Be warned! Signaling that you understand signaling is a terrible signal, because it throws all your other signals into doubt.
This is the opposite of true. People want allies that are competent signalers. Explicitly talking about signalling is in most cases a bad idea and usually a signal that you don’t understand signalling or respect it sufficiently.
Revealing that you are optimizing your signaling separately (for example, talking about “PUA”) is among the worst signals of all.
To the extent that there are “worst signals of all” rather than signals being dependent on context and goals, talking about PUA wouldn’t be near the top. There are more than enough cases where it is either neutral or positive—especially when that ridiculous acronym isn’t used.
Yes, in a world of shifting coalitions and subcontrancting, a lot of signaling consists of not signaling our abilities directly, but rather signaling our ability to signal our willingness to signal our abilities.
Be warned! Signaling that you understand signaling is a terrible signal, because it throws all your other signals into doubt.
This is the opposite of true. People want allies that are competent signalers. Explicitly talking about signalling is in most cases a bad idea and usually a signal that you don’t understand signalling or respect it sufficiently.
I think there’s a distinction between them possessing a generalised skill in signalling and them being engaged in attempting to influence you via signalling. (Consider “He’s charming” vs. “he’s trying to charm me”). Possibly people resent the implied disrespect in trying to alter their behaviour cia signalling not argument.
It’s helpful here to remember the difference between you figuring out that I’m attempting to influence you (whether via signalling or any other route), and my expressing to you (whether via signalling or any other route) that I’m attempting to influence you.
This is the opposite of true. People want allies that are competent signalers. Explicitly talking about signalling is in most cases a bad idea and usually a signal that you don’t understand signalling or respect it sufficiently.
To the extent that there are “worst signals of all” rather than signals being dependent on context and goals, talking about PUA wouldn’t be near the top. There are more than enough cases where it is either neutral or positive—especially when that ridiculous acronym isn’t used.
Yes, in a world of shifting coalitions and subcontrancting, a lot of signaling consists of not signaling our abilities directly, but rather signaling our ability to signal our willingness to signal our abilities.
I think there’s a distinction between them possessing a generalised skill in signalling and them being engaged in attempting to influence you via signalling. (Consider “He’s charming” vs. “he’s trying to charm me”). Possibly people resent the implied disrespect in trying to alter their behaviour cia signalling not argument.
It’s helpful here to remember the difference between you figuring out that I’m attempting to influence you (whether via signalling or any other route), and my expressing to you (whether via signalling or any other route) that I’m attempting to influence you.