Consider this: I have a high emotional IQ and acutely understand whatever lesson you think you're imparting here, I just don't have the kind of bullshit budget required in this context.
Here's the obvious consequence that no one ever seems to get, even with having it explained to them: if I'm going to have to start dropping things on the floor and make some people unhappy, guess who I'm going to choose to be the recipient? All the people most responsible for squandering the resources that were available.
Your call, your problem, I've no stake in it either way. I don't need an answer here, although don't let me stop you if you feel the need. I'm just saying, is all, because the kind of analysis you're describing reminds me of the way I tend to get thinking when I'm too burned out to have realized yet how burned out I am.
Maybe I'm wrong to make the comparison, and in fact I kind of hope I am, because you sound like you're in a bad way.
Given that you felt the need to say that, you might want to reconsider whether your powers of self-diagnosis are as accurate as you previously thought.
> I just don't have the kind of bullshit budget required...
> ...if I'm going to have to start dropping things on the floor...
...then you've already failed. The goal is to never get to that point in the first place. Perhaps if you spent some of your "bullshit budget" sooner, it wouldn't have even occurred to you to make plans for throwing a tantrum.
Civility is incredibly cheap and has a multiplier effect on most other human resource metrics—such as productivity, enthusiasm and loyalty.
You're responding to an anonymous comment on a message board with zero IRL context. Consider your own ability to diagnose here.
Perversely, you are doing exactly the thing that the statement "Consider this: I have a high emotional IQ" is exhorting you not to do, which is to tunnel vision your way to one of the possible outcomes--the one where it isn't true--and then try to reflexively use it to justify the starting position that leads to that outcome. You are failing to consider the counterfactual.
I know. I said it. Why am I having to repeat this?
> what part of your description was condescending
What? I'm not saying my description was condescending. It is a description of your reply. It pinpoints what was condescending about that reply. You are "leaping at the opportunity" to explain "how to human". This is condescending. It would be like if I launched into an explanation about why it's a good idea to shower and maintain good hygiene, as if you needed to be told that body odor can be unpleasant for other people and might make them not want to be around you.