<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>cygnoir.net - Latest Comments in three-part messages</title><link>http://cygnoir.disqus.com/</link><description>Fiction, foibles, and fountain pens from a black swan with digital wings. Posts about writing, books, public libraries, community, games, analog delight, and food.</description><atom:link href="https://cygnoir.disqus.com/three_part_messages/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 21:34:48 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: three-part messages</title><link>http://cygnoir.net/2006/05/19/three-part-messages/#comment-5386333</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm in total agreement with you.  I read some of the comments but stopped because it devolved into ridiculousness and I've just got no time for people who need it all spelled out for them.  Critical thinking, folks.  Look into it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">cygnoir</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 21:34:48 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: three-part messages</title><link>http://cygnoir.net/2006/05/19/three-part-messages/#comment-5386332</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've always liked that method of starting dialogues in problematic situations. But tangentally: did you read some of the comments being posted to that LJ post? It's like.... people can't put this in the appropriate context. I'm not going to use this method unless there's a rationale for it. I'm not going to use it on, say, someone I have no connection to that I come across on the street. "Hello, fellow pedestrian. When you continually push the Walk button like that, it makes me feel agitated, because it creates a sense of impatience in me." What? No! God. The original poster offers the explanation that she's trying not to talk down to people by having to explain what she thinks (as I do) what should be obvious, but apparently she DOES because LJ is a crazy vast expanse of people who need their hands held. ...I'm going to stop there, I'm starting to sound like an LJ post. :(&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jason</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 21:14:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: three-part messages</title><link>http://cygnoir.net/2006/05/19/three-part-messages/#comment-201213802</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm in total agreement with you.  I read some of the comments but stopped because it devolved into ridiculousness and I've just got no time for people who need it all spelled out for them.  Critical thinking, folks.  Look into it.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">cygnoir</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 20:34:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: three-part messages</title><link>http://cygnoir.net/2006/05/19/three-part-messages/#comment-201213801</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I've always liked that method of starting dialogues in problematic situations. But tangentally: did you read some of the comments being posted to that LJ post? It's like.... people can't put this in the appropriate context. I'm not going to use this method unless there's a rationale for it. I'm not going to use it on, say, someone I have no connection to that I come across on the street. "Hello, fellow pedestrian. When you continually push the Walk button like that, it makes me feel agitated, because it creates a sense of impatience in me." What? No! God. The original poster offers the explanation that she's trying not to talk down to people by having to explain what she thinks (as I do) what should be obvious, but apparently she DOES because LJ is a crazy vast expanse of people who need their hands held. ...I'm going to stop there, I'm starting to sound like an LJ post. :(&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Jason</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 19 May 2006 20:14:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>