Photo from Sarah Ardin/Unsplash

Article also available at https://medium.com/non-monetized-together/protecting-ourselves-from-totalitarian-movements-on-the-internet-c1fcad23db63.

What This Article Is About

Nonmonetized Together – an environment on Medium and write.as that promotes open dialogue, empowerment, personal development, and access to knowledge. A place where nobody is under pressure to be perfect. A world where you can take a breather from the political chaos on the rest of the Internet, where you can listen to and learn from each other instead of dunking on each other. A space where articles are phrased in a way that makes them useful for participants in a variety of ways, depending on each participant’s worldview.

But what if a Nonmonetized Together visitor’s worldviews involve forcefully taking these experiences away from people? How can participants successfully defend themselves from these movements while staying true to the values of Nonmonetized Together?

This is a topic we absolutely need to discuss because I believe that ordinary people deserve the same privileges as academic sociologists, but this would require the use of methods designed to prevent tyranny and hate. Firstly, anybody who tries to use Nonmonetized Together to silence opposition using force will be banned immediately. I’ll call these movements “first-degree totalitarianism.” But what about someone who is in favour of totalitarian ideas but also willing to act fairly on Nonmonetized Together? In this case, the goal would be to allow this person to participate the community while being careful that they don’t escalate into first-degree totalitarianism. Note that a movement doesn’t need to promote totalitarian beliefs to use first-degree totalitarian methods.

In this article, you and I will come up with ideas to prevent first-degree totalitarianism from taking over Nonmonetized Together. The ideas I will share are untested, so I’m going to run them by you and see what you think. Then, if I get a chance, I will try them out to see if they work. These ideas will be presented in a special format I created where I present the background info first, then the idea, then the supporting evidence. This will be done to prevent people from misinterpreting the background info as supporting evidence and vice versa.

Get Involved

Viktor Forgacs/Unsplash

But before I begin describing them, you should know that I would also love to hear your ideas on how to overcome totalitarianism. You might want to read up on Nonmonetized Together so you can get a sense of whether it is the best place to implement your plans. Or if you want, you can just wing it and not read up on us. Either way, I will send you a response telling you whether Nonmonetized Together can implement your plans and why/why not.

Here are some articles that can help guide your understanding of the community (choose whatever article you feel like reading):

(About Our Blog) Tired of Internet Drama and Fakeness? This Community Can Help With That.

8 Things I Can Only Do Here On Nonmonetized Together.

Why I Added #Svalien to the Nonmonetized Together Title.

How This Online Community Fights Against the Stigma of Mental Illness.

Worried About Political Interests On Nonmonetized Together?

This Common Internet Practice Embodies Most of the Worst (Legal) Aspects of Internet Culture.

This Blog’s Comment Sections Will Make You Feel Significant.

Check Out This Brand-New Social Media Metric.

Keep in mind that Nonmonetized Together is a community based off of norms, not rules, so nothing in the above articles are set in stone. This means that if you see a Nonmonetized Together guideline that presents a problem for implementing your anti-totalitarian ideas, you can try writing a comment that makes a case for the guideline to be changed. If you can show that your ideas can be successful in relation to Nonmonetized Together’s context, I can update the norms to include your ideas. But just because a discursive strategy is successful in the greater society or the political sphere, doesn’t mean it will be successful on Nonmonetized Together. The strategies that are useful here are different.

Background info for idea #1:

See introduction.

Idea #1:

Anybody who uses Nonmonetized Together to forcefully silence opposition and/or spread information designed to create unrest will be banned immediately once we find out.

Supporting evidence for idea #1:

We need users to feel that first-degree totalitarian methods are counterproductive on Nonmonetized Together. By having zero tolerance for these methods, Nonmonetized Together can achieve its goal of being an environment that makes up for the unequal power relations in the greater society. Totalitarianism, on the other hand, causes inequality. By protecting itself from totalitarian movements, Nonmonetized Together allows users to share and receive information that could give members strength and agency.

