4 ms·
"Toxic people aren't worth the effort to keep them in, no matter how good their skilled contributions are. There can and should be a way to remove them." This
by Gwarzo 5y ago
"Toxic people aren't worth the effort to keep them in, no matter how good their skilled contributions are. There can and should be a way to remove them."
This is your utopian ideal - it is NOT indicative of the real world. Sometimes, there are horribly toxic people who are so competent and requisite to a project that their removal would cause immediate and irrecoverable failure.
You made your statement as matter of fact - it is absolutely wrong. There may be times, perhaps even a majority of times that you can simply remove a toxic person - but to state it as the hard rule without exceptions is wrong.
- ivraatiems 5y agoI'd call my statement an opinion, not a fact, but we can add an "In general," in front of what I said and note that there'll be exceptions from certain standpoints. I think those exceptions are very limited, though. There seems to be an implicit judgment here that the success of the project is usually more valuable than the well-being of the people who are helping to complete it, and in the vast majority cases of I disagree. Unless literal life and death are on the line, it's hard for me to see it as worth it. As an individual, my rule is pretty hard and fast and that's why I phrased it so definitively. I don't really care how much money is being offered to me or how cool or important the project is, and I don't really care how critical the person is to the project. If the choice is "allow the toxic person to be toxic or allow the project to fail," I'll vote with my feet and I'll leave.