• agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    There are a lot of ways to interpret this question, it really depends on the information and the people.

    Between experts trained in the method of communication? Between experts and a general audience? One expert and one non-expert? Is it technical data? Nuanced opinion? Simple message?

    • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There are a lot of ways to interpret this question, it really depends on the information and the people.

      Hence why OP is asking for better ways to communicate.

      :P

    • ALostInquirer@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      There are a lot of ways to interpret this question, it really depends on the information and the people.

      This is intentional. When I post to this AskLemmy community I try to frame my questions to fit its description:

      A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

      I fall back to more specific questions here when I can’t find a relevant, active community to post to (or forget to look for one).

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is too broad. It’s like asking “what’s the best wrench to tighten nuts and bolts?” For some applications that’s a torque wrench, some it’s a box end, some it’s a socket wrench, some it’s a crescent wrench, sometimes it’s a pair of vice grips and a hammer. Anything that could properly be called a mode of communication has use cases where it’s clearer than others.

        The OBD code that’s unintelligible to the lay person is the clearest way to communicate a discrete engine problem to a mechanic. A graph that plots a particular change over time might perfectly communicate the raw data, while being incapable of communicating narrative context. A meme image or referential quote might perfectly communicate a specific emotional concept to a broad group that gets the reference, while being totally opaque to those who don’t.

        • ALostInquirer@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I follow ya, I have trouble writing these questions to thread the needle between too broad and too narrow. Too broad and understandably, I get responses correctly calling it out as you have, yet too narrow and it doesn’t produce the conversation and different responses I’m interested in seeing.

          • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            I suggest breaking it down into sub questions based on expertise of the audience and nature of the information: technical, narrative, cultural, emotional, etc.