If I define that it is a whale, the first name that comes to mind is @caluman, and although I don't know you that much, I see the collective work you do, I have also seen the great work of @trostparadox and I think they define very well that word "whale"
I have not had the opportunity to detail the work of the other whales, since I am busy with so much content that I enjoy reading, and it will surely be a matter of time to be able to meet a profile of virtues and defects, which should not be relevant to them at all , since it is an own appreciation.
Perhaps what matters most to me is that feeling of believing that everything will remain as similar as possible to partiality, I have seen how in Hive some whales use their power to deliberately affect the publication of certain colleagues, and I think it will always be a disadvantage to deal with.
Of the rest if I take into account that life is only one, I do not think I reserve something when I must express a situation that at that moment seems out of place, if we look at real life, we are trampled on repeated occasions for fear of losing something or being discarded, and after seeing so many close examples, I think that being honest will always be the right thing to do, whether or not it bothers whoever it is directed at!
Truth!
Well stated.
Your point about partiality is an interesting one, and it's something I've touched on in another comment about the intentions of larger stakeholders.
It's known by some of the longer-standing members that I've picked out some things and highlighted it surrounding the larger stakeholders. That's always to find out what their intentions are . Without this kind of information being shared and some feedback being received, we cannot be sure of anything and we shouldn't assume good faith.
I'm with @trostparadox, this is solid.
+20 POB for dropping the truth bombs
I totally agree with "we cannot be sure of anything ...".
I disagree with "... and we shouldn't assume good faith."
In my life, I have found it best to be skeptical of almost every claim, until backed up by solid logical argument or evidence. However, I have likewise found it best to always assume the best in terms of intentions. Many times once the facts come out, we find good intentions (or at least an absence of mal-intent) behind actions that turned out badly or simply went against what we thought was best.
Life is too short to be constantly worrying about other people's intentions.
Some of the most destructive government policies were put in place with relatively good intentions (take the U.S. welfare system, for example).
When all is said and done, intentions don't matter (on earth, anyways). God will judge the intents of the heart.
Might be splitting hairs, here, but I think you are getting at motivations rather than intentions.
This does seem like a more sane approach. The emotions associated with assuming bad intentions aren't healthy and it isn't worth worrying over (especially in this instance).
Yes, you're correct there. I've been throwing around the word "intentions" willy nilly. It is definitely directed more towards people's motivations and not any plans in particular. Time to consider what other words I've been using frequently without fully understanding the meaning behind them and how they come across, lol. Always a learning opportunity.
Thanks for the food for thought, it has helped.
Here are a couple to think about:
Our pastor pointed out a few years ago that when we refer to "Bible stories" to our children, we inadvertently give the impression that they are just that, 'stories'. Whenever it is an historical account, we should use the word "account" (e.g. "the account of David and Goliath"), because it more accurately reflects truth and reality as opposed to fiction and mere storytelling.
Somewhere a few years ago, I read an article explaining why we should avoid saying "I believe" because of the relativism in society today. It is easier for someone to dismiss your 'beliefs' because they are just that, subjective beliefs.
If it is something that you believe with conviction, it is better to say "I affirm" -- this conveys not just that you "believe" something (in a subjective sense) but that you affirm it as objectively true. Doesn't mean they have to agree with you, just that you are drawing a line between subjective 'opinions' and claims of objective truth.
Yes, it is in your personal best interest to assume good intentions. Life is more pleasant that way.