Speak no evil?

Question

One should keep close their fears and concerns and seek not remediation.
To do so incurs the wrath of the listener and heightens the level of frustration.
To convey an idea in it’s proper context in the course of a conversation .
Is difficult to do and renders untrue your words through aberration.
Any perceived slight or slip of the tongue will be met with undue trepidation.
How does one guard the words that they use to avoid this type of vexation?
To try and seek clarity when expressing oneself through the act of communication.
Is to leave oneself open to misunderstanding and unwarranted incrimination.
While it seems clear the motives were pure in seeking dissemination.
What is it’s worth when all the times spent in offering rectification?
Singularity of thought and purposeful speech precludes any recantation.
Consider long your desire to hold in your mind the essence of clarification.
The onus of the burden resides with you if you truly wish edification.
But be warned in advance there’s a price to be paid and it’s usually vilification.
The question is, how does one properly phrase a question that elicits a thoughtful response without raising the ire of the respondents. Is there a tried and true method of asking that causes someone to answer in a truthful and logical manner?

Answer 1

Okay my lyrical friend, here's what I think:

People are people beyond our control
and despite our fervent desires
they'll answer the questions however they'd like
often nonsensically if they are tired
So despite earnest phrasing and rhythmic rhyme
there is not a lot that we can do
to insure that they answer with diligence and care
the way that we'd hope they would do.

Answer 2

There are too many different types of people, moods, and ways of thinking to ever ask something that won't set somebody off. You could ask how people like to have fun and you would find someone that thinks you're a loser and a slacker because you find time to have fun.
And you always have those that could be given the Silver Ladle Award, ie sh** stirers. They will always go for the stupid or shock value.
It would be nice if some of the answers were more intellegent and less venomous, but then it depends on the question. Some just beg for passionate responses.

Answer 3

Evil is depressing and needs business organization. So ignoring that's dis-empowering to it. there is an old legend that evil can't stand that's own photo. it should be destroyed by technique of mirrors. With that in innovations, then what's evil? If it ought to't stand itself then it should be an phantasm. also, considering the fact that sturdy is accepting and forgiving, then sturdy can't spoil evil. So evil can purely be destroyed by technique of itself, for this reason the reflect theory back. Which brings to innovations the so pronounced as classic conflict of "sturdy vs Evil". How can sturdy be hostile to evil? isn't it extremely Evil vs sturdy?

Answer 4

Of course, one should consider the location of the conversation, to avoid such a situation, that could be the cause of such vexation within the ideation of the unwarrated situation!Alas, one should also consider the ideation that all creation is blessed with his own consideration for every situation and to avoid conflict(ation) would be sometimes nearly be an obliteration of the subjectivism.
tee hee - how about with sincerety and openness along with some brevity.

Answer 5

Concentrate completely and solely, on the question being asked.
Avoid name-calling, labeling, making unrelated assumptions about the asker. Stick to the facts as you understand them and use clear and concise language to clarify your answer.

Answer 6

Good Lord Man!

Answer 7

Hey there, what this has to do with Etiquette??

Do you think that being complicated makes you more interesting?! ... well, NO!

Answer 8

Would that be the K.I.S.S. rule? LOL

Answer 9

The answer is....NO!

Answer 10

I dunno.