8 ms·

My blood pressure increased just reading that and imagining myself on the receiving end. We don't post things like that here, pretty please. > "we don't do tha

by tasuki 4y ago

My blood pressure increased just reading that and imagining myself on the receiving end. We don't post things like that here, pretty please. > "we don't do that here" As a newcomer to wherever, given this treatment I'd feel excluded and somewhat upset. Who is "we"? Am I dealing with a homogeneous group and this person is speaking for all of them? Why don't they do "that"? Am I the only one that's different? > preferred way to say no: “that doesn’t work for me.” That... doesn't work for me? If you want to say no, just say no. If you want to say more, I'd be very grateful if you could tell me why not. I'm sure the magic phrases have made the author's professional career easier. Also I'm sure they made life worse for other people.

projectazorian 4y ago
Usually it's better to criticize in private and offer space for questions, but sometimes you need to shut down a behavior fast, eg. when someone is using offensive language around other employees. Saying "we don't do that here" is a great way to do that.
vinceguidry 4y ago
Author did specify that it's a last-resort option to be used when the energy or time for a deeper conversation wasn't available.
- dymk 4y ago
  They said no such thing, the opening example given was to whip out the phrase the moment the visitor said "gay", which then lead to an in-the-moment defensive fight. The later examples are the same, whipping out the phrase the moment the 'offender' does something the author doesn't like, and then doubling down on it when challenged.
  - axblount 4y ago
    Quote from the article: > When I’m able I’d much rather spend the time to educate someone about diversity and inclusion issues and see if I can change how they see the world a bit. But I don’t always have the time and energy to do that. And sometimes, even if I did have the time, the person involved doesn’t want to be educated.
    - dymk 4y ago
      And yet they jump straight to "We don't do that here" every time in the article.
  - corrral 4y ago
    > They said no such thing, > > In the world I want to live in, we don’t have to set negative rules like “don’t harass people.” Instead, we could get by with positive guidelines like “be welcoming” and “be kind” and use our giant human brains to figure out how to apply those values to novel situations. When I get the chance, I try to create those spaces. When I have the energy, I try to educate and inform instead of correct. But I still keep this simple phrase in my back pocket as a tool for ending and defusing situations when other approaches don’t work. The author did put it at the end, but it's definitely there.
    - pclmulqdq 4y ago
      This only means that the author is a bit of a hypocrite. If you say that something is a last resort, and your primary exemplar of its use is something trivial and common (the word "gay"), then that belies the fact that you just said that it was a last resort.
      - vinceguidry 4y ago
        Trivial and common? We run in very different social circles. The last time that's been common in my life was when I was in the military some 17 years ago. I would have the exact same reaction as the author if someone tried to reintroduce casual homophobia into my life.
        pclmulqdq 4y ago
        In my social circles, the homosexual men prefer to be called "gay" rather than anything else. Also, some of the black people prefer to be called "black" - two are not African and hate the term "African-American."
        moistly 4y ago
        I rather doubt that your homosexual friends support the use of “gay” as a pejorative, e.g. “that’s so gay.” Your argument is disingenuous; I hope it is not deliberate.
  - mcguire 4y ago
    "Said 'gay' as a pejorative, as was common in the early 2000s." In the HN guidelines, "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." "The college I attended was small and very LGBT friendly. One day someone came to visit and used the word “gay” as a pejorative, as was common in the early 2000s. A current student looked at the visitor and flatly said, “we don’t do that here.” The guest started getting defensive and explaining that they weren’t homophobic and didn’t mean anything by it. The student replied, “I’m sure that’s true, but all you need to know is we don’t do that here.” The interaction ended at that point, and everyone moved on to different topics. “We don’t do that here” was a polite but firm way to educate the newcomer about our culture."
tinalumfoil 4y ago
> It clearly and concisely sets a boundary, and also makes it easy to disengage with any possible rebuttals. This type of "because I told you so" style only works as a show of power, otherwise people would just continue do it somewhere else. I get the feeling this author spends more time talking down to people than up to them.
- guhidalg 4y ago
  Agreed, the author sounds like a boss who hasn’t learned how to deal with conflicts gracefully and instead uses a pre-written script that gives them unquestionable authority over the employee.
  - tinalumfoil 4y ago
    I don't think you need to be a boss or have unquestionable authority to use this style of language. It's like if a cop tells you to stop doing something at a traffic stop, because she tells you so. It's not that you think they're going to shoot you if you keep it up. But it's authority on the level of, I could make your immediate future very unpleasant if you don't do what I say.
    - indiv0 4y ago
      I'm having trouble parsing what you wrote. You say that you don't need to have unquestionable authority to use this style of language and then proceed to give an example of an unquestionable authority using this style of language.
      - guhidalg 4y ago
        I think I understood the point, and I'll give another example: your coworker (let's say you both report to the same boss) doesn't like the way you're talking to them and tells you "Hey indiv0, we don't say X here... we just don't say X here". If you choose to question the statement, you could cynically assume that the other person is going to use anything you say as evidence that you're not professional/are harassing them/make them feel uncomfortable against you. Better to just shut up rather than say something damming. I've been in a situation like this, and being on the receiving end of the "we don't do that here" is received as "shut up, do what I say, and don't question me".
Arainach 4y ago
Hard disagree. There is a vocal segment of the tech community that wants to understand and debate everything, and there's not enough time and energy to deal with them. It's like a 2 year old child who keeps asking "why?" There are some topics where an issue is a learning opportunity and a discussion can be had. Technical disagreements are a classic case. There are others that are so played out and hurtful that it's not worth it. I don't need to spend an hour giving a coworker an explanation of why their actions are hurtful. They just need to know that they are. If they're interested in getting better, they can go to their nearest search engine and read some history. If they're not, they can just know to keep their mouth shut next time.