Background info for idea #2:

Nonmonetized Together has its own unique set of norms, different than that of the rest of social media, and painstakingly designed to promote responsible free speech without falling into the same traps that ruined other free-speech websites. By operating on norms instead of rules, any Nonmonetized Together user gets to interact in a way that directly transforms the existing norms that have gotten society in this deep mess of stressful unproductive discussion. This makes it possible for a non-totalitarian to share knowledge that can challenge a supporter (not actor) of totalitarianism without either person feeling threatened enough to retaliate.

In my attempt to create new norms that can allow Internet users to create a better future, I have studied social media discussions for hundreds of hours, wondering how they could have been handled better. My autism allows me to pinpoint problematic social behaviour that most people take for granted. On top of that, the autism supports I received growing up allowed me to realize the importance of providing personalized support to people who want to do things right but who fail to do so. I am motivated by the possibility that there may not be another chance for people to band together and make a better Internet. Without Nonmonetized Together, our future could be in the hands of whoever can make people the most anxious about the future.

Idea #2:

Because of this context, nobody who states support of totalitarian ideas will be removed from the community without them doing first-degree totalitarianism.

Supporting evidence for idea #2:

This allows anti-totalitarians to take advantage of the fact that unlike the rest of the Internet, this is a safe social landscape devoted to listening and learning, and anti-totalitarians can use that to engage in dialogue that could point totalitarians to safer paths. By understanding the suffering that totalitarian beliefs inflict on totalitarians, anti-totalitarians can encourage peace and tolerance in a way that totalitarians will understand. Participants may receive direct knowledge from a totalitarian about what caused them to take such extreme approaches, and since this is an environment based off listening and learning, we can use this information to solve the issues that led people to choose totalitarianism. These opportunities just aren’t available elsewhere on the mainstream Internet due to censorship, as well as the fact that most people on the Internet would rather act hysterical than try to get along with each other. However, Nonmonetized Together uses free speech to resist radicalization instead of welcoming radicalization, so I hope that we won’t get censored by Medium or write.as.

I’m aware that free speech has contributed to online radicalization in the past, but I also realize that if I block and ignore viewpoints that need improvement, then I’ll just be shifting the responsibility of handling these problems to future generations. And if we continue to ignore the problem, then these generations will be more powerless than present generations, and will have a harder time fighting against these movements! By blocking and ignoring totalitarian ideas, society is leaving it up to totalitarians to solve the problem on their own. Guys, society’s putting fascists in charge of ending fascism! And people wonder why many of us feel unsafe.

Background info for idea #3:

A movement can use first-degree totalitarian methods to promote non-totalitarian messages. Nonmonetized Together is committed to wiping out all first-degree totalitarianism completely.

Idea #3:

I want to hold all first-degree totalitarian movements to the same standards regardless of the movement’s message.

Supporting info for idea #3:

If Nonmonetized Together readers think that I am being partial to one group of people, this could lead to unnecessary conflict. To avoid this, I will hold everyone to the same standards.

Background info for idea #4:

Here on Nonmonetized Together, nobody benefits from forces of power. Community members instead benefit from respect, listening, and fairness.

How do I manage this? By only approving articles that set a tone of cooperativity and solutions, making the comment section mostly free speech, and then guiding the conversations into more productive directions when things go awry. By doing this, I can implicitly set norms and standards for readers’ responses, and these norms and standards can be more civil than that of the rest of the Internet. This means that while a reader can have the freedom to reply what they want, I can set a precedent as to how they comment and for what purpose, without being forceful about it.

The most important goal on Nonmonetized Together is to accurately understand what people are trying to say. We just need to say exactly what we mean and make sure readers know that. We can do this by explaining our points clearly, logically, and literally enough to erase any concerns of double meaning. We can start comments with “let me know if I understand correctly…” and then clarify. To avoid conflict, we can start off our responses by finding common ground with the other person before getting into disagreements.

