Speaker 1: You're listening to Why we do what we do? Welcome
Speaker 1: to Why we do what we do Mini. I am
Speaker 1: your host Abraham, and I'm your oh Shane. We are
Speaker 1: a psychology podcast. We talk about the things that humans
Speaker 1: and non human animals do, mostly humans, to be fair,
Speaker 1: and this is a mini, which means it's short. We've
Speaker 1: been doing This is our one hundred and fourteenth mini,
Speaker 1: so we've been doing these for some time now, over
Speaker 1: two years. We enjoy the minis. They're cool. We release
Speaker 1: these on Mondays in full length episodes on Wednesdays. If
Speaker 1: you're joining us for the first time, then welcome. I
Speaker 1: hope that you enjoy what you hear in this discussion.
Speaker 1: And if you're a returning person, then welcome back. I
Speaker 1: hope you enjoy what you hear in this discussion. And
Speaker 1: either way, if you like to support us, you can
Speaker 1: join us on Patreon, leave us a rating and a
Speaker 1: review like subscribe, tell a friend. I'll talk more about
Speaker 1: those things at the end, but we need to dive
Speaker 1: into this because it's a mini. Yes, unless there's anything
Speaker 1: you'd like to add or anything that I forgot before
Speaker 1: we begin.
Speaker 2: No, I think we're ready to go.
Speaker 1: Okay, Okay, we recently released, recorded, and released an episode
Speaker 1: outlining the dystopian, draconian evil proposal to destroy science and
Speaker 1: the scientific process and progress recently put forward by the
Speaker 1: Trump dump administration. That was an episode that happened.
Speaker 3: Yes, that was an episode that happened, And we can't
Speaker 3: believe that we have to say that sentence out loud. Unfortunately,
Speaker 3: in our passionate disapproval of this ridiculous proposal, we did
Speaker 3: not outline all the changes that they were proposing, but
Speaker 3: we did end with a call of that to action,
Speaker 3: specifically called action to submit public feedback.
Speaker 1: So, while it's understandable that you may want to screen
Speaker 1: belliger at obscenities as I did in that episode, and
Speaker 1: we'll do a little bit in this episode at the
Speaker 1: belligerent dubscenity that is this asinine proposal, it is important
Speaker 1: that feedback constructed in such a way as to be
Speaker 1: as effective as possible if you're going to leave feedback
Speaker 1: on this proposal.
Speaker 3: Yeah, so this episode's going to provide some tips on
Speaker 3: how to write feedback to be as influential as possible,
Speaker 3: to be maximally persuasive, specifically regarding this particular thing.
Speaker 1: So to make sure we're clear, what we're saying is
Speaker 1: we have a certain window of time with which we
Speaker 1: can leave feedback on this proposal. We as a country.
Speaker 1: For those of you in the United States, I don't
Speaker 1: know if there's people, probably not out people outside of
Speaker 1: the United States, but people in this country. It is
Speaker 1: open to the public for comment. You don't have to
Speaker 1: be a scientist, but if you are a scientist, I
Speaker 1: strongly encourage you to weigh in. But otherwise the public
Speaker 1: can weigh on in this. They gave us a very
Speaker 1: short window. It was only forty five days, which is
Speaker 1: very short for something particularly as sweeping as this. Nothing
Speaker 1: like this has ever been tried in this country before.
Speaker 1: This is a horrible step in the wrong direction, but
Speaker 1: that is where we stand. So just to make sure
Speaker 1: you're clear. The essentially what we're saying is you should
Speaker 1: go comment on this, but for that comment to have weight,
Speaker 1: we have some suggestions for things that you can do
Speaker 1: to construct it in such a way that it's likely
Speaker 1: to be influential.
Speaker 2: Yes, absolutely.
