4 ms·

The No Asshole Rule

35 points by Bluestein 2y ago

Bluestein 2y ago
""The theme of this book is that workplace bullying worsens morale and productivity. To screen out the toxic staff, it suggests the "no asshole rule". The author insists upon use of the word asshole since other words such as bully or jerk "do not convey the same degree of awfulness".[6] In terms of using the word in the book's title, he said "There's an emotional reaction to a dirty title. You have a choice between being offensive and being ignored."" PS. I am sure there's an in-between somewhere, but, fair enough.-
- delichon 2y ago
  > You have a choice between being offensive and being ignored. The author of "The No Asshole Rule" explains the incentive to be an asshole and succumbs to it in the title to get more attention.
  - Nevermark 2y ago
    Using a lightly culturally offensive word, I.e. a rude word aimed at nobody, or at a group defined by the harm they cause, is not the same as using a serious socially offensive word, I.e. an abusive word aimed at, or including, innocent people. Such as “[insert deeply disrespectful term associated with systematic denegration, unfair treatment, hate or violence aimed at any group that includes people innocent of causing some systematic intentional harm to others]”. “Enshitification” is another rude word not aimed at anyone innocent, but whose unpleasantness memorably represents dramatically repellant and even harmful behavior.
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      (And, unfortunately, if I could - "enshitification" - a rather relevant concept nowadays ...)
    - mikrl 2y ago
      I think enshittification is removed enough from its root word to be acceptable. I’ve heard it said matter-of-fact-ly on podcasts which otherwise avoid blue language.
  - squircle 2y ago
    Well, there is being an asshole when immediately being understood is critical/important (i.e., we're cooking here, skip the niceties--I think this actually increases trust and honest communication) and then there is being an asshole because you're a cranky old fart who doesn't know any other way to communicate and/or enjoys exploiting others by making them uncomfortable.
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      This distinction, in fact, is made by the author by way of "temporary" and (so called) "certified" practitioners ...
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    Actually, the qualifications for Assholehood are very well defined, as - I guess - is part of the point. To wit: ""Their unpleasant behaviors were catalogued by Sutton as The Dirty Dozen:[9] Insults Personal space violation Unsolicited touching Threats Sarcasm Flames Humiliation Shaming Interruption Backbiting Glaring Snubbing
    - esperent 2y ago
      Flames?
      - Bluestein 2y ago
        (Apparently ...)
huhtenberg 2y ago
The tone of the article is way off as far as Wikipedia guidelines go. Reads more like a promo piece.
- squigz 2y ago
  It is, and others agree with you (and yet others disagree) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_No_Asshole_Rule#Proposing_Deletion_of_this_Article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_No_Asshole_Rule#Propo...
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    Interestingly, and - on that point - the Wikipedia page in question is itself linked to by a Wikipedia "essay" on