Re: [libreplanet-discuss] Proposal for "FUD responses" wiki pages

[Daniel Pocock]

On 29/02/16 12:05, Fabio Pesari wrote:
> On 02/29/2016 11:18 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>
>> Very good, but not every person will respond like that
> 
> One should be prepared for the worst case scenarios: that includes
> taking into consideration emotional, irrational and ignorant arguments.
> 
> Those are very common among both professional developers and casual
> GNU/Linux users, and it's very easy for people to agree with them
> because they feel good and don't require any introspection.
> 
> For example, even if it seems downright childish and ridiculous, this is
> the most commonly used counter-argument to GNU/Linux:
> 
> "But I want to play videogames!"
> 
> I still haven't found an answer for that because it's true that most
> libre games are crap and decades behind mainstream titles, and
> suggesting that freedom is more valuable than entertainment never
> convinced any of those people.
> 


That actually contains a big clue

We need to focus on identifying each person's values and not expect
everybody to have values.

E.g. some doctors will want to keep their patient data private because
it is the right thing to do.  Some will do it because of the commercial
incentive (not wanting a rogue employee of the IT company to sell a
customer list to a rival).  Some will only want to keep patient data
private because of the big penalty fines that doctors now face for data
breaches.

The first step is to use questions to identify the person's values.
Then match the argument to their values

While it sounds trivial, salespeople are usually trained to identify one
of these things that each customer values most: career, family, hobby.
Once they identify the most important one, they may try to talk about it
or even relate their message to it (e.g. "do you think you might have a
third child?  Have you seen this larger model car...")

Even if this only helps for 1 out of 5 discussions, just forget the
other 4 and don't be demotivated, you can't win every time.

> We're talking about a society that is eagerly waiting for Oculus Rift (a
> Facebook product) to engage in virtual "sex". The problems at the root
> of proprietary software adoption are very, very deep, and completely
> unrelated to rationality - I would say moral, but I know some people
> here don't like that word or its connotations, so I think we can safely
> agree that most people want to be comfortable more than they want to be
> free, and few give a crap about things like ethics, security and privacy.
> 
>> Do you feel that the idea of making up questions like this is useful in
>> comparison to just having statements to use as responses?
> 
> I think one should imagine every possible response and
> counter-response. Right now shutting up a free software supporter is
> very easy, as we get easily frustrated by arguments like the ones I
> shared before and quit.
> 

This is just a matter of training and practice

For example, lawyers often spend hours with their clients practicing
questions and answers for court cases.  That is how they look so
convincing and respond so effortlessly in the heat of the moment.

Regards,

Daniel