5 ms·
When two people strongly hold the opposite opinions on the same team, it can be a massive hassle for absolutely zero benefit. On teams, or in life in general,
by nitrogen 6y ago
When two people strongly hold the opposite opinions on the same team, it can be a massive hassle for absolutely zero benefit.
On teams, or in life in general, IMO when there is no consensus, or even an anti-consensus, the only rational global decision is not to make a global decision.
- kuang_eleven 6y agoI cannot disagree strongly enough, this is how you end up working on teams that are just disconnected, hostile fiefdoms. Solving an issue that is intractable via discussion is when you escalate. Probably to a tech lead, or even to a manager.
- nitrogen 6y agoMaybe we're talking about different kinds of issues. In the context of opinion-based disagreements (rather than matters of fact or evidence), an anti-consensus seems to indicate that there isn't (and can't be) one right answer. If one group imposes its will on another group, or appeals to the powers that be to do so on their behalf, the second group will definitely become hostile to the first. Thus, anything other than "agreeing to disagree" and moving on to areas where you do agree would just build more resentful, disconnected hostility.