4 ms·

> That so feels like a mistake... Easy to test. 1. Send back the document he sent with a copy of your most recent edits and ask him to confirm if his document

> That so feels like a mistake... Easy to test. 1. Send back the document he sent with a copy of your most recent edits and ask him to confirm if his document is correct. 2. But, make note of at ONE error, and see if he fixes all of them. 3. If he only fixes only the one, then he's either really lazy or trying to keep up the deceit. 4. Repeat steps 1 to 3, be sure to CC everyone involved. If he's lazy he will be ashamed and be more careful. If he's a sneaky bastard he will most likely get angry. Not foolproof, but will sure make everyone aware of what is going on. (regardless of the motives)

lowdose 7y ago
You must have had your share of weasels during contract negotiations.
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  I have dealt with some horrible people over the years. It's incredible what they will do to get away with stuff. Standing your ground while maintaining a logical and rational approach is the only way to deal with them. Most of them like a fight, so you simply can't pick one with them.
  - mikekchar 7y ago
    Assuming there is an external person arbitrating (which is usually the case when dealing with internal politics at least -- one or two levels up from you), it's so important in these cases to stay reasonable. Virtually every single time, the person that likes to fight will cross the line in the hopes of goading you into a fight. But it's exactly at that time that you win. You send a very reasonable email to the arbitrating person saying, "I'm really trying my best to get this working, but I'm having trouble. Could you please give me a hand." Since the arbitrating person really would rather do nothing, they will look at the situation and say, "A is completely reasonable. B is not. B, you need to change." I remember one time where I was discussing a problem with a manager in another team. Every single email he sent, he CC'd the management 2 levels up. Every single email I sent, I sent directly to him only. My colleague was panicking. He felt that I needed to show my side of the story to upper management or else I would be in trouble. Eventually the management 2 levels up got frustrated: "Why am I getting all of these emails? Why can't you people sort out this problem yourself?" To which I reasonably replied, "I'm very sorry that you've been bothered, and I'm not sure why this person is being so difficult. Now that you are here, would you mind giving us a hand?" Problem solved.
    - RobertRoberts 7y ago
      You have a good point about CC'ing too many people. And that care should be taken when including others in a discussion that could affect their reputation. Thanks for pointing this out.
solaris00 7y ago
Why the indirectness? Is there a downside to directly confronting the lawyer?
- jacobush 7y ago
  You may never know. "Oh, my mistake. Sorry, I'll have the correct draft for you this afternoon."
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    Exactly this. I want to know and reveal motives (it's not foolproof) not just escape one incident. They are likely to repeat the attempt if they think they can get away with it on you.

lowdose 7y ago

You must have had your share of weasels during contract negotiations.

RobertRoberts 7y ago
I have dealt with some horrible people over the years. It's incredible what they will do to get away with stuff. Standing your ground while maintaining a logical and rational approach is the only way to deal with them. Most of them like a fight, so you simply can't pick one with them.
- mikekchar 7y ago
  Assuming there is an external person arbitrating (which is usually the case when dealing with internal politics at least -- one or two levels up from you), it's so important in these cases to stay reasonable. Virtually every single time, the person that likes to fight will cross the line in the hopes of goading you into a fight. But it's exactly at that time that you win. You send a very reasonable email to the arbitrating person saying, "I'm really trying my best to get this working, but I'm having trouble. Could you please give me a hand." Since the arbitrating person really would rather do nothing, they will look at the situation and say, "A is completely reasonable. B is not. B, you need to change." I remember one time where I was discussing a problem with a manager in another team. Every single email he sent, he CC'd the management 2 levels up. Every single email I sent, I sent directly to him only. My colleague was panicking. He felt that I needed to show my side of the story to upper management or else I would be in trouble. Eventually the management 2 levels up got frustrated: "Why am I getting all of these emails? Why can't you people sort out this problem yourself?" To which I reasonably replied, "I'm very sorry that you've been bothered, and I'm not sure why this person is being so difficult. Now that you are here, would you mind giving us a hand?" Problem solved.
  - RobertRoberts 7y ago
    You have a good point about CC'ing too many people. And that care should be taken when including others in a discussion that could affect their reputation. Thanks for pointing this out.

solaris00 7y ago

Why the indirectness? Is there a downside to directly confronting the lawyer?

jacobush 7y ago
You may never know. "Oh, my mistake. Sorry, I'll have the correct draft for you this afternoon."
- RobertRoberts 7y ago
  Exactly this. I want to know and reveal motives (it's not foolproof) not just escape one incident. They are likely to repeat the attempt if they think they can get away with it on you.