I am serious. What do you think could possibly prevent this from working (other than insufficient skill to say good enough things)?
You say it's a strategy for obtaining misery and contempt. But it's not a strategy. It's just a fact. The strategy of attempting to get everyone to like you in this way is something different. That's hard and I didn't recommend it, I only said it is possible.
> What do you think could possibly prevent this from working?
One possibility springs to mind. What if someone was to comment on an article by PG, but without reading the article itself? Someone could say bad things about you without listening to what you have to say, you'd have no chance to change their mind.
Heh. Well if it's good enough then word will get around. One day all his friends will have read it, loved it, and told him to read it. Plus it would be all over TV and radio and culture in general, so it'd be hard to have a normal conversation while missing all the references to it.
What do you think could possibly prevent this from working
The people you're trying to please have contradictory opinions and desires. What you say to please Group A will strike Group B as an outrage! And if you try to remove everything potentially offensive to anybody, well, that will turn you into such a pandering namby-pamb that the whole world will find you annoying and want to poke you with a stick.
Edit: Just to be clear, I'm not saying one should go around offending people. I'm saying that trying to get everyone to like you is hopeless and that effort put into doing so will both warp and weaken you.
Other edit: just noticed that pchristensen already made the same point.
Pleasing two groups that start with contradictory opinions requires persuading at least one group to change it's mind. That's definitely possible because if they contradict then at least one of them is mistaken and would benefit from changing its mind.
Let's assume there exist two groups of people. The members of group A think that some improved product is better because it tastes great. The members of group B, on the other hand, believe that the same product is better because it's now less filling. Keeping in mind that the product is better because it both tastes great, and is less filling. Which group is mistaken? Which group would benefit from changing their minds?
Their ideas don't really contradict. But they think they do because, apparently, both sides have the mistaken view that a product has to be better for exactly one reason.
My example was obviously a gross simplification, but not all disagreement stems from contradiction. Worse, sometimes when people agree on many points they are in inreconcilable disagreement with each other on others. If we were to consider that both groups have held their position for many years, it should be immediately apparent that it would be impossible for either to change their mind. Time calcifies opinion.
You're right, though I think I would say "extremely difficult, tending toward impossible". People do not change their minds easily, especially on subjects they feel a strong emotional attachment to.
Oh my goodness. You're not serious, are you? This is a strategy for obtaining misery and contempt... and deserving it!