I don't know about necessity, necessary or unnecessary. It's just a thing that is. I'm not saying be hostile. Granting advancement to somebody who exposed weak

I don't know about necessity, necessary or unnecessary. It's just a thing that is. I'm not saying be hostile. Granting advancement to somebody who exposed weakness over someone who didn't, if all other things are equal, would be even more of an act of hostility. That's not fair to the other person at all. And I'm not saying don't expose vulnerability. It's just, work isn't for that. We should all talk to friends and family about that (and I'm sure most of us do). You see this as an imposition on the people exposing their vulnerability, but demanding that managers suspend reason and ignore relevant data in their decision making is an imposition on them, and it's also just a bad way to run a company.