Idea #4:

When I see someone who says something in favour of totalitarianism without using first-degree totalitarianism, I will tell the commenter even though they may feel the need to use first-degree totalitarianism in the outside world, that need will never be as strong as on Nonmonetized Together. I will use the information in this idea’s background to explain how this is done, and then I will invite the totalitarian to discuss the issues that pushed them in that direction, so we can actually work towards solving these problems.

Supporting evidence for idea #4:

If somebody goes down the wrong trail and gets lost, you don’t let that person fend for themselves, you need to contact them. Same thing here. You can’t expect to solve societal problems by leaving the problem up to the person who is causing them. We need to put politics aside, form alliances with these people, and give each one a chance to explain their situation, so none of them have to use violence or threats to find a solution.

Background info for idea #5:

Nonmonetized Together has its own unique set of norms, different than that of the rest of social media, and painstakingly designed to promote responsible free speech without falling into the same traps that ruined other free-speech websites. By operating on norms instead of rules, any Nonmonetized Together user gets to interact in a way that directly transforms the existing norms that have gotten society in this deep mess of stressful unproductive discussion. This makes it possible for a non-totalitarian to share knowledge that can challenge a supporter (not actor) of totalitarianism without either party feeling threatened enough to retaliate.

One way you can show a user that you’re not out to get them is to be grateful whenever one of them notices a hole in your logic. Eagerly view it as a tool for growth. This may allow them to see you’re being cooperative, not competitive. Even if they’re wrong about there being a hole in your logic, you don’t need to get defensive. You can correct them, but you can tell them you appreciate their effort.

Idea #5:

When using Nonmonetized Together to communicate with others, you might want to try showing them that you’re not out to get them.

Supporting evidence for idea #5:

It’s very important that Nonmonetized Together is a non-confrontational environment. This can be achieved by acting non-confrontational. By reducing conflict, totalitarianism can be made unnecessary on Nonmonetized Together. If a reader makes a response that misinterprets your post as an attack, it’s best to de-escalate the situation right away. Listen, the reader probably isn’t doing this just to be mean. The reader likely made that response because they view you as a threat.

Background info for idea #6:

Where and how do we find cases of first-degree totalitarianism? We need a method that will not create fear and distrust among the community.

Idea #6:

My suggestion is to do some non-confrontational inspections wherever we see something that may suggest a first-degree totalitarian movement. This would involve asking users questions that will determine whether they are innocent or guilty.

Supporting info for idea #6:

If we word these inspections carefully, we can make it so people know we’re not trying to be aggressive. Maybe a participant can begin their comments by saying they respect the non-totalitarian parts of their post but then mention that they are “concerned” about the part that appears totalitarian, saying “I just noticed what might be a problem” with the post. Non-totalitarian participants can tell them that we want their movement to do as much as good as it can, but that there are a few things it needs to do first before the people behind the movement can start benefitting.

Background info for idea #7:

Sometimes we may run into a participant who is not interested in contributing to productive discussion or helping other participants grow. I don’t want to censor them, but I also don’t want them to turn Nonmonetized Together into a cesspool. What can we do to discourage them from contributing to the community?

Idea #7:

Maybe we can tell the troublemaker something that would scare them off from the community. By “scaring them off,” I don’t mean “say something that would make them angry”, I mean “say something that’s so honest that they would socially alienate you in response.” Ideally, it should be something about the community that they may find off-putting.

Supporting evidence for idea #7:

These people can only bring trouble to Nonmonetized Together, so don’t worry if many of them want nothing to do with us. By making responses that cause feelings of discomfort, we get to reinforce Nonmonetized Together’s nonsugarcoated identity in the process.

Conclusion

Nonmonetized Together is not for everybody. Participants need to be brave enough to investigate the cracks in society that have led some people to disturbing life pathways. But people have engineered online social spaces to create division, alienation, and paranoia, so Nonmonetized Together can use social engineering to undo the damage.

Discuss...

#Peace #Power #Communication #HateMovements #Internet

You can also view this article at https://medium.com/non-monetized-together/this-writing-strategy-will-prevent-people-from-misunderstanding-your-argument-59bad7d9535c?source=friends_link&sk=c9385350b8d6d09c90db2e195c539701.