- whatshisface 4y ago
  Assertion with no explanation works great right up until you are wrong. If you changed the situation slightly the person saying "we don't do that here" would sound awful. Turning the clock back a couple decades for example, "My pronouns are he/him." The authority figure, thinking that trans issues de-legitimize feminism: "We don't do that here." Or two decades before that: "My boss is harassing me, I'd like to complain." The authority figure, thinking that dealing with harassment claims is worse for team cohesion than taking them seriously: "We don't do that here."
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - ThePadawan 4y ago
    Both of the examples you mentioned seem to me like the best possible outcomes: The trans person or harassment victim immediately realize that the authority figure is untrustworthy and they have to escape or escalate. If the authority figure went on to publicly agree, but privately misgender the trans person, or to publicly agree to investigate the harassment while privately hiding the evidence, this would be far more hurtful and dangerous to the victims.
    - whatshisface 4y ago
TremendousJudge 4y ago
In a professional space, I find that getting that treatment is usually preferable to starting an argument on ethics. I'm just trying to get some work done, not really looking to illuminate my coworker's mind with my personal illusions of the world.
Minor49er 4y ago
We don't make these kinds of comments here
- tasuki 4y ago
  I got upvoted so apparently we do!
  - Minor49er 4y ago
    I got upvoted too, so that doesn't work for me
Kon-Peki 4y ago
> That... doesn't work for me? If you want to say no, just say no. If you want to say more, I'd be very grateful if you could tell me why not. I'm sure the magic phrases have made the author's professional career easier. Also I'm sure they made life worse for other people. Ugh. You know, a lot of people on the Autism spectrum get professional coaching so they can successfully navigate a workplace environment. Some people can't say no politely, or at all. Please don't make them collateral damage to your anger.
nicbou 4y ago
I think that it's a good way to uphold the unwritten rules of a community without making a big deal out of it. You don't need to be told why off-colour jokes are wrong, only that this is not the place for them.
radres 4y ago
I completely agree. This answer should be the last resort in situations just like mentioned in the article. But when the situation is completely different, if a new comer is a new grad joining the company and "that" behavior is just a mild disagreement, this wording should 100% be avoided and only should be used if you would like to cut ties with the person.
astrobe_ 4y ago
"We don't do that here" is a jewel of passive-aggressiveness. I clicked on the link hoping to find something related to "Not invented there", but ended up with a new way to issue heavy threats with small words.
- olsonjeffery 4y ago
  It's only a jewel because it's valuable. If you don't like the OP, then simply downvote and move on. Lot's of people in this thread find it valuable and are actually willing to say as much. They are even so gracious as to outline their argument for it's utility, in detail. Maybe you should read what they have to say and engage with that.
  - ok123456 4y ago
    It's not that valuable since it can be easily rebutted with "you do now."
  - swayvil 4y ago
    Now that was indeed a jewel. What it lacks in brevity it more than makes up for in depth. My hat off to you sir.
  - astrobe_ 4y ago
    > If you don't like the OP, then simply downvote and move on I never downvote because I "don't like", and so should you. > Lots of people in this thread find it valuable and are actually willing to say as much Being in a majority doesn't make you more right. Ironically, this is a part of the mindset some minorities had to fight against. > Maybe you should read what they have to say and engage with that I did, and other people have made some replies with which I agreed. Therefore, no point for me to repeat the same things.
- mcguire 4y ago
  How do you consider it threatening? As ineptech wrote, "This (and a lot of other related arguments in this thread) would probably be a lot clearer with less contentious examples, like "don't push a deploy after 4pm," than with hot-button political topics. If you go to push a deploy at quitting time and someone says "We don't do that here", you wouldn't think they're on a power trip, you'd think they don't fully trust their automation tests."
tomjen3 4y ago
The trouble with no is people will say why and try to guilt you into saying yes.
csours 4y ago
> My blood pressure increased just reading that and imagining myself on the receiving end. Sure. That's a normal response when you feel challenged. Technology has exposed people on a personal level to an unprecedented number of social groups. In the past, people talked to their neighbors and their kinfolk, because that was who was around. They didn't have to worry about what was happening in China or Russia or Wyoming or whatever. Now you are expected to have an opinion, and to have the righteous opinion of the group. I have to assume that we will learn how to deal with this impulse at some point in the future, but right now, we don't. You don't know how many times a topic has come up and been tabled in that group before you joined. Until we get past our self-righteousness phase on social media "we don't do that here" is perfect shorthand to shut down a destructive conversation. --- A note: please try not to over-interpret my comment. You don't know me. I do think it's important to actually hear the personal experience of others and defer judgement. That is not currently the norm on social media or with remote groups.
- tasuki 4y ago
  > [...] "we don't do that here" is perfect shorthand to shut down a destructive conversation Yes, it is also a perfect shorthand to shut down any other conversation. Its only purpose is to shut down the conversation. If you don't care about the other participants, and just want the conversation shut down, saying "we don't do that here" is great for you. > A note: please try not to over-interpret my comment. You don't know me. I attempted to see how your comment could be over-interpretted and haven't succeeded :)
  - csours 4y ago
    > Yes, it is also a perfect shorthand to shut down any other conversation. Its only purpose is to shut down the conversation. If you don't care about the other participants, and just want the conversation shut down, saying "we don't do that here" is great for you. Yes. It is a judgement call when to use it. The linked article talks about how to make that judgement.
thiht 4y ago
> Why don't they do "that"? If the phrase is used well, I think the person on the receiving end would just get it. If they defend themselves with « but I’m not [intolerant] », they know what’s up. Otherwise they’ll just ask « do what? »

by tasuki 4y ago

projectazorian 4y ago

Usually it's better to criticize in private and offer space for questions, but sometimes you need to shut down a behavior fast, eg. when someone is using offensive language around other employees. Saying "we don't do that here" is a great way to do that.

vinceguidry 4y ago

Author did specify that it's a last-resort option to be used when the energy or time for a deeper conversation wasn't available.

dymk 4y ago
They said no such thing, the opening example given was to whip out the phrase the moment the visitor said "gay", which then lead to an in-the-moment defensive fight. The later examples are the same, whipping out the phrase the moment the 'offender' does something the author doesn't like, and then doubling down on it when challenged.
- axblount 4y ago
  Quote from the article: > When I’m able I’d much rather spend the time to educate someone about diversity and inclusion issues and see if I can change how they see the world a bit. But I don’t always have the time and energy to do that. And sometimes, even if I did have the time, the person involved doesn’t want to be educated.
  - dymk 4y ago
    And yet they jump straight to "We don't do that here" every time in the article.
- corrral 4y ago
  > They said no such thing, > > In the world I want to live in, we don’t have to set negative rules like “don’t harass people.” Instead, we could get by with positive guidelines like “be welcoming” and “be kind” and use our giant human brains to figure out how to apply those values to novel situations. When I get the chance, I try to create those spaces. When I have the energy, I try to educate and inform instead of correct. But I still keep this simple phrase in my back pocket as a tool for ending and defusing situations when other approaches don’t work. The author did put it at the end, but it's definitely there.
  - pclmulqdq 4y ago
    This only means that the author is a bit of a hypocrite. If you say that something is a last resort, and your primary exemplar of its use is something trivial and common (the word "gay"), then that belies the fact that you just said that it was a last resort.
    - vinceguidry 4y ago
      Trivial and common? We run in very different social circles. The last time that's been common in my life was when I was in the military some 17 years ago. I would have the exact same reaction as the author if someone tried to reintroduce casual homophobia into my life.
      - pclmulqdq 4y ago
        In my social circles, the homosexual men prefer to be called "gay" rather than anything else. Also, some of the black people prefer to be called "black" - two are not African and hate the term "African-American."
        moistly 4y ago
        I rather doubt that your homosexual friends support the use of “gay” as a pejorative, e.g. “that’s so gay.” Your argument is disingenuous; I hope it is not deliberate.
- mcguire 4y ago
  "Said 'gay' as a pejorative, as was common in the early 2000s." In the HN guidelines, "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." "The college I attended was small and very LGBT friendly. One day someone came to visit and used the word “gay” as a pejorative, as was common in the early 2000s. A current student looked at the visitor and flatly said, “we don’t do that here.” The guest started getting defensive and explaining that they weren’t homophobic and didn’t mean anything by it. The student replied, “I’m sure that’s true, but all you need to know is we don’t do that here.” The interaction ended at that point, and everyone moved on to different topics. “We don’t do that here” was a polite but firm way to educate the newcomer about our culture."

