Precision Deflection

Correcting minor wording differences in how someone paraphrased your position instead of addressing the underlying point or misunderstanding.

• "I said 'concerning' not 'problematic.'"
• "That's not what I said. I said X, not Y." (when X and Y mean roughly the same thing)
• "You're misquoting me. I said 'most' not 'all.'"

Why It's Unproductive

Fixates on exact phrasing rather than clarifying the actual idea or addressing why the other person understood it that way. Makes conversations feel adversarial over semantics when the substantive positions might be close. Often happens when someone feels their position is being distorted, but correcting the precise wording without explaining the meaningful difference just escalates the semantic dispute.

The Better Move

• "I think Racket is excellent. My point was more about Guile's specific weaknesses in [area]."
• "To clarify, I see Racket as further ahead in [specific way]. Here's what I meant..."
• "I can see how that read as dismissive. What I meant was..."
• "Fair paraphrase, though I'd add this nuance: [explain the distinction that matters]."

Why It's Better

Treats the paraphrase as an opportunity to clarify rather than a mistake to correct. Explains what you actually meant and why the distinction matters, which helps both of you understand each other better.

Example

OP: "Sounds like you're writing off Racket compared to Guile."

Antipattern reply: "I wrote that Guile 'greatly lags' Racket."

Better: "Actually the opposite - I think Racket is excellent, just more mature than Guile. Guile is catching up but still lags in tooling and libraries."