It's sort of like this:

"When I describe East Coast vs West Coast culture to my friends I often say "The East Coast is kind but not nice, the West Coast is nice but not kind," and East Coasters immediately get it. West Coasters get mad."

[1] https://twitter.com/jordonaut/status/1352363163686068226

You mean people get mad when you imply they are kinda pleasant on the outside but don't have a good heart? Color me shocked!

Right. It seems to be a way for unkind people to explain they are actually kind, and that's more important.

I'm deeply confused, but it's not worth arguing about.

lol I live in East Coast (NYC) lol.

I see the two as quite different.

To me, "kind" implies taking time and effort for someone, investing in them. That might mean engaging in conflict with them, if that seems to be what they need.

"Nice," on the other hand, suggests to me being polite, delicate, and never making anyone uncomfortable.

Niceness makes no enemies and wins no friends. It benefits the nice one more than anyone else, and is principally a strategy for staying out of trouble.

Kindness costs the giver something, sometimes the risk of giving offense, sometimes their time, sometimes the loss of power and influence because of making an unpopular choice that helps someone who really needed it. It is principally a strategy for taking care of others.

That's how I see it, anyway. YMMV.

Okay, to me kind means the definition "having or showing a friendly, generous, and considerate nature."

I'm not familiar with what you're describing, but I saw another reply with a twitter thread explaining something similar to what you're proposing, so perhaps I'm just out of the loop.

I think what I'm describing might fit into the "generous, considerate" part of the definition you cite.

The senses I associate with the two words are probably more connotations than denotations, though.

You worded it perfectly.

Thanks. Glad I was able to help clarify.

Probably the people who proudly proclaim to "have no filter".