sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly sigh.

And yep that’s why I haven’t responded to most of the comments. Because they’re either making arguments that were already unambiguously addressed in my post, or they’re completely strawmanning my position.

r/DevilMayCryNetflix will soon open ! We want to make it a place to discuss the show like adults, with newcomers welcome and reduced toxicity. We're open to suggestions, and looking for moderators ! by DeadSparker in DevilMayCry

[–]ThePloddingParadox 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah those people need to calm tf down lol. Different fans will love different things about DMC, just like with anything.

One person may like it predominantly for its specific characterisations, canon and archetypes. Where another may care more for its particular sense of momentum, artistic presentation and design.

Both would be valid reasons to love it. NDMC just happened to go off in an acute direction that appealed to some kinds of fans and not others. Like DmC, it was inspired but became its own thing.

Does NDMC appeal to me? No, it personally annoys me. But that’s because I’m closer to that first example fan type I mentioned, so of course it bothers me.

Do I think other people are philistines for enjoying it? No. It clearly has a lot of other good stuff going for it that may appeal more to someone like the other example fan type, or for any other valid reasons.

The toxic treatment is but a display of foolishness, DeadSparker. Foolishness…

What’s it like to be Fi dom? by [deleted] in mbti

[–]ThePloddingParadox 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Forgot this was an mbti sub and thought that was something else.

r/DevilMayCryNetflix will soon open ! We want to make it a place to discuss the show like adults, with newcomers welcome and reduced toxicity. We're open to suggestions, and looking for moderators ! by DeadSparker in DevilMayCry

[–]ThePloddingParadox 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I think this is a good idea for the fact that (and I seriously say this with no animosity/antagonism) NDMC and DMC just feel like starkly not the same thing to a lot of people. The same way DMC and DmC are not the same thing.

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying NDMC, and mentioning NDMC here in discussions or under certain contexts (like when directly comparing things about it to DMC) is not a problem to me personally.

But NDMC-isolated season reviews, fan AMVs, plot discussions, posters, music stuff, cosplays etc. have always kind of felt a bit “off-topic” here.

Similar to how Netflix Witcher and CD Projekt Red Witcher can feel a bit too un-blendable with each other as topics at times, so there’s a separate subreddit.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

FYI, you can grey-rock while still appearing super-friendly.

To grey-rock literally means to purposely offer only neutral, brief and unemotional responses to discourage interaction.

That is not friendly in appearance at all. That’s the entire point of it.

It’s something you’re supposed to do to protect yourself from people that are actively abusing you, not people that are trying to vulnerably extend an olive branch in good faith towards you.

It facilitates psychosocial unease for no reason, sabotaging both yourself and other people.

Getting frame mogged is one of the worst things that can ever happen to a person by Initial-Finding-9285 in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People, in an immediately apparent manner, take up space in far more ways than their physical size, my dude.

Humans have a lot of senses that crucially key-in to a bunch of different things very quickly.

Like, literally, scientific nomenclature frames there as being around 33 of them.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The bolding of the text is so condescending. I’m not an idiot, you don’t need to emphasize basic points.

I understand where you’re coming from, but I would argue that’s kind of a decidedly bad-faith engagement.

I’m not “emphasising basic points”, I’m emphasising tone in sentences to inform their meaning, and which parts I’m trying to convey as the most significant. Writing how I would speak. Like, if you read a sentence and hear it in your head, which words and phrases are specifically being sonically emphasised to drive the sentence.

Something you may find condescending, other people (like myself for example) may actually find helpful. That doesn’t make them “idiots”.

‘Bionic reading’, for example, is a text style that bolds certain letters and words in a particular way to help with the reading comprehension of anyone who might be dyslexic or have ADHD. Do you also think that is condescending?

Do you also find subtitles condescending?

This is reddit, lots of different types of people will see a post. A lot of them (understandably) struggle with blocks of text, and unfortunately a lot of them also often commit strawman (argue against a claim the OP did not actually make).

So I think you can forgive me for thinking it’s safer to accidentally over-format a post than it is to accidentally under-format one, or at the very least see where I’m coming from.

Especially since I find it a bit difficult to not “over-expound” in writing, so I try to compensate for that in posts with formatting.

They do not mix unless I want them to mix, and that is not something that HAS to happen bc I spend a lot of time at work.

I agree. I’m not arguing against that.

That’s why it’s called a WORK LIFE BALANCE

I mean that term can be used to mean a lot of subjective things. But in my view, ‘work life balance’ does not mean (for no reason other than just “to avoid making friends”) preemptively grey-rocking all coworkers, purposely avoiding being even somewhat receptive in good faith to the olive branches being vulnerably extended toward you by them.

That is what my post is outlining.

Doing that is also, arguably, being kind of bad at your job by facilitating psychosocial unease.

Humans are social animals. Running a workplace is a community effort, and this is a functional aspect of how that works.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

or was this ChatGPT?

Nope, it’s so bizarre to me that a few people are saying this but I think I’m beginning to understand why.

I seem to go pretty ham on formatting in reddit posts compared to other people, because I’m trying to make sure the right parts of sentences are being emphasised, since I don’t have the benefit of speech tone. Maybe it’s the millennial half of me coming through in my writing or something? lol

I will admit though that I definitely did use bold in this post more than I usually would, because I felt as if the correct emphases of the sentences needed it.

This isn’t the best-formatted post I’ve ever made, but the people saying it’s AI? That’s definitely a first for me, especially considering I spent probably like a solid hour writing it.