tinalumfoil 4y ago

> It clearly and concisely sets a boundary, and also makes it easy to disengage with any possible rebuttals. This type of "because I told you so" style only works as a show of power, otherwise people would just continue do it somewhere else. I get the feeling this author spends more time talking down to people than up to them.

guhidalg 4y ago
Agreed, the author sounds like a boss who hasn’t learned how to deal with conflicts gracefully and instead uses a pre-written script that gives them unquestionable authority over the employee.
- tinalumfoil 4y ago
  I don't think you need to be a boss or have unquestionable authority to use this style of language. It's like if a cop tells you to stop doing something at a traffic stop, because she tells you so. It's not that you think they're going to shoot you if you keep it up. But it's authority on the level of, I could make your immediate future very unpleasant if you don't do what I say.
  - indiv0 4y ago
    I'm having trouble parsing what you wrote. You say that you don't need to have unquestionable authority to use this style of language and then proceed to give an example of an unquestionable authority using this style of language.
    - guhidalg 4y ago
      I think I understood the point, and I'll give another example: your coworker (let's say you both report to the same boss) doesn't like the way you're talking to them and tells you "Hey indiv0, we don't say X here... we just don't say X here". If you choose to question the statement, you could cynically assume that the other person is going to use anything you say as evidence that you're not professional/are harassing them/make them feel uncomfortable against you. Better to just shut up rather than say something damming. I've been in a situation like this, and being on the receiving end of the "we don't do that here" is received as "shut up, do what I say, and don't question me".

Arainach 4y ago

Hard disagree. There is a vocal segment of the tech community that wants to understand and debate everything, and there's not enough time and energy to deal with them. It's like a 2 year old child who keeps asking "why?" There are some topics where an issue is a learning opportunity and a discussion can be had. Technical disagreements are a classic case. There are others that are so played out and hurtful that it's not worth it. I don't need to spend an hour giving a coworker an explanation of why their actions are hurtful. They just need to know that they are. If they're interested in getting better, they can go to their nearest search engine and read some history. If they're not, they can just know to keep their mouth shut next time.

whatshisface 4y ago
Assertion with no explanation works great right up until you are wrong. If you changed the situation slightly the person saying "we don't do that here" would sound awful. Turning the clock back a couple decades for example, "My pronouns are he/him." The authority figure, thinking that trans issues de-legitimize feminism: "We don't do that here." Or two decades before that: "My boss is harassing me, I'd like to complain." The authority figure, thinking that dealing with harassment claims is worse for team cohesion than taking them seriously: "We don't do that here."
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ThePadawan 4y ago
  Both of the examples you mentioned seem to me like the best possible outcomes: The trans person or harassment victim immediately realize that the authority figure is untrustworthy and they have to escape or escalate. If the authority figure went on to publicly agree, but privately misgender the trans person, or to publicly agree to investigate the harassment while privately hiding the evidence, this would be far more hurtful and dangerous to the victims.
  - whatshisface 4y ago

TremendousJudge 4y ago

In a professional space, I find that getting that treatment is usually preferable to starting an argument on ethics. I'm just trying to get some work done, not really looking to illuminate my coworker's mind with my personal illusions of the world.