Speaker 1: What we didn't include in the original conversation of the
Speaker 1: things that they are proposing to change in these grants,
Speaker 1: we included some things we talked about the fact that
Speaker 1: they're essentially going to shift all final say to an
Speaker 1: appointed politician that the priorities are to carry out the
Speaker 1: president's agenda, but we didn't mention that they are also
Speaker 1: proposing to remove funding for scientists to attend conferences, which
Speaker 1: is where a huge amount of dissemination and collaboration occurs,
Speaker 1: unless that was approved by the overseeing politician, which means
Speaker 1: that is on a case by case basis, which at
Speaker 1: best is going to decimate attendance at these conferences. Yeah,
Speaker 1: which if those conferences lose, like they barely straight by
Speaker 1: with the amount that they have, if they lose a
Speaker 1: huge proportion of their attendees, they will die. They also
Speaker 1: added that funding in these grants can be terminated at
Speaker 1: any time without any warning. They can just say nope,
Speaker 1: you're done and then pull all of that funding. The
Speaker 1: funding cannot be used to try to advertise or reach
Speaker 1: out to new employees to hire for these projects. So
Speaker 1: if they are trying to start a research project, you
Speaker 1: can't use the money from that you'd be getting for
Speaker 1: that research to hire new people. You just have to
Speaker 1: hope that they magically show up in your space and
Speaker 1: ask for a job, which also means there's a reduction
Speaker 1: in the kind of merit based hires that will likely
Speaker 1: take place. We may have mentioned this, but just to
Speaker 1: make sure it's very clear, they are nearly abolishing the
Speaker 1: capacity to do any international collaboration whatsoever. There might be
Speaker 1: some case by case basis, but the priority is we
Speaker 1: only do things related to and directly involving the United
Speaker 1: States full stop, because the United States doesn't exist on
Speaker 1: planet Earth, that exists in its own private spaceship, that
Speaker 1: doesn't have anything to do with planet Earth. Sure, and
Speaker 1: that the funding can be rejected even from consideration, like
Speaker 1: they don't. You have to read it if it contains
Speaker 1: any language the politicians don't like. And I'm not exaggerating
Speaker 1: at all when I say that if it has the
Speaker 1: word diversity, are the word woman, or the word gay,
Speaker 1: even if that's someone's name, it can be excluded from consideration.
Speaker 1: So those are things to know about the changes. The
Speaker 1: first link that I'm putting in the notes for this episode,
Speaker 1: so where you find this episode, the very first link
Speaker 1: is going to be where you can go to submit
Speaker 1: your feedback. FYI, all right, now, let's talk about how
Speaker 1: to lay feedback.
Speaker 3: Well, let's take a break for an ad first, so
Speaker 3: that you can scream a little bit, and then we're
Speaker 3: going to talk about the feedback.
Speaker 2: So we're going to give you a moment to decompress.
Speaker 3: Scream into a pillow, scream at your local politician, scream somewhere,
Speaker 3: aim it, but scream a little bit, and then we'll
Speaker 3: come back, and then we'll talk about this.
Speaker 1: Scream with these ads, Scream with these ads. All right,
Speaker 1: we're back. You screamed at the ads, the ads screamed
Speaker 1: at you. Let's talk about how to give feedback.
Speaker 3: Yes, So, while a large volume of feedback will likely
Speaker 3: construe the magnitude of opinion about a topic, it is
Speaker 3: important understand that the comments are not like votes. An effective,
Speaker 3: well written side comment might be more influential than one
Speaker 3: thousand poorly written comments right well, or you may be
Speaker 3: dismissed out of hand without consideration.
Speaker 1: So that's one important piece here is they're like, if
Speaker 1: you just go in screaming belligerent things, they won't read it.
Speaker 1: If you'd make a well constructed comment, they're likely to
Speaker 1: bear a lot more weight. Another important thing here is
Speaker 1: to start drafting your feedback right now or three weeks ago.
Speaker 1: The deadline is eleven fifty nine pm Eastern Time, July thirteenth.
Speaker 1: Now it's said through July thirteenth, ending on July thirteenth,
Speaker 1: and I saw eleven fifty nine, so I derived from
Speaker 1: that that that's what that means. But it could be
Speaker 1: July twelfth. Get it in before then, Like, just set
Speaker 1: the deadline for yourself of July eleventh to make sure
Speaker 1: you're definitely there on time. If you're going to write feedback,
Speaker 1: get started right away. You'll need plenty of time to
Speaker 1: carefully craft your message and get it submitted, ideally well
Speaker 1: before the deadline, and do not put this off to
Speaker 1: the last minute, so that it definitely gets into the system.