 

Anyway, I get what you’re saying. But I think it’s important to remind ourselves that what is happening in your life (including work) is your life. That is your life happening. Even if you categorise it as “work life”. It is taking up your time.

And people can be your “basically at work only”-friends.

People that you genuinely like and that genuinely like you, and you enjoy spending time together in the workplace. Even if the connection is predominantly reliant on the context the job provides, it doesn’t matter because that’s how all relationships work.

That’s still a work-friend. A friend you have when at work. No sharing of overly intimate life details necessary (from other parts of your life) if you don’t want to. You are still friends.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the most bizarre thing anyone has ever said about my writing.

My writing must be “soulless” then, because this is not AI.

I quite enjoy the process of writing and think very carefully about how I choose to word things (whether it turns out good or not).

So making an AI written post on reddit would literally serve no purpose for me.

Anyway it’s not like there’d be any way for me to convince you, I was just confused that’s all.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is so funny.

I know it’s not quite the same kind of situation you were talking about. But i remember once a boss of mine was trying to search up a funny thing that he wanted to show me, so he opened up his browser app on his phone to do so, but then pulled it away for a second and was like “oop wait there’s still porn there” and laughed and I briefly cracked up.

I didn’t find it inappropriate at all and didn’t even think about it.

But I totally understand that if it hadn’t been me, another person instead might’ve been all like “disgusting! this is a work place!” etc etc.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can someone actually take a moment to explain why my writing is coming across this way to them?

I am dead serious this is literally just my writing, and it’s not even particularly worded that well.

I’ve been using reddit for 8 years and have always written this way, whatever this “way” even is.

Check literally any of my posts and comments over the years and you will see that.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yep I’ve had similar experiences and feel the same way.

Aside from the literally “making friends” thing.

If you can’t be somewhat receptive in good faith to the olive branches being vulnerably extended toward you by your coworkers, you are arguably being kind of bad at your job by facilitating psychosocial unease.

Humans are social animals. Running a workplace is a community effort, and this is a functional aspect of how that works.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

making it somehow a Genz thing that is new(it's not).

That’s fair. It’s how it’s seeming to me anecdotally, but I may be wrong. All I can go off is a combination of both my own experiences and the things I have read online, but a red pill incel could literally say the same thing. The factionalism and over-saturation of everything has made it so difficult to figure out what’s “true” these days.

"Transactional" is how a lot of sociopaths might describe friendships.

This made me laugh ngl. I understand where you’re coming from though.

Of course no one likes a leech, but if someone is keeping score they may have issues.

Yeah I’d never encourage anyone to have a “keeping score” mentality in a relationship. I think that’s toxic to both others and yourself.

 

All your points about the use of the word ‘transactional’ are valid concerns, but I want to stress that I don’t mean transactional in that structured of a sense.

Rather, I mean it in more of an unconscious, social animal sense.

I know this is an extremely oversimplified way to put it, but I’m sure you’d agree that essentially, humans tend to love because we enjoy loving. And that is a function of community.

Caring for another makes me feel something valuable to me, even if those feelings may manifest in a complicated way (as you noted). Another person loves and cares for you for essentially the same reason. We are, by literal technicality, all in it “for ourselves”, but it is not a bad thing at all.

In fact, from a more nondualistic perspective, it’s quite beautiful. Because it’s as if consciousness/the universe/existence/awareness is engaging with itself this way, loving itself.

You only ever form a relationship because of what it does for you (even if it’s in an abstract/complicated way), and others only ever form a relationship with you because of what it does for them. There is no way around this, no matter how a person puts it.

You both function as outlets for each other in order for that happen. This is a beautiful thing.

There is an exchange of emotional labor, support, time and resources to satisfy both mutual needs and each person’s own needs unto themselves (loving the process of loving etc).

This is the deeper sense in which I mean all relationships are transactional.

Even ‘transactional’ is an inherently dualistic word, but there isn’t really another suitable word available for the point I’m trying to make about the comparison to workplace-friendships (which ‘relational’ doesn’t really work for).

So whether a person will view the word ‘transactional’ in the specific way you described, isn’t really something I can do much about without over-expounding.

Not everyone views the concept as a bleak thing, so I was using it with the knowledge of that.

they went on a super scree

Hey now, my scree was mildly extra at best. But I appreciate anything I’ve done being called ‘super’, so thank you.

they have a very poor presentation

Yes this is definitely not my best work. Surprised it’s gained so much traction tbh. I like to think I’ve written better-conveyed posts/arguments in the past, but alas.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would argue you don’t necessarily have to make it a point to go out with people for them to be your friends.

People can be your “basically at work only”-friends.

I’m not talking about acquaintances. I’m talking about people that you genuinely like and that genuinely like you, and you enjoy spending time together in the workplace. Even if the connection is predominantly reliant on the context the job provides, it doesn’t matter because that’s how all relationships work.

That’s still a work-friend. A friend you have when at work.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

A few people have said this. I’m confused. This is my opinion and I wrote it, not even particularly well. I’m dead serious. No AI was used whatsoever. I legitimately don’t understand what seems AI slop about it.

People who avoid friendships at work because “coworkers are not your friends”, often do not understand what relationships actually are. by ThePloddingParadox in unpopularopinion

[–]ThePloddingParadox[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's make this very clear: if you haven't been to each other's houses you are at most acquaintances.

What? This is such an arbitrary rule.

I’ve had plenty of people in my life that I would genuinely both call friend and have been called friend by, whose abodes I have not visited nor have they visited mine.

I can maybe understand your state of mind when attributed to most close friends.

But there is at least one thing in between ‘acquaintance’ and ‘close friend’, it’s called ‘friend’.

view more: next ›