Two sets of questions

[mdlbear]

Two sets of questions for you, inspired by my post on social answers and calibration. The first set doesn't have "right answers", it's just a kind of survey.

1. Do you consider a "social answer" a form of dishonesty (i.e., a lie), or a convenient shorthand based on a social convention that certain socially-incompetent geeks like me never learned to understand?
2. Do you give "social answers" yourself?
3. If so, is there usually a subtext, and do you expect the listener to understand it?

I'll give mine: 1: shorthand; 2: only rarely except with strangers; 3: not a conscious one/no.

The second set is stuff I don't have a clue about. I'm asking because I very much want -- and need -- to learn how to get better at interacting with people.

1. Is it usually safe to ignore the subtext, or is it usually something very important that will cause problems if I miss it?
2. Is it socially acceptable to probe for further details?
3. If that's situational, is there any way to tell when it's acceptable?
4. Can a 61-year-old geek learn this arcane skill, and if so, how?

I don't have answers for those, obviously.

Comments

[mdlbear]

2. No, it isn't.

3. I'm slowly getting better at noticing that a discussion has gone off the rails, and sometimes even figuring out why. Usually a day or two later, unfortunately...