Speaker 3: Yes, another important point, be clear on who you are
Speaker 3: and why your opinion matters. Even if you're just a
Speaker 3: private concern citizen, that is a valid point of view,
Speaker 3: but avoid presenting yourself as an expert in something of
Speaker 3: which you are not an expert, or as a fringed
Speaker 3: lunatic with a chip on their shoulder. If you're a
Speaker 3: professional on field but are writing from your own personal viewpoints,
Speaker 3: say this clearly. If you're reporting in tandem with others
Speaker 3: from your field or organization. Then say that if you're
Speaker 3: reporting just for yourself, then express that whatever it is,
Speaker 3: Say who you are and why you are concerned.
Speaker 2: Make that explicitly clear.
Speaker 1: Yes, they want to know like that you are something,
Speaker 1: that you're a person, you're a real person, that you
Speaker 1: have real value to add and that, and so just
Speaker 1: telling them who you are and where you come from
Speaker 1: is important. Another important thing is to be constructive and
Speaker 1: be specific. This is kind of two points, so I
Speaker 1: want to say the to say them as two separate points,
Speaker 1: but be constructive and be specific. It helps to identify
Speaker 1: in your feedback the specific rules you are concerned with.
Speaker 1: There are many. If you are not sure what they
Speaker 1: are exactly or how they're phrased, look them up. Make
Speaker 1: sure that you know exactly what you're talking about. It's
Speaker 1: not inappropriate to make broad comments like you could go
Speaker 1: in here saying like I have a problem with all
Speaker 1: of it, and that's okay. You can make those broad comments,
Speaker 1: but it can be more influential to cite specific language
Speaker 1: rules or sections of the proposal with which you are concerned.
Speaker 1: So like you and you can do both. You can
Speaker 1: say like, I think these are the problematic implications of
Speaker 1: these rules. Here are the specific rules I'm talking about,
Speaker 1: and phrase it that way if you like whatever it
Speaker 1: is like. Just make sure that you are clear on
Speaker 1: what you're saying. And I would even say, don't take
Speaker 1: our word for granted on what these rules are like.
Speaker 1: Look at them and read them, because it is important
Speaker 1: that you know what you're talking about as it's written down.
Speaker 1: Or again, they might just dismiss it out of hand.
Speaker 3: Yes, and when you do, state what you think should
Speaker 3: happen instead of what is proposed. So it's not just
Speaker 3: enough to complain about something or be upset about something.
Speaker 2: And point out the errors.
Speaker 3: It's important to be able to offer some solutions to
Speaker 3: even though they are a bunch of pathetic loser failures
Speaker 3: of evolution who represent the worst of our species and
Speaker 3: who are so stupid they can't tell the difference between
Speaker 3: their ass and a hole in the ground. We must
Speaker 3: constrain our language to constructive how to do it better
Speaker 3: and use phrasing that includes pros cons trade offs about
Speaker 3: various aspects of the rules proposed, but take a clear
Speaker 3: stance and offer solutions.
Speaker 1: Yes. And another thing that can be very helpful is
Speaker 1: use data and evidence wherever possible, use citations, use exact data.
Speaker 1: It is helpful to cite specific examples and sources to
Speaker 1: support your position and opinion when those are relevant and available.
Speaker 1: Not all things will be and that's okay, But like
Speaker 1: if you can try and include those, there are things
Speaker 1: that are going to just be concerns and they won't
Speaker 1: have citations, And like I said, that could be a
Speaker 1: totally valid way of presenting things. But where you can
Speaker 1: find some evidence and citations and support, use them. That
Speaker 1: will be helpful.
Speaker 3: Yes, And finally, be concise. It is more likely that
Speaker 3: your opinions will be read and considered if they are
Speaker 3: delivered in an efficient manner. Relatedly, avoid using jargoning acronyms.
