Ok, apologies in advance - this is sort of a brain dump of stuff I have been thinking about for weeks. Hopefully it may be of use to at least one of you. :)
Every time the staff team implement some major changes to D&D Beyond, I find the varied community response fascinating.
Whilst the Kubler-Ross change curve over-simplifies a complex situation, it's very good at illustrating the journey experienced by introducing change.
Some people naturally take to change, adopting quickly and wanting to experiment and learn. Some people dislike change, for a variety of reasons specific to them.
Work experience tells me that the best way to navigate this journey is for the early-adopters to help the other members of the community to see the benefits of the change.
It's worth noting also that people mostly make decisions based upon emotions, rather than logic, so using logic to influence adoption is rarely successful. Looks like sci-fi writers have been correct for decades!
Have you ever seen arguments like this:
"This is demonstrably way better for these specific reasons (follows with list based on data)"
"I don't like it though. I liked the old system."
That's a classic logic vs emotion debate that won't go anywhere. Person A is trying to use logic to influence Person B. Person B has already made their decision and, probably lacking facts at the time, it was made entirely on emotions. To allow Person B to change their mind on this, needs for a different approach than just bombarding them with more facts.
For those of us who are rational thinkers and always use data & facts to back-up an argument this is confusing and frustrating, "Look, the evidence is overwhelming. What do you mean you still don't agree?"
Similarly, for the person who has made the emotional decision, having multiple people bombard them with facts, without addressing the core of their argument is also very frustrating. How many times on these forums have we seen, "I understand what you've said, but I FEEL screwed over."
I'm not going to link to any websites, but there's a lot of information out there on how to appeal to emotions, rather than using facts, when trying to sway people to adopt change.
I've been a Business Change Manager for many years (amongst other roles), and can recommend reading up on this for anyone who finds themselves in a situation of needing to enact change within a community.
If you're looking to help specific individuals, Key Adopters, then talk to them and find out what they find difficult or frustrating about their experiences and help them see how the changes can help them in that respect. The moment they see change as helpful to them, rather than just something presenting an obstacle because they have to re-learn, then you've cracked it.
Happy to debate and discuss if anyone would like, but I am about to go on vacation for the weekend, so likely won't reply until Sunday evening.
For those of us who are rational thinkers and always use data & facts to back-up an argument this is confusing and frustrating, "Look, the evidence is overwhelming. What do you mean you still don't agree?"
While I will not claim to be immune from emotional thinking, my general anger and frustration in arguments is due to people being illogical, irrational, uncritical thinkers. Before I even knew what critical thinking was, I was doing it, even as a kid. Not sure how or why, but I remember as far back as being five years old and realising that I thought in ways different to most people. For the most part, I tend to jump to the experiment phase of your chart and end up wondering why it is that people can't fill in, what I consider to be, obvious gaps between what I'm saying, and what we're discussing. This tends to be especially true of issues that require lateral thinking.
My impatience is where I get emotional and irrational. Having to fill in those gaps for people is often so damned painful and annoying that I just tend to lash out and troll instead because it's pretty much never worth the effort to bring these people up to speed. Of course, in saying this, I'll get accused or thought of as being arrogant, but dealing with people who never stop to actually consider their own opinions and positions and only ever seek to confirm their own biases, when you're the type of person who naturally tends critically examine, pull apart, reconstruct, and analyse things, those people become... incredibly tiresome.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
It is tough saying yeah lets try it and judge it based on it merits rather than making assumptions about how it will work. Those that can make mostly unbiased judgements are a relatively rare breed, they tend to be people who are naturally contemplative, or empathetic.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersOk, apologies in advance - this is sort of a brain dump of stuff I have been thinking about for weeks. Hopefully it may be of use to at least one of you. :)
Every time the staff team implement some major changes to D&D Beyond, I find the varied community response fascinating.
Whilst the Kubler-Ross change curve over-simplifies a complex situation, it's very good at illustrating the journey experienced by introducing change.
Some people naturally take to change, adopting quickly and wanting to experiment and learn. Some people dislike change, for a variety of reasons specific to them.
Work experience tells me that the best way to navigate this journey is for the early-adopters to help the other members of the community to see the benefits of the change.
It's worth noting also that people mostly make decisions based upon emotions, rather than logic, so using logic to influence adoption is rarely successful. Looks like sci-fi writers have been correct for decades!
Have you ever seen arguments like this:
"This is demonstrably way better for these specific reasons (follows with list based on data)"
"I don't like it though. I liked the old system."
That's a classic logic vs emotion debate that won't go anywhere. Person A is trying to use logic to influence Person B. Person B has already made their decision and, probably lacking facts at the time, it was made entirely on emotions. To allow Person B to change their mind on this, needs for a different approach than just bombarding them with more facts.
For those of us who are rational thinkers and always use data & facts to back-up an argument this is confusing and frustrating, "Look, the evidence is overwhelming. What do you mean you still don't agree?"
Similarly, for the person who has made the emotional decision, having multiple people bombard them with facts, without addressing the core of their argument is also very frustrating. How many times on these forums have we seen, "I understand what you've said, but I FEEL screwed over."
I'm not going to link to any websites, but there's a lot of information out there on how to appeal to emotions, rather than using facts, when trying to sway people to adopt change.
I've been a Business Change Manager for many years (amongst other roles), and can recommend reading up on this for anyone who finds themselves in a situation of needing to enact change within a community.
If you're looking to help specific individuals, Key Adopters, then talk to them and find out what they find difficult or frustrating about their experiences and help them see how the changes can help them in that respect. The moment they see change as helpful to them, rather than just something presenting an obstacle because they have to re-learn, then you've cracked it.
Happy to debate and discuss if anyone would like, but I am about to go on vacation for the weekend, so likely won't reply until Sunday evening.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
While I will not claim to be immune from emotional thinking, my general anger and frustration in arguments is due to people being illogical, irrational, uncritical thinkers. Before I even knew what critical thinking was, I was doing it, even as a kid. Not sure how or why, but I remember as far back as being five years old and realising that I thought in ways different to most people. For the most part, I tend to jump to the experiment phase of your chart and end up wondering why it is that people can't fill in, what I consider to be, obvious gaps between what I'm saying, and what we're discussing. This tends to be especially true of issues that require lateral thinking.
My impatience is where I get emotional and irrational. Having to fill in those gaps for people is often so damned painful and annoying that I just tend to lash out and troll instead because it's pretty much never worth the effort to bring these people up to speed. Of course, in saying this, I'll get accused or thought of as being arrogant, but dealing with people who never stop to actually consider their own opinions and positions and only ever seek to confirm their own biases, when you're the type of person who naturally tends critically examine, pull apart, reconstruct, and analyse things, those people become... incredibly tiresome.
"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation."
― Oscar Wilde.
It is tough saying yeah lets try it and judge it based on it merits rather than making assumptions about how it will work. Those that can make mostly unbiased judgements are a relatively rare breed, they tend to be people who are naturally contemplative, or empathetic.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."