The background information in a piece of persuasive writing can easily be misinterpreted by readers as supporting evidence for the main argument. Less commonly, the supporting evidence for the main argument can be misinterpreted as background information. In reality, background information and supporting evidence serve very different purposes. Poor communication between reader and writer can arise when the writer fails to clarify which sections are background information and which sections are supporting evidence.

So, what’s the difference between supporting evidence and background information? Supporting evidence provides an answer to the question, “why is your main argument sound?” It can help readers grasp why someone could think your main argument is worth considering. Readers can decide whether they agree with you by comparing your main argument’s supporting evidence with the supporting evidence of other theories.

On the other hand, background information is used to clarify the supporting evidence and/or the main argument. Background information contextualizes the rest of your text, helping prevent you from running into communication problems revolving around different meanings of the same words. It precedes your supporting evidence so readers can get in the same headspace as you when they read the supporting evidence.

To prevent people from confusing your background information with your supporting evidence, you can organize your text into three sections: background information, main argument, and supporting evidence. If you choose to use this method, each of these sections should have their own paragraph, with a heading that states which section each paragraph corresponds with. Otherwise, it might not work.

Mixing up background information and supporting evidence results in a complete defacement of what the writer was trying to say. Once it occurs, the reader and the writer are understanding things so differently from each other that the cause of the conflict can be difficult to detect. Before cancelling someone over something they wrote, make sure to confirm with them which parts were background information and which parts were supporting evidence. You might be surprised.

Since misinterpretation can happen in any environment, these guidelines can be applied to any form of written communication. If I were to apply them to this post, paragraphs 1-3 would be background information, paragraph 4 would be the main argument, and paragraph 5 would be the supporting evidence.

#Communication #Writing #PersuasiveWriting #Miscommunication #WritingTips

Discuss...

Ava Sol/Unsplash

If someone on Nonmonetized Together dismisses someone else by calling them mentally ill, I will ask them what mental illness they were referring to and why it is relevant. If they do not have an answer, then that shows that they did not mean “mentally ill.” They meant another adjective, but they used “mentally ill” as a way to give their statement more weight. So in this case, I will ask them what they meant to say when they called the other person mentally ill.

My intent is not to argue with them, attack them, or act offended, and I will make sure they know about that. I also don’t want to act like they should have known already. Instead, my goal is to tell people to express themselves more clearly in the hopes of resolving conflict and having a productive discussion. If people are willing to open up and talk about things, then we can weaken the stigma of mental illness.

I will make it clear that in the Nonmonetized Together dialect, “mental illness” means nothing but “mental illness” and any attempts to make it mean anything else will simply not register. They could keep on using it and be as edgy as they want about it but it just won’t mean a thing, but only on Nonmonetized Together, as its goal is to be a fantasyland free from the social diseases that persist in the rest of society.

So, if I catch you using the term “mental illness” to mean something else, there is no need to run and hide or fight back. I’m not trying to silence others. I will forgive you.

I am just trying to help you communicate more clearly so the discussion goes better. If you run off or fight back, that will raise some questions. So don’t do that.

If not enough readers commit to using language this way, my attempts to neutralize the language of mental illness may not succeed, not even shaping how language is used in this tiny corner of the Internet, but I hope that you use the words “mental illness” in the same way when you’re on Nonmonetized Together, and I will link this article in the comments whenever the topic comes back so more people can understand.

If you don’t use language the way I do when you’re on here, I suppose nothing’s stopping you. I try to avoid censorship on here because this is a place to solve problems, not pretend that they don’t exist. I will still give this a try though. I hope this works.

Do you have any other ideas for how you will fight stigma on Nonmonetized Together? This can be stigma of any sort. Make sure to let everybody know by sharing your ideas in the comment section.

This article is also available at https://medium.com/non-monetized-together/how-this-online-community-fights-against-the-stigma-of-mental-illness-39e1b528821f?source=friends_link&sk=3378f022ee2d95dbedd5670626e360ef.

