> I am trying to understand and evaluate criticisms against NVC and I am not convinced by what those posts said.
Sure came off as trying to dismiss or deflect from criticisms in your earlier comments. Sounded almost like you'd drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid. (From all I've read and heard about "Non-Violent Communication" -- mostly from the pro side! -- it sounds rather like a cult.)
> I want to know these because if I am giving bad advice by recommending NVC I want to stop.
> Sure came off as trying to dismiss or deflect from criticisms in your earlier comments
yeah, because I am saying they are not convincing and I believe I stated why. Next in the exchange would be to say why my reasons against it are folly or why I misunderstood.
It sounds like you think I'm too deep in. So help me out: what, specifically, do I need to change my perspective on? By definition, if I'm too deep, I can't see it.
> yeah, please do
I will, when someone can help me understand _why_.
Sure came off as trying to dismiss or deflect from criticisms in your earlier comments. Sounded almost like you'd drunk too deeply of the Kool-Aid. (From all I've read and heard about "Non-Violent Communication" -- mostly from the pro side! -- it sounds rather like a cult.)
> I want to know these because if I am giving bad advice by recommending NVC I want to stop.
Yeah, please do.