Sarah, frankly, I dislike much of the advice-giving on these boards. What what one person might call direct and blunt another person might receive as presumptuous and condescending. I dislike labeling, prescription, and invalidation. Not infrequently I feel a scornful, sanctimonious undertones in deliveries here.

I think advice should be delivered extremely sparingly, if at all. Instead one can talk modestly about one has met a parallel challenge. When someone "needs" to give advice, like the urge to scratch an itch, it probably shouldn't be delivered. We're guests in each other's backyards; and I think feedback should be an authentic, respectful gift for the recipient.

Most people change slowly at best, and I never found labels, accusations and scorn helpful no matter how Dr. Phil operates.

I assume recovery community members have occasions when blunt, straight talk is apt. I assume these are specific "contracts" the recovery community has to support each other in immediate, specific situations. It's a specific culture with specific challenges and emergencies.

I'm in the arts, and colleagues have specific ways to explore work. I conjecture our communication is quite different than in the recovery community. However, we still might have a gentle "honesty" that would be poorly received elsewhere in the world.

When someone has been habitually unpleasant with me, I don't give them feedback. I try to offer it only to people I like for the right reasons, not as a weapon.

If by chance you did miscalculate with someone, that's a universal event. No one walks through life with a perfect communication record. It doesn't make you awful.

In general though, I think it good to think about the receiver before offering "blunt," "straight" assessments of them or their actions. No one is an ultimate truth-teller, so I think advice, if given at all, should be delivered with great humbleness and grace.