedented insight into say, autism
due to autistics spazzing out
there is really nothing else like it, not even autistic forums etc.
Perhaps the limited flow of comments haven't spurred a reconsideration of policy.
exactly, the effect compounds itself
then you cant be sure
John has much more people commenting on his articles.
"is this all there is?"
"what am I doing?"
"is this any use?"
not realizing that the problem was you in the first place
at least partially you
it's just sad, it's not really anyone's "fault"
everyone is thinking well
good intentions
Wildblood has a good attitude to comments, but a more esoteric group of topics
nester and fallot finally meet
his low key influence has been extremely potent
he himself realized this somewhat
not specific to himself
but that apparently not-a-big-deal stuff can be important
it's important to speak the truth even in case one person hears it
It also has to do with what's talked about in the article, and how elaborately. In this regard, bruce articles don't invite as much comments as john's.
you just don't know how important or not it is
John expects comments to complete his articles.
that's true
yes, it's a welcoming attitude
Bruce doesn't.
occasionally Charlton does this as well
and when he does, he doesn't get many comments
John will often leave things open ended, to be possibly concluded in comment discussions.
his tone is open ended more so than his conclusions
"come in, lets talk, this is what I think"
vs.
"this is what I think, oh are you listening? have something to say? you better else scurry off"
There's a great bit of the later as well.