3 ms·
Sorry for expressing it this way, but what's naive is thinking your colleague is loyal. It is much simpler to just consider that he hasn't found a situation to
by lordnacho 5y ago
Sorry for expressing it this way, but what's naive is thinking your colleague is loyal. It is much simpler to just consider that he hasn't found a situation to screw you and the rest of the team yet, and that when such a situation happens, there's a chance he will act accordingly.
To me he has simply been unmasked as someone who is doing whatever he is currently incentivized to do, rather than someone who respects agreements. When you respect agreements it means you stick to it even when the situation changes to make it less favorable. When people do this it makes a lot of things much easier, since agreements can be relied on.
If you've ever been screwed over in business, you'll find your partners go to all sorts of lengths to pretend they were within their legal rights, which are conveniently just next to their moral obligations.
- throwaway211116 5y agoWhat is even more naive is thinking there are no other colleagues "that they haven't found a situation to screw you and the rest of the team yet, and that when such a situation happens, there's a chance they will act accordingly". Just because you do not know whether someone cheated on their spouse does not mean they did or didn't or would or wouldn't. It means you don't know. And just because someone did or was willing to do something in one context does not mean they would do so in another different context, but they would probably do so in a similar context.
- lordnacho 5y agoThe point is you now have information on that one guy. You won't know who the other cheaters are, but you know this one.