Protip for life: If you have to explain it twice, chances are you have to explain it differently. This is because the first one did not work. This may be for one of the following reasons:
- Your first explanation was not specific enough. In this case, specify what needs to be specified. The other person may have done the work for you and gave exactly what it is that you need to specify. It might be hard to spot, but remember to look carefully. If you don't find it, you may have to figure out what to specify yourself. If you can't figure out what to specify, feel free to ask what the other person wants you to address before they can accept your explanation.
- Your first explanation was (seemingly) irrelevant. If the explanation is relevant, all this is is just a more difficult variation of the above. Asking the other person won't work for this, you will have to figure out how to justify its relevance yourself. You may find this frustrating. I don't have a solution to this. If I did, I would be out there explaining literally everything to literally everyone myself. My condolences. If the explanation turns out to be irrelevant, you must form an entirely new explanation. You may still be able to salvage relevant parts of your previous explanation, however rehashing the entire original explanation will not work.
- Your first explanation requires context the other person does not have. In this case, it is once again similar to the first case. You must give the added context with the explanation. You may find yourself unable to word the context. If there is an available resource which explains the context better than you ever could, you may quote or link it. You should also consider quoting or linking even if you are able to explain the context yourself. You may also have someone else explain the context for you. If neither can be done, my condolences, I have no idea either.
- Who knows what else there is? (I don't.)
- If all else fails, the other person might just be stubborn and wouldn't change anyway. In this case, either leave the situation, or in applicable situations shift the goal to tormenting them as much as possible. For the latter, remember not to stray into illegal actions.
To: Most likely the second one applies. (To me, the point no longer seems to be relevant due to my addition of the Convention section.)
- Your first explanation was not specific enough. In this case, specify what needs to be specified. The other person may have done the work for you and gave exactly what it is that you need to specify. It might be hard to spot, but remember to look carefully. If you don't find it, you may have to figure out what to specify yourself. If you can't figure out what to specify, feel free to ask what the other person wants you to address before they can accept your explanation.
- Your first explanation was (seemingly) irrelevant. If the explanation is relevant, all this is is just a more difficult variation of the above. Asking the other person won't work for this, you will have to figure out how to justify its relevance yourself. You may find this frustrating. I don't have a solution to this. If I did, I would be out there explaining literally everything to literally everyone myself. My condolences. If the explanation turns out to be irrelevant, you must form an entirely new explanation. You may still be able to salvage relevant parts of your previous explanation, however rehashing the entire original explanation will not work.
- Your first explanation requires context the other person does not have. In this case, it is once again similar to the first case. You must give the added context with the explanation. You may find yourself unable to word the context. If there is an available resource which explains the context better than you ever could, you may quote or link it. You should also consider quoting or linking even if you are able to explain the context yourself. You may also have someone else explain the context for you. If neither can be done, my condolences, I have no idea either.
- Who knows what else there is? (I don't.)
- If all else fails, the other person might just be stubborn and wouldn't change anyway. In this case, either leave the situation, or in applicable situations shift the goal to tormenting them as much as possible. For the latter, remember not to stray into illegal actions.
To: Most likely the second one applies. (To me, the point no longer seems to be relevant due to my addition of the Convention section.)
Comments
-
jcole 5 months agopkmnq ai comeback?? -
PkmnQ is cool 5 months agocan I have different training data -
jcole 5 months ago
yes -
PkmnQ is cool 5 months ago
please kindly thank you I don't know who provided this one