Minor49er 4y ago

We don't make these kinds of comments here

tasuki 4y ago
I got upvoted so apparently we do!
- Minor49er 4y ago
  I got upvoted too, so that doesn't work for me

Kon-Peki 4y ago

> That... doesn't work for me? If you want to say no, just say no. If you want to say more, I'd be very grateful if you could tell me why not. I'm sure the magic phrases have made the author's professional career easier. Also I'm sure they made life worse for other people. Ugh. You know, a lot of people on the Autism spectrum get professional coaching so they can successfully navigate a workplace environment. Some people can't say no politely, or at all. Please don't make them collateral damage to your anger.

nicbou 4y ago

I think that it's a good way to uphold the unwritten rules of a community without making a big deal out of it. You don't need to be told why off-colour jokes are wrong, only that this is not the place for them.

radres 4y ago

I completely agree. This answer should be the last resort in situations just like mentioned in the article. But when the situation is completely different, if a new comer is a new grad joining the company and "that" behavior is just a mild disagreement, this wording should 100% be avoided and only should be used if you would like to cut ties with the person.

astrobe_ 4y ago

"We don't do that here" is a jewel of passive-aggressiveness. I clicked on the link hoping to find something related to "Not invented there", but ended up with a new way to issue heavy threats with small words.

olsonjeffery 4y ago
It's only a jewel because it's valuable. If you don't like the OP, then simply downvote and move on. Lot's of people in this thread find it valuable and are actually willing to say as much. They are even so gracious as to outline their argument for it's utility, in detail. Maybe you should read what they have to say and engage with that.
- ok123456 4y ago
  It's not that valuable since it can be easily rebutted with "you do now."
- swayvil 4y ago
  Now that was indeed a jewel. What it lacks in brevity it more than makes up for in depth. My hat off to you sir.
- astrobe_ 4y ago
  > If you don't like the OP, then simply downvote and move on I never downvote because I "don't like", and so should you. > Lots of people in this thread find it valuable and are actually willing to say as much Being in a majority doesn't make you more right. Ironically, this is a part of the mindset some minorities had to fight against. > Maybe you should read what they have to say and engage with that I did, and other people have made some replies with which I agreed. Therefore, no point for me to repeat the same things.
mcguire 4y ago
How do you consider it threatening? As ineptech wrote, "This (and a lot of other related arguments in this thread) would probably be a lot clearer with less contentious examples, like "don't push a deploy after 4pm," than with hot-button political topics. If you go to push a deploy at quitting time and someone says "We don't do that here", you wouldn't think they're on a power trip, you'd think they don't fully trust their automation tests."

tomjen3 4y ago

The trouble with no is people will say why and try to guilt you into saying yes.

csours 4y ago

> My blood pressure increased just reading that and imagining myself on the receiving end. Sure. That's a normal response when you feel challenged. Technology has exposed people on a personal level to an unprecedented number of social groups. In the past, people talked to their neighbors and their kinfolk, because that was who was around. They didn't have to worry about what was happening in China or Russia or Wyoming or whatever. Now you are expected to have an opinion, and to have the righteous opinion of the group. I have to assume that we will learn how to deal with this impulse at some point in the future, but right now, we don't. You don't know how many times a topic has come up and been tabled in that group before you joined. Until we get past our self-righteousness phase on social media "we don't do that here" is perfect shorthand to shut down a destructive conversation. --- A note: please try not to over-interpret my comment. You don't know me. I do think it's important to actually hear the personal experience of others and defer judgement. That is not currently the norm on social media or with remote groups.

tasuki 4y ago
> [...] "we don't do that here" is perfect shorthand to shut down a destructive conversation Yes, it is also a perfect shorthand to shut down any other conversation. Its only purpose is to shut down the conversation. If you don't care about the other participants, and just want the conversation shut down, saying "we don't do that here" is great for you. > A note: please try not to over-interpret my comment. You don't know me. I attempted to see how your comment could be over-interpretted and haven't succeeded :)
- csours 4y ago
  > Yes, it is also a perfect shorthand to shut down any other conversation. Its only purpose is to shut down the conversation. If you don't care about the other participants, and just want the conversation shut down, saying "we don't do that here" is great for you. Yes. It is a judgement call when to use it. The linked article talks about how to make that judgement.

thiht 4y ago

> Why don't they do "that"? If the phrase is used well, I think the person on the receiving end would just get it. If they defend themselves with « but I’m not [intolerant] », they know what’s up. Otherwise they’ll just ask « do what? »