#MentalHealth #OnlineCommunity #Language #Communication #Stigma

Discuss...

OpenAI

Is there any point to social media if it isn’t being used to communicate productively? Maybe this is why it feels so meaningless! By learning how to write respectful and civil comments on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, and Medium, you can make the most out of your online social experience.

One thing you can remember is that more people can see your online behavior than your offline behavior. This means that your social media comments have a greater impact on others. You can use this as a motivating factor. Just think about how it’s important not to waste the opportunity on squabbling and toxicity.

Second, social media moves at a slower pace than the real world, and you can use this to your advantage. You have the freedom to reread others’ comments or read them closer than you would in the physical world. You can also put lots of thought into your own comments and read them over before you’re finished. There’s no time limit.

Social media also has the benefit of being something you can return to later. If you’re at home and you see something that makes you angry, you can step away from the screen for a few minutes and let out all your energy by exercising, pacing, or doing anything you need to calm down. Then you can come back to your screen and respond to whatever it was that got you mad. Not only does this put you in a better position to make a positive contribution to an online discussion, but you’ll probably be able to release your emotions more fully through physical activity than through typing.

You may also want to begin your comment by clearly stating its purpose. This is the reason why most “serious” writing starts with an introductory paragraph. You probably don’t need a full paragraph for a social media comment (then again, you might), but why not at least have some sort of introductory sentence to communicate your intentions? It’s also helpful to make sure you know the purpose of the post you’re responding to. By avoiding miscommunication, the other person has less reason to respond aggressively.

My goal on Non-Monetized Together is to make posts that lead the comments section to exchange knowledge, honesty, support, and ideas. The tips in this article are my tools of the trade. They did an amazing job at making it easy to have a valuable online conversation. I hope they help make social media a more pleasant and enlightening experience for you.

This article was originally posted to Medium on December 20, 2022 (https://medium.com/illumination/thinking-before-you-send-a-guide-to-discipline-and-self-control-on-social-media-fbb7b7902eaf?source=friends_link&sk=deb1e35b1babfa6d549dcc7d465ed0c4).

#SocialMedia #SelfHelp #SocialSkills #SelfControl #Communication

Discuss...

Photo from Kajetan Sumila/Unsplash

I am aware that Non-Monetized Together’s patient approach to online discussion isn’t exactly fashionable. A lot of people on the Internet seem to think “you can’t fix stupid” and use that as a justification to mock, provoke, and troll anybody who doesn’t understand their morals.

But I don’t see why we should treat these people any different than people who have been diagnosed with a mental disability. What’s the difference between idiot and a mentally challenged person? Well, for one thing, the latter has gotten a seal of distinction from a professional. But the second difference is that the words mental disability indicate some level of respect and understanding. When not used in a way that suggests otherwise, those words do not express the contempt that is conveyed by calling someone a moron. They instead suggest that the subject is not to blame for the way their mind works and that neurotypicals have no choice to tolerate the fact that this is the way they are.

These are the only two differences I can think of. One, idiots are not recognized as such by our institutions, and two, they are not respected for who they are. So, I decided to take inspiration from the disability rights movement and understand that maybe Internet morons are not deficient but are differently abled, that they require special needs, that they need patience and understanding. In fact, the terms idiot and moron were originally used to describe those who have a mental disability. If society can outgrow that dismissive, derogatory attitude towards the neurodivergent, I’m sure Non-Monetized Together can do the same with some of its more difficult participants.

#DisabilityRights #Internet #Communication #Respect #Stupidity #Kindness

This article was originally published to Medium on June 27, 2023 (https://medium.com/non-monetized-together/whats-the-difference-between-being-an-idiot-and-having-a-mental-disability-55ac496ed241?source=friends_link&sk=308ed3328e79b572547cd4217168b304)

Medium comments:

great commentary. These labels, informally derogatory or clinical, are often subjective based on personal experience, cultural norms, or fads.

