4 ms·

> it’s better to be liked than right. Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. That doesn't being a

> it’s better to be liked than right. Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. That doesn't being a dick to anyone I think is wrong. The whole point of telling someone that they're wrong is to correct course and fix things, and bullheaded, righteous, approaches never accomplish that. But it does mean you don't keep quite. You don't give up. You ask questions, you try to learn. Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one. I understand being unwilling to bulge to people that come in thinking they know better about everything. But I do not accept not even listening to someone that disagrees, that's a red flag,and I am out asap.

yucky 4y ago
Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one. Ironically, you are wrong. Not only are there better ways to let people know they're wrong when you're 100% right, but in your example you aren't even sure you're 100% right, yet telling others they're wrong. Good luck with that :)
- tonnydourado 4y ago
  What other way there is to tell someone that they are wrong then, well, telling them?
  - yucky 4y ago
    You said: "Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one." So which is it? Are they wrong for sure, or are you willing to learn that you may be the wrong one?
    - tonnydourado 4y ago
      Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. I always consider colloquial affirmations to carry an implicit degree of confidence, which is rarely 100%, and I often try to make that explicit by phrasing it like "I think that ...", etc. So, yeah, I don't see a conflict on thinking something is wrong, pointing it out, and arguing for change, and at the same time be open to be convinced that it wasn't, in fact, wrong.
      - yucky 4y ago
        Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. This is wrong. Words have meanings.
        tonnydourado 4y ago
        I'm sorry, I genuinely do not understand your point. If I think something you say is incorrect, and I say "Hey, I think this is not right. Not 100% sure, but I think it isn't", you're saying that this is not "saying that something is wrong"? English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance.
        yucky 4y ago
        English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance. Indeed you are, but had I known English was your 2nd language it would have made more sense and I probably wouldn't have even corrected you since your English is very good.
        tonnydourado 4y ago
        Can you elaborate what exactly is the nuance I missed?
        yucky 4y ago
        Wrong = not correct. Telling someone they are wrong, means you know for a fact that they are wrong. It does not mean you think they may be wrong. It is binary. You do not tell someone they are wrong if they may in fact not be wrong.
simplotek 4y ago
> Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. Why do you presume all outcomes of your eggregious interactions is placing blame on others? It seems you are totally oblivious to some of the most basic principles of working in a professional environment: if you antagonize and attack your team members, you are not trusted to help out and have their backs. This means you are not an asset but a liability. Working close to you is making them vulnerable to being stabbed in the back by you at the slightest issue. And that's why you are not liked, even if/when you are right. All the people can be right, but that doesn't justify you insisting on pissing on everyone else's cereals.
- tonnydourado 4y ago
  Maybe I'm not expressing myself well enough, but I'm not sure why you jumped from "telling someone they are wrong" to "antagonize and attack". I feel like you can almost always do the first without incurring in the second. I 100% agree that if you tell people they are wrong aggressively and arrogantly, that will backfire, and they are probably justified in ignoring your correction. But some people, and particularly some organizations, seem incapable of accepting even the most thoughtful correction, and that's the kind of place/people I'd rather keep a distance.

yucky 4y ago

Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one. Ironically, you are wrong. Not only are there better ways to let people know they're wrong when you're 100% right, but in your example you aren't even sure you're 100% right, yet telling others they're wrong. Good luck with that :)

tonnydourado 4y ago
What other way there is to tell someone that they are wrong then, well, telling them?
- yucky 4y ago
  You said: "Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one." So which is it? Are they wrong for sure, or are you willing to learn that you may be the wrong one?
  - tonnydourado 4y ago
    Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. I always consider colloquial affirmations to carry an implicit degree of confidence, which is rarely 100%, and I often try to make that explicit by phrasing it like "I think that ...", etc. So, yeah, I don't see a conflict on thinking something is wrong, pointing it out, and arguing for change, and at the same time be open to be convinced that it wasn't, in fact, wrong.
    - yucky 4y ago
      Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. This is wrong. Words have meanings.
      - tonnydourado 4y ago
        I'm sorry, I genuinely do not understand your point. If I think something you say is incorrect, and I say "Hey, I think this is not right. Not 100% sure, but I think it isn't", you're saying that this is not "saying that something is wrong"? English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance.
        yucky 4y ago
        English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance. Indeed you are, but had I known English was your 2nd language it would have made more sense and I probably wouldn't have even corrected you since your English is very good.
        tonnydourado 4y ago
        Can you elaborate what exactly is the nuance I missed?
        yucky 4y ago
        Wrong = not correct. Telling someone they are wrong, means you know for a fact that they are wrong. It does not mean you think they may be wrong. It is binary. You do not tell someone they are wrong if they may in fact not be wrong.

simplotek 4y ago

> Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. Why do you presume all outcomes of your eggregious interactions is placing blame on others? It seems you are totally oblivious to some of the most basic principles of working in a professional environment: if you antagonize and attack your team members, you are not trusted to help out and have their backs. This means you are not an asset but a liability. Working close to you is making them vulnerable to being stabbed in the back by you at the slightest issue. And that's why you are not liked, even if/when you are right. All the people can be right, but that doesn't justify you insisting on pissing on everyone else's cereals.

tonnydourado 4y ago
Maybe I'm not expressing myself well enough, but I'm not sure why you jumped from "telling someone they are wrong" to "antagonize and attack". I feel like you can almost always do the first without incurring in the second. I 100% agree that if you tell people they are wrong aggressively and arrogantly, that will backfire, and they are probably justified in ignoring your correction. But some people, and particularly some organizations, seem incapable of accepting even the most thoughtful correction, and that's the kind of place/people I'd rather keep a distance.