Differing sponsorship styles: I prefer a confrontational and interventionist style in the main

..on condition that the MOTIVE is correct. I.e: To be HELPFUL, as opposed to DOMINTE, CONTROL, BROWBEAT or PUNISH. If done correctly, it saves me a LOT of time. If NOT done correctly, it creates more problems than it solves, and is pretty much useless. In my opinion anyway.

Be as gentle as doves but as wise as serpents' is a good rule.
New people lie a lot. I have been lied to and it does help us to see our gullibility and idealism more clearly. Being taken in does leave on feeling betrayed. And that does not feel nice.

Hmm let me see. I am not a touchy feely nice guy when I deal with very new people. I am pretty tough. But for good reason. I refuse to open up wounds for examination until the 'patient' has the strength to look at them. So my tone alters dependent on their ability. The more 'well' they are the more compassionate the tone gets. Anyway. In the beginning they have virtually no tolerance at all for even the most superficial level of emotional honesty, so I keep it very light. Basically the more 'at risk' they are, the shorter the leash. The more 'tough' I get so to speak.

The upshot I frequently tell new people I think they are full of s**t , because they very often are. Its the truth and they know it so it does no harm. Anyway. If you are the 'kind, helping hand' version of helping, that is less interventionist in style and gives the unscrupulous person more leeway. Makes them a little less accountable.

Basically I let new people get away with very little. I'm not there saying 'there there, never mind, don't you worry' etc. its more along the lines of a series of very explicit instructions one after the other. I know it sounds crap, but you just have to take my word for it. Basically I'm very interventionist, very 'pulling people up on things', very action commands orientated. Its not speculation, not theory, not sympathy. Just a series of suggested actions.