>I learnt about I-messages about 10 years ago in a seminar on conflict resolution and have tried to use them eversince. My personal impression is that they have really helped me - in solving conflicts, but also in growing as a person. Because, again purely subjective, my impression is that once you give others your I-messages, they are more likely to also respond with I-messages. Which again helps me to understand others and their needs better.
I've also found the pattern:
You have [Problem]. Lots of people feel [how you feel] about [Problem]. If I did [X] would it solve [Problem]?
To be helpful in every relationship:
"I get that you're mad that I didn't take out the garbage. The kitchen stinks now and everyone hates that. Do you think it'd help if I added a reminder to my phone?"
My answer to that would be "I don't give a shit what you do, as long as you take out the garbage" and I would _still_ be mad at you (plus annoyed that you asked me for a solution to something that shouldn't be my problem in the first place).
If you read the book you'll notice that I-messages are a rough approximation of the tools. Sometimes I think this summary does more harm than good by presenting it without the richness of the book
1. I feel... (Insert feeling word) 2. when... (tell what caused the feeling). 3. I would like... (tell what you want to happen instead). (from [0])
I learnt about I-messages about 10 years ago in a seminar on conflict resolution and have tried to use them eversince. My personal impression is that they have really helped me - in solving conflicts, but also in growing as a person. Because, again purely subjective, my impression is that once you give others your I-messages, they are more likely to also respond with I-messages. Which again helps me to understand others and their needs better.
That said, NVC looks like a great addition, by making things more explicit with those four distinctions (observations vs. evaluations, etc.).
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-message