I raise a concern about someone or something and someone else is dismissive. I think it's because they dismiss the concern, and are implying my feelings aren't valid. Really, they dismiss every concern not supported with citations, of which my expressed concern was one example.
Someone says they "just looked up" something, I think they're implying I'm lazy or negligent in not looking it up. They meant "just" meaning recently, as in "just now".
I am being sarcastic, someone does not realize it.
I tell someone who only writes long comments that I enjoy their writing and that they should write more short comments, they think I'm trying to politely tell them to stop writing long comments.
Someone says anything we can do to X we can do to Y". I mistakenly think they are implying that only things that can be done to X can be done to Y.
I stumble shakily about the subway station clutching my groin, eyes unfocused and face contorted oddly. People think I am a drunken pervert, in reality I just had a mole removed high up on my inner thigh.
Since every action is the result of multiple influences, any thought in which "just because" springs to mind is immediately highly suspect. E.g. Mormons are "just" on here to proselytize.
I would like LW to be an environment in which we can learn by having honest and productive conversations. Fortunately, it substantially is such a place, but we can do better.
I would like to make a post about judging others favorably in the near future. To this end I think a useful mechanism would be to encourage people to post as comments scenarios in which they made erroneous assumptions about others' intent, and hide the conclusion in which they learned of their error from view until the reader has performed the exercise of considering what the innocuous actual explanation might be.
The purpose would be to make a repository of stories in which people could read the scenario, fail to think of how the situation could be resolved, and then see how in the previously hidden comment. Each bias involved in misjudgment - thinking one's enemies innately evil, believing one's own argument from ignorance about what the best possible explanation could be, and so forth - would be identified.
I don't know that hiding the conclusions of stories would be technically easy. One hack would be to have people post the conclusion within the comment in which they laid out the story. people could then downvote the child comment and upvote the parent. However, not everyone has the hiding threshold set at -3, and the first people to see the comment would see the conclusion, not everyone has unlimited dowvotes, etc.
Alternatively, the conclusion to each story could be in rot13.
As a protocols, analogously to how people are discouraged from quoting themselves, I would think to limit posts about when others misjudged the author's intent to a maximum, perhaps one for every two submissions in which an author posts he or she misjudged the intent of others.
As another protocol posts in which others on LW misjudged one's intent would be off-limits.
Comments are encouraged, whether on my proposed protocols, how to format, etc.