3 ms·
I can't help but regard some on the list with suspicion as being far more own fragile ego driven than any actual assholishness. More "you made the sociopath ang
by Nasrudith 7y ago
I can't help but regard some on the list with suspicion as being far more own fragile ego driven than any actual assholishness. More "you made the sociopath angry by not going along with his bullshit" ones which I see in the anti smart "jerks" one.
Some of them are unconditionally valid of course but the list includes questionable ones.
* Publicly calling out and blaming others
What if they actually are to blame or deserve to be called out? Putting it on the never list is a bad idea but it should probably be a last or N to last resort.
* Stirring shit and troublemaking
That is dangerously ambiguous as terms to include both in terms of what qualifies as stirring shit. If it is actually trying to rile people up fine but that exact phrase could be used for anyone who goes against the grain. Trying to stop bad practices which /will/ lead to literal disaster because "we have always done it that way" or reporting misconduct can also be called the exact same thing.
Related cluster
* Ignoring people trying to contribute
* Dismissing the opinions and ideas of others without discussion
* Undermining someone’s confidence for asking questions
There is one major problem with this sub-block. It never stops to ask if the "victim" is themselves massively wrong and doesn't get the hint that they are themselves negative in productivity and not even getting any learning out of it. To be frank the case where they aren't ignorant or even inept but an outright idiot who doesn't take a hint.
Like saying insisting the company should make their next car run on water and doesn't listen to why that is thermodynamically impossible (it would actually run on whatever substance it reacts with). While there are values to considering alternative approaches and departure from conventional wisdom willful ignorance isn't equal to actual expertise no matter how "polite" it may be to treat as such.
This may be where the you are never the asshole perception really creeps in - despite all of the talk about two way communications and feelings of others that the other party may be in the wrong and not "the asshole". It can look like every reference to the others is really just obfuscated grammar for myself to make the writer sound less self centered and like they have more support than theh really do.
- glangdale 7y agoI had a similar reaction. Haven't we all run into the opinionated junior who dominates a 10 person meeting and won't shut up, take advice, or focus on executing their job competently before chasing some "prestige project"? There are better and worse ways to deal with that person, but after a while, most merely human people will do things on this list rather than (for the nth time) gently explain that said junior needs to "pull their head in".
- dusklight 7y agoNo. Your response is the reasoning that every non-asshole makes as they get converted into an asshole because of their interactions with assholes. The response to someone being an asshole to you shouldn't be to be an asshole back to them. That is how assholes spread. It is possible to disagree without being an asshole. Just watch some videos of Obama responding to republican talking points for some examples.
- C4stor 7y agoYours is one of multiple comments defending "Publicly calling out and blaming others" as a valid occasional behaviour. In my experience, this has never produced any positive result for the companies I worked for. I don't mean people don't make mistakes, I mean that the punishment strategy of blaming them don't seem to me to have any positive effect when used. Then again, I'm not very experienced, so have you (or anyone else defending this) had any positive experience with that ? (on either end of the interaction)