4 ms·
> Chesterton's fence Is there a "reverse" version of this where you do understand the reasoning, explain clearly why it doesn't apply anymore, but the other si
by mehrdadn 6y ago
> Chesterton's fence
Is there a "reverse" version of this where you do understand the reasoning, explain clearly why it doesn't apply anymore, but the other side just refuses to think for themselves and just sticks with the status quo because it must've been done with good reason and they don't want to second-guess it?
- noisy_boy 6y agoQuite often the other side is perfectly capable of thinking for themselves. They just don't want to lose their job on account of that one common-sense approval in case things go south. Self-preservation etc.
- yodelshady 6y agoI believe the phrase is "jobsworth", as in "more than my". The point of the article is that's kind of correct - the cost (risk) of deregulating is concentrated, but the benefit is distributed. There needs to be some way to capture the value-add of removing a rule. But if you do that the easiest way - turning the global metric of productivity into a target - then managers will asset strip, fire security (ahem, Mozilla), and walk off with a fat bonus (short-term productivity is up!) before people realise what's left is a the empty shell of a company. And that's why good management is hard.
- mehrdadn 6y agoLearned a new (British?) word today, thanks!
- anoncake 6y agoCargo-culting? At least it's similar.
- vharuck 6y agoAppeal to tradition: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition