In a non-verbal exchange this choice of an explicit pause followed by the use of the phrase "interesting interpretation" could also be misconstrued as an underhanded compliment/sarcasm further undermining your alleged intention.
In a non-verbal exchange this choice of an explicit pause followed by the use of the phrase "interesting interpretation" could also be misconstrued as an underhanded compliment/sarcasm further undermining your alleged intention.
Maybe, but it's totally unnecessary if you want to foster open and good faith discussions as you claim.
Being patient in a textual medium means just saying what you mean instead of adding unnecessary pauses and reactions to their response. Regardless of how it was intended to come across it is regularly a sarcastic/dismissive response and not one that assumes good faith or openness which the GP purported to promote.
> Instead of policing his tone, you should reconsider yours. It sounds like you’re upset for an unclear reason.
You're imputing an emotional state on me and dismissing what I'm saying based on that, which is ironically the very thing that the original response was about and exactly why many people vehemently don't answer personal questions like the GP asks. Nor is this policing, the GP can do as they wish, it is critical feedback though about fostering good faith and openness. If that collapses at the first challenge then the GP isn't actually committed to it and ought not act like it.