Even the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders changes their classifications over time. I say their as it's still a publication by a group of academics from the American Psychiatric Association alleged to be influenced by the very powerful pharmaceutics industry.

In France for example, ASD (Autism) is frequently diagnosed as NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder).

Here in N.America, NPD can only be diagnosed in adolescence. NPD doesn't require medication to my knowledge, but ASD could (Intuniv).

Labels are false reassurance but are inclusive (in their own communities) unlike moron which isolates, socially.

What do you think?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5

Turi Sue

I think this might be the first comment I received (for articles in this publication) that added something new to the discussion, which is great. That means you're using the community the way it's supposed to be (though, I recently decided I won't clap for comments on my own articles to challenge the idea of “author as authority”).

In the real world, you need a diagnosis to get the treatment you need to function. The treatment can also be expensive. In Non-Monetized Together, my goal is to communicate with people in a way that leads to the best result, every time. Even if it means being more patient with them than elsewhere on the Internet. I want them to be heard!

For those on the losing side in society, labels can sometimes be false reassurance, but I hope Non-Monetized Together will not only be inclusive, but equitable. Then it can fulfill the ideals promised by medical labels but only offered to a few – giving people the support they need to succeed.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

Thank Kevin.

I'm actually new to Medium. I set up my account years ago but have only started using it recently. Right now I'm trying to get a “feel” for what works and what doesn't. I'm not a member yet and haven't applied for any monetization. Is there any benefit to remaining like this other than ideological? If I understand it, you have created a group that resists the money-making incentive for folks to interact.

Is this right?

Turi Sue

Yeah, there are many positives to not monetizing. I wouldn't call them ideology-related, they are more about trying to make the blog operate differently and achieve things that other blogs can't. But there's also personal benefits like not being pressured to earn enough money.

Good luck with your Medium articles.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

I almost forgot to ask you, could you please provide some evidence for the statement you made about how France and North America diagnose people? I have to make sure all posts on Non-Monetized Together back up their claims.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

Kevin, I reached out to Sam Vaknin to get his opinion on your links:

https://vaknin-talks.com/

BTW it was him that alerted me to the possible misdiagnosis of ASD as NPD and vica versa, I forgot to mention this to you.

Although Vaknin is a physicist (I believe), he has written numerous books on NPD. He also lists himself as a WHO consultant (?)

Hopefully, he'll answer me, but many times these “experts” don't reply directly, but rather indirectly through a YT lecture.

Stay tuned....

S.T.

Turi Sue

Thank you for letting me know.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

---

Hi Kevin. Personal experience and available literature.

My daughter was diagnosed with NPD in France at the age of 6. When we moved to North America, the diagnostic experts at McGill University (Dr Guile) and Dr Klein of the Douglas Institute who are experts in their field, told me that NPD is only diagnosed in adolescence in North America, and that she possibly has Asperger's rather than NPD as her brother was born with Asperger's.

https://psychcentral.com/disorders/narcissistic-personality-disorder

https://www.mcgill.ca/psychiatry/clinical-care/dmhui

https://www.quebecmedecin.com/medecin/medecin-guile-jean-marc-14347.htm

I don't remember the name of the doctor in France that performed the two day evaluation. To find out it has to be officially requested through government medial portals.

-S.T

Turi Sue

It looks like the ICD no longer lists NPD as a diagnosis, so the French medical industry has likely moved on from that.

https://bpded.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40479-022-00182-0

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6206910/

Kevin the Nonmonetized

ps. am testing out this membership thing to see if it really makes a difference. I checked my stats as a non-member last week and there were 50 suspicious claps on each of 3 posts. Who or what is putting exactly 50 claps. Not 59 nor 51 but 50. Fishy.

Turi Sue

By the way, I'm a member and I still get very suspicious stats. I had one article get about 100 views in one day and zero reads. This came out of nowhere. Ever since then, the article has gotten exactly one view almost every day.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

hmm. So being a member will not clear that up.

