3 ms·
I would like to propose this crazy concept to you: appropriate reaction. Over-reaction is as damaging as under-reaction. Much like the cries of "standing idly
by sophacles 16y ago
I would like to propose this crazy concept to you: appropriate reaction.
Over-reaction is as damaging as under-reaction. Much like the cries of "standing idly by" that are thrust on under-reactors, over-reactors become "wolf criers", and when the situation actually warrants extreme action, people won't take it because they assume it is mere over-reaction.
I don't know why you would champion a crappy course of action, but I guess I know where not to get advice in the future.
- notahacker 16y agoWhilst I agree with the general point, I don't think the rapidly-backpedalling author of the linked blog post or many of us here are qualified to determine what the appropriate reaction is. Most of the reaction is simply a case of people with limited understanding of the relevant facts (either the current condition of the reactor or the underlying science) attempting to communicate to people with no understanding of the facts. I also suspect that well-orchestrated overprecaution and explanations of worst case scenarios are better for public safety than feeding them constant reassurances they don't believe and leaving them to get their sensationalism from demagogues
- sophacles 16y agoStrategically, I think it is also easier to recover from "a bit too far" in terms of over-reaction, since it can be written off as "better safe than sorry", however there is still a line and balancing act between "crying wolf" and "being extra careful".
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]