Legalist Mandela Effect
Social Contractual Literalists are the people default to what was specifically said (in an informal legalist way) against assumed ways, due to intuition, vague wording, or assumptions. Example:
"You said you'd come to my Halloween party?" "I did come by." "At 11pm when it was almost over." "I didn't say when."
This would be another old fight akin to ask-vs-guess culture, except people have bad memories and are usually unable to actually operate that way. The request might have been spelled out completely and that slipped the memory of a verbal conversation weeks ago.
In particular this might happen because if you are a friend of a SCL, you run into this frequently and have learned to account for legalism.
"No, I asked if you could be there by 8pm and you said yes."
and of course now things are confrontational instead of collegial and usually no satisfying resolution is reached.
I think what's going on is a sort of Mandela Effect. That effect works when the actual fact of the matter is something against pattern (like Berenstain) and your brain tried to be efficient by storing "example of pattern" instead of each actual letter.
The pattern is "someone requested something that usually has an implied reading and a explicit meaning, so save the pattern "they asked in the implied way"."
The pattern is "someone requested something that usually has an implied reading and a explicit meaning, so save the pattern "they asked in the implied way"."
Yeah I've had drama about this.





















