jojackson
New Member
I thought this deserved its own thread too, since nearly every thread posted where there are multiple contributors, contains misunderstandings and miscommunication that causes confusion and sometimes heated disagreements. Any understanding and effort made to communicate better can only better the forum and help us help each other.
A common problem I see, with what I call 'computer apathy', Is that useful information is posted sparingly by those who could 'go a little further', and generalisations posted by those without the knowledge to.
A simplified Example.
Person A: My female veiled has been diagnosed with an RI, she holds her mouth open, bubbles from nose , wheezy sounds etc etc. She is being treated
with such & Such but what can I do to help her?
Person B: Raise the basking temp by 5-10f
Now person C comes along, reads person A's 'how to ask for help' info, sees basking temp at 82f, reads person B's response and writes...
Person C: 90f is too high for a female veiled, they need 80f or the have huge clutches and die, etc etc
Person C is well meaning and wants to help, but dosent understand why person B has written that. Person C is simply posting the most appropriate seeming generalisation.
Neither B or C are wrong, there is simply a communication issue. Person A is now thouroughly confused and may be put of by the apparent self contradictory answers.
Person B might have 'gone a little further' by writing..
Person B: While your chameleon is ill, raising the basking temp (temporarily for the duration of treatment) by 5-10f will boost her metabolism and help speed her recovery. After your chameleon has recovered, you may return to your original basking temp, which is correct because....
Now person A has a better understanding, has learnt something. Perhaps Person C will also learn a little something more. I am also guilty of giving short answers like Person B from time to time, I did so recently, and despite an effort to 'go a little further', my responses were marred by irritation after the original miscommunication, in effect, That Person A became thourally disenchanted and went off to seek info elsewhere, not a result im proud of.
My apology to that person.
Some person C's dont realise that the 'appropriate' generalisation they make, may not be applicable in certain circumstances and thus, will seem to directly contradict what another has written. It is hoped that They also will benefit by gaining a little extra insight.
Some person B's also fall victim to 'computer apathy'. They tend to post multiple links, which, while they may be bristling with useful information, may tend to 'overload' a person new to whole thing. Not many folk actually read 7 links, let alone fully. Also the authors of these links will have written the work aimed at the mass public, and therefor person A may not understand how it relates directly to their issue.
Perhaps A summary with such links, In your own words explaining the relavence to Person A's problem may be of more help?
Lets work toward better communication so that our passion and desire to
help others on their journey of discovery is not 'lost In translation'!
A common problem I see, with what I call 'computer apathy', Is that useful information is posted sparingly by those who could 'go a little further', and generalisations posted by those without the knowledge to.
A simplified Example.
Person A: My female veiled has been diagnosed with an RI, she holds her mouth open, bubbles from nose , wheezy sounds etc etc. She is being treated
with such & Such but what can I do to help her?
Person B: Raise the basking temp by 5-10f
Now person C comes along, reads person A's 'how to ask for help' info, sees basking temp at 82f, reads person B's response and writes...
Person C: 90f is too high for a female veiled, they need 80f or the have huge clutches and die, etc etc
Person C is well meaning and wants to help, but dosent understand why person B has written that. Person C is simply posting the most appropriate seeming generalisation.
Neither B or C are wrong, there is simply a communication issue. Person A is now thouroughly confused and may be put of by the apparent self contradictory answers.
Person B might have 'gone a little further' by writing..
Person B: While your chameleon is ill, raising the basking temp (temporarily for the duration of treatment) by 5-10f will boost her metabolism and help speed her recovery. After your chameleon has recovered, you may return to your original basking temp, which is correct because....
Now person A has a better understanding, has learnt something. Perhaps Person C will also learn a little something more. I am also guilty of giving short answers like Person B from time to time, I did so recently, and despite an effort to 'go a little further', my responses were marred by irritation after the original miscommunication, in effect, That Person A became thourally disenchanted and went off to seek info elsewhere, not a result im proud of.
My apology to that person.
Some person C's dont realise that the 'appropriate' generalisation they make, may not be applicable in certain circumstances and thus, will seem to directly contradict what another has written. It is hoped that They also will benefit by gaining a little extra insight.
Some person B's also fall victim to 'computer apathy'. They tend to post multiple links, which, while they may be bristling with useful information, may tend to 'overload' a person new to whole thing. Not many folk actually read 7 links, let alone fully. Also the authors of these links will have written the work aimed at the mass public, and therefor person A may not understand how it relates directly to their issue.
Perhaps A summary with such links, In your own words explaining the relavence to Person A's problem may be of more help?
Lets work toward better communication so that our passion and desire to
help others on their journey of discovery is not 'lost In translation'!