A conclusions place

[OzyWho]

Imagine you've a conclusion and arguments for it.

I believe that: (situational)

• IRL/Live it's better to start with your arguments first and then slowly work your way towards the conclusion. If you started with your conclusion first, then the other person will have their mind busy thinking of a response, due to their initial disagreement with your conclusion, so they'll have a harder time listening to your arguments.
• On the internet/Forums it's better to start with your conclusion. That way they can see the relevance of the arguments(or examples) and dissect them fully. (This thread was inspired by an incident on Reddit, where someone made a large amounts of arguments or examples at the beginning, and by the time I got to his conclusion I had already made up my mind and completely missed his point he was trying to convey. It was entirely my fault, but he unnecessarily made it harder for others to understand him by putting his point in the end instead of the beginning.)

Question is this: where should the conclusion be put in a FM post? Put it in the beginning, and there's your agenda. Put it in the end, and (assuming large post) they'll feel like you're trying to trick them.

[Helz]

Imagine you've a conclusion and arguments for it.

I believe that: (situational)

• IRL/Live it's better to start with your arguments first and then slowly work your way towards the conclusion. If you started with your conclusion first, then the other person will have their mind busy thinking of a response, due to their initial disagreement with your conclusion, so they'll have a harder time listening to your arguments.
• On the internet/Forums it's better to start with your conclusion. That way they can see the relevance of the arguments(or examples) and dissect them fully. (This thread was inspired by an incident on Reddit, where someone made a large amounts of arguments or examples at the beginning, and by the time I got to his conclusion I had already made up my mind and completely missed his point he was trying to convey. It was entirely my fault, but he unnecessarily made it harder for others to understand him by putting his point in the end instead of the beginning.)

Question is this: where should the conclusion be put in a FM post? Put it in the beginning, and there's your agenda. Put it in the end, and (assuming large post) they'll feel like you're trying to trick them.

For one bit I think we should equally focus on what that means for us as the reader. This question is focused on the writer but catering to others bad listening habits is not always a viable solution. There is actually some very basic concepts behind how to 'be a good listener' that our society fails at.

For a pragmatic FM focus I would say it depends. Pushing a lynch I usually voice reasoning before conclusion and end with a vote. Pushing a scum tell I usually start with the conclusion and follow up with reasoning to why my opinion is valid.

Maybe there is some connection between the style of speech and the appropriate format? Persuasive reasoning first while informative conclusion first?

[OzyWho]

For one bit I think we should equally focus on what that means for us as the reader. This question is focused on the writer but catering to others bad listening habits is not always a viable solution. There is actually some very basic concepts behind how to 'be a good listener' that our society fails at.

I'd say that humans are naturally stubborn to levels of extreme, and I don't believe that teaching people how to become better listeners would have any noticable impact.
That's just my random baseless biased opinion though.
Why I have this opinion? Idk. The only thing that comes to my mind is this video: how adults get indoctrinated.

For a pragmatic FM focus I would say it depends. Pushing a lynch I usually voice reasoning before conclusion and end with a vote. Pushing a scum tell I usually start with the conclusion and follow up with reasoning to why my opinion is valid.

I actually thought the opposite. Conclusion before reasoning for lynching because it gives the "I've made up my mind" appearance = stronger impact.
You choose it to pressure for tells. Makes sense to me.

But why the more tame approach when pushing a lynch? I feel like the conclusion after reasoning approach gives a "I'm not sure, still trying to figure things out" appearance.

I feel there might be maybe one of your secrets here that make you have a strong presence in the game.

Maybe there is some connection between the style of speech and the appropriate format? Persuasive reasoning first while informative conclusion first?

Tbh, I will not even attempt acting like this isn't waaay over my head.

[OzyWho]

I'd say that humans are naturally stubborn to levels of extreme, and I don't believe that teaching people how to become better listeners would have any noticable impact.
That's just my random baseless biased opinion though.
Why I have this opinion? Idk. The only thing that comes to my mind is this video: how adults get indoctrinated.

After rewatching the video, now I remember the underlying idea for that opinion of mine. It's that people are more likely to come to a conclusion that would nullify their cognitive dissonance rather than coming to a more rational conclusion.

For example, let's imagine FM and let's imagine a insecure player who doesn't want to be seen as a bad player. Let's call him Ozy.

Ozy spends D1 calling Oberon (example) scum.
D2 comes about, and MM makes a comment saying: Ozy must be bad player because there's no way that Oberon is scum.

Ozy now experiences cognitive dissonance. Either he is bad player, or Oberon is scum, or MM is scum.

The simple fact of the human nature = Ozy has to resolve this cognitive dissonance, by either admitting that he is bad (let's ignore that in actuality admitting falsehood would be the better play) or by having either Oberon or MM be scum.

Congratulations, Oberon and MM are now Ozy's sole PoE list, and he will rationalize everything with confirmation bias to make it stay that way, no matter what arguments other people put forward to him.

Humans are not rational when they have to resolve a cognitive dissonance, doesn't matter what arguments are put forward. That's why it's hard to become Atheist for example.

Ever felt like losing your mind from listening to something that you seemed as stupid? Gj, you felt cognitive dissonance. You probably called them stupid and that was the end of it.


(Sorry for this off topic rant)