Not quite accurate, but it doesn’t matter. I did not respond to the BS comment as it was sarcasm.... I commented that the author was in the same boat as me... totally swamped...
The article is accurate. However it has the greatest impact when you confront and tweak the other person. I have no need to play games with people and try not to get people emotionally riled up. I can do it when necessary in legal negotiations and have done it often. As my screen name indicates.... I’m tired of that type of work.
At the same time, I have studied stage hypnosis, group psychology, and mind control techniques to help people not fall prey to the manipulation. It’s a two edge sword as I must be careful to not share with ill motived people.
The technique outlined in the article is thousands of years old. It’s one of the main techniques in Sun Tzu’s “Art of War.” Divine your enemy with propaganda. Even the Apostle Paul used it to split the Saducees and Pharisees when they were trying him as a Christian shortly after his conversion on the road to Damascus.
Divine your enemy = Divide your enemy!!!... too tired here....
>> I did not respond to the BS comment as it was sarcasm...
True, but you’re treating a vulgar term in an acceptable way.
You also demonstrated “trollish” behavior by citing my posts from other threads instead of speaking to what I posted here. By intimating that I’m a candidate for what the article describes as a sicko, you proved the misleading message of the article that makes the bold judgement: brazen commentary has no place in public discourse, and its purveyors are sickos.
There are other failures described in the article; the study itself — it was intentionally misleading for “scientific” purposes of course. There’s also the presumption that influential, hostile commentary is intrinsically bad since it manipulates the opinions of others. But what of the articles themselves? Cannot evil be disguised in the form of eloquent prose ensconced with the ‘official’ branding of govt, academia, and think-tanks?
If it’s truth we’re after, the article fails to define the necessary rules to reveal it.