Turi Sue

Tell me if these links work. They should hopefully contain evidence that the stats are wonky.



Kevin the Nonmonetized

---

Isn't 50 claps the maximum that one person can give?

Kevin the Nonmonetized

a posted poem got 91, so I don't know about that. But you said something interesting.: “that one person can give”

Turi Sue

Were those 91 claps from one person?

Kevin the Nonmonetized

---

They may not have, Kevin. Moving on may not happen as fast as that.

Cultural biases or tendencies of a country towards a condition or PD diagnosis don't evaporate as soon as the literature is modified esp. by the WHO. It takes a while for the population to catch up incl. the front-line medical practitioners.

I didn't see any reference to the question of age in the links you sent, unless I missed it.

But it appears the WHO dictates the international criteria for the diagnosis regardless of cultural biases. What did come across is the importance of self-perception in the diagnosis of \ PD.

As a 6-year-old's personality is not fully developed, they cannot be given this diagnosis.

Interesting debate although the tip of the iceberg.

Turi Sue

Fair enough. I guess at that point it’s not something that can be proven as much as perceived.

Kevin the Nonmonetized

Discuss...

This article was originally posted to Medium on June 24, 2022 (https://medium.com/@non-monetized_together/the-power-of-careful-wording-30816dadd31f?source=friends_link&sk=6002f671b9fec2c4c0558d12efd25596)

#wording #phrasing #communication #writing #comparison

Image from Pexels/Pixabay,

Introduction

How important is it for a writer to word their message carefully? In this article, I’ll attempt to answer this question by rewriting my most popular article, but this time using wording that makes my points look much more unconvincing.

Other than that, this reworked version will make the same points as the original. The only difference is that I will write in a writing style that will make the content look worse. The point of this article is to show that poor word choice can single-handedly make a statement seem a lot more unreasonable and can sometimes get the wrong message across to readers.

For a comparison, here’s the original article: https://medium.com/illumination/6-simple-strategies-for-becoming-unprejudiced-e0243c2a7bfa. As noted in the disclaimer at the bottom of that link, I would not publish this sort of article these days. These sort of posts make me look too much like an authority figure in charge of my readers’ minds.

Without further ado, here’s what poor wording looks like…

6 Simple Strategies for Becoming Unprejudiced

Do people not want to be around you? These tips could fix that for you.

1. Question Your Culture

Sometimes I hear people defend someone’s actions by pointing out that they are a product of their environment. I don’t care how much this explains, how is it OK to defend their impressionable minds? They do realize that they’ll never be able to help fix society’s issues if they aren’t critical, right?

Image from JessBaileyDesign/Pixabay

2. Don’t View People Simply

If you don’t know someone well, you have no right to form opinions about them. Same goes for if you have known them for a while but somehow don’t know much about them yet. Acknowledge the good side of everybody.

3. Don’t Describe Groups as If They Are Individuals

Have you ever met people who didn’t treat you well? Well, before judging them, think about the groups they identify with, and remember that there are other people who have that same identification and who would be opposed to what they did. With some exceptions, groups have all sorts of people, so don’t be inconsiderate of that.

4. Always Try to Help People, No Matter Who They Are

If you avoid toxic people and try to help everybody, you will be able to acknowledge their life problems and understand that we all have them. Make sure that abusers quit their behaviour. If you help people, you can appreciate them and get to know them well.

5. Show Decent Respect

For many people, the reason why they have trouble with others is because they don’t show respect.

6. Don’t Call People Out as Hypocrites

If you call someone a hypocrite, that means you are not even bothering to consider that maybe they just forgot something, or that they changed their mind, or that they lost motivation. Let them know that something is wrong and that they need to do something about it.

Conclusion

Image from pixelcreatures/Pixabay

Not sure why I have to add one of these, only geeks care about conclusions … oh right, I’m finished providing examples of poor phrasing.

Anyways, good luck on phrasing your writing properly! Words can be powerful if used correctly. If used carelessly? Then that’s a waste.

Discuss...