3 ms·
Accusing interpretations of being "uncharitable" feels really odd when we're talking about communication training material. It's not some Slack thread taken out
by makeitdouble 5y ago
Accusing interpretations of being "uncharitable" feels really odd when we're talking about communication training material. It's not some Slack thread taken out of context, we're reading quotes from reviewed and crafted material.
Also I don't see how changing "Cut off competitors' access to target" to "Integrate target with Google" matches your idealistic view of "focus on our product; competition is good and okay".
They basically acknowledge competition will be crushed, and are asking for appropriate communication to avoid troubles. It makes sense from Google's point of view, but I don't see why we should be advocating for them in any way.
- ma2rten 5y agoI think you are reading something into it that is not necessarily there. The slides give examples of things that are appropriate to say and are not appropriate to say. It doesn't necessarily mean that one thing has to changed into the other.
- makeitdouble 5y agoThat "good vs bad" table doesn't work if the element on the same line don't refer to the same situations/behaviors. The examples above of reneging "Dominant" for "Successful" is a clear example of that.
- BiteCode_dev 5y agoJust like the 1984 party so the article is spot on.