4 ms·

Am I supposed to come away thinking they're both reasonable interpretations which accurately critique the main argument in this article? Because that's what I

• imhelpingu 5y ago
  I pasted the current top comment for you since you seem to be having trouble finding it or reading it: >When I was at IBM 15 years ago, IBM was far from being a monopoly, since there were plenty of competitors in the hardware space (HP, Sun, Dell, etc) and in the software space (Oracle, SAP, etc.) and in the Services space (Accenture, PwC, KPMG, etc.) employees still had to complete annual legal training that was very similar to what was described in the post. >Any large company with half-way competent legal counsel is going to tell their employees not to say, "our goal is to crush our competitors, dominate the market, and hear the lamentation of their women." Instead they will tell their employees to focus on making life better for their customers. It's a much healthier way for product managers to focus, and what you might do if the goal is "crush/dominate the competition" is not the same than if the goal is delight the customer. So it's not just a messaging strategy to prevent embarassing e-mails from coming out at trial; it's a business strategy, too. Hope this helps.
  • mwint 5y ago
    Can you explain what you’re trying to say? I feel like I’m supposed to see something damning in these two paragraphs, but I’m not seeing it. Writing styles seem dissimilar enough that I don’t think they’re the same person, if that’s it.