@malteengeler
Similarly, by Le Guin

"Leaves

Years do odd things to identity.
What does it mean to say
I am that child in the photograph
at Kishamish in 1935?
Might as well say I am the shadow
of a leaf of the acacia tree
felled seventy years ago
moving on the page the child reads.
Might as well say I am the words she read
or the words I wrote in other years,
flicker of shade and sunlight
as the wind moves through the leaves."

@plexus
Good criticism should be expressed to build people up, to improve. Its important to be open to accountability too, especially if the role you're doing effects others, considering the underlying power imbalance.

Still, this critique of critics reminds me of a book from anarchists about what they call rigid radicalism. Its well worth the read. "Joyful Militancy
Building Thriving Resistance in Toxic Times" https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/joyful-militancy-bergman-montgomery

I read everyone's posts. I don't think encountering rudeness and trolls justifies shutting down most feedback. Although i understand the frustration of being taken for granted and of purity culture.

Quote from the book recc. , section "The limits of critique: from paranoia to potential":

"[...] Limits are often spoken of as if they are fixed, and paranoid reading specializes in locating them and pointing them out. But limits are never fixed. Limits are the always shifting edges of what we are, what we are capable of. To explore potential is to live right at these fluid edges. Affirmative reading is rooted in Spinoza’s insight that we do not know in advance what a body—or a movement or struggle—can do. This ignorance is what makes experimentation possible. Potential is the dimension of these unfolding encounters that can never be known beforehand.

To replace paranoid reading with affirmation is about activating a power complementary to critique, without giving up on critical thinking. Reading affirmatively and seeking out potentials can be a way for us to find new resonances and experiment with concepts in new ways. Critique—as the questioning of inherited certainties and habits—might be necessary to remove the obstacles to all this exploration. It might tear apart some of the rigidities that make experimentation difficult. But it can fall into a paranoid search for problems, detached from the immediacy of life and the potential of new encounters. Maybe some paranoia is necessary—just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you. Maybe it is a question of dosage and mixture, timing and framing, of combining critique and curiosity, wariness and exploration. We are not sure."