[freetime2]

Yup I have seen this technique used by someone who thought they were being tactful, but just came across as being totally patronizing and wasting a large amount of time.

Polite directness is best. Explain your position as clearly as possible, your reservations with the alternative, what it would take to change your mind, and actually be open to considering alternatives and changing your mind.

That being said, I think it is possible to be direct while also employing the socratic method.

[Brian_K_White]

Exactly. You can both state your reasoning AND ask a question that not only tries to lead someone else to your conclusion, but also allows them to rebut your conclusion with their own better one.

Assuming that that last doesn't exist is just insufferably patronizing asshole.

When I ask "what did I miss?" I'm really asking that.

Sure I know I've put a lot of time and thought into the topic (otherwise I'm not trying to state anything in the first place), and sure I may even be pretty sure I'm the authority in the immediate viscinity, but obviously anyone else from any background at any time on any topic may know something I don't know or have considered something I never considered, and may actually have an answer. In fact it happens all the time.

[riedel]

Totally agree. It can really feel passively aggressive to me if someone politely asks you to reflect. IMHO it is really important to be transparent. It is important for the opposite to understand also how important something is to you and why. I tend to really dislike people whose trained communication strategies you can observe, even it is something like nonviolent communication (whose underpinning I understand but am particularly bad at)