Speaker 3: Speak simply and plainly, especially given the population that we're
Speaker 3: trying to talk to, And remember that these are very
Speaker 3: stupid people elected by very stupid people, and a vicious
Speaker 3: cycle of very stupid people doing stupid things causing more
Speaker 3: very stupid people to exist.
Speaker 2: Small simple words to get through to their p.
Speaker 3: Sized brains will be the most effective way to do this.
Speaker 3: So really clear, really concise. Maybe a way to say
Speaker 3: this subjectively is you should write this on a fourth
Speaker 3: to fifth grade reading level at best.
Speaker 1: At best, Yeah, like avoid multi syllabic words. Possibly, I
Speaker 1: think they allow for some attachments. If you have attachments,
Speaker 1: you might be able to include those. Maybe. I don't
Speaker 1: know that they necessarily encourage drawings, but they might understand
Speaker 1: them better because words are hard and they're dumb. Maybe
Speaker 1: don't do that. I don't want to discourage you, but
Speaker 1: I actually so. I included several here that are various
Speaker 1: agencies that have put forth some tips and guidelines for
Speaker 1: how to write public comment feedback to be maximally effective.
Speaker 1: Check those out. We essentially summarize those points here, just
Speaker 1: trying to if we're going to leave you with a
Speaker 1: call to action to leave public feedback, we also feel
Speaker 1: like it is helpful in retrospect to give you some
Speaker 1: support and guidance on how to do that in a
Speaker 1: way that your voice really can be heard. Because, like
Speaker 1: I said, this is not voting. It'd be nice if
Speaker 1: it was, but this is not voting. This is like
Speaker 1: they're just see, like, how are people responding to this?
Speaker 2: Right?
Speaker 1: Honestly, I'm at least happy that they gave us this
Speaker 1: option because it would not have surprised me at all
Speaker 1: if they didn't, and so let's tell them where they
Speaker 1: can stick it, but in very polite, professional ways.
Speaker 2: I agree, perfect all right.
Speaker 1: If you like to tell us your thoughts or try
Speaker 1: and send us something and have us critique it. I'm
Speaker 1: not sure how helpful will be, but if you want
Speaker 1: to send it to us, you can try and take
Speaker 1: a look. You can reach us at info at WWDWWD
Speaker 1: podcast dot com, or on the social media platforms. You
Speaker 1: can also just tell us about other things. Tell us
Speaker 1: your opinions, your thoughts. We like hearing those things. We
Speaker 1: also appreciate when you site your sources, but we're also
Speaker 1: happy to hear passionate things, and constructive criticism is also
Speaker 1: best for us. Otherwise, you can support us if you like.
Speaker 1: To support us by leaving us a rating and a
Speaker 1: review wherever you listen to podcasts like and make sure
Speaker 1: you subscribe to get future episodes and join us on Patreon.
Speaker 1: There we get bonus content, add free episodes early episodes,
Speaker 1: and I'll read your name and the list of supporters
Speaker 1: at the end of our full length discussions, which come
Speaker 1: out on Wednesdays. Thank you so much to my team
Speaker 1: of people. Thank you for recording with me today.
Speaker 2: Shane, Hey, anytime.
Speaker 1: Is there anything else that I missed that you'd like
Speaker 1: to add before we say O goodbyes?
Speaker 3: Stand up, speak out? I mean this is use your voice.
Speaker 3: You've got it, so use it.
Speaker 1: Yes, they made this available to us to comments on.
Speaker 1: Do use this platform. Please speak up, Please have your
Speaker 1: voice be heard. We need as many people as possible
Speaker 1: weighing in on this topic so we can hopefully avoid
Speaker 1: the bleakest future in the history of this country. So right, yes,
Speaker 1: thank you for listening to. This is Abraham, This is Shane.
Speaker 1: Why we Do what we Do? Mini is Out.
Speaker 2: Bye. You've been listening to Why We Do What We Do.
Speaker 3: You can learn more about this and other episodes by
Speaker 3: going to WWDWWD podcast dot com. Thanks for listening, and
Speaker 3: we hope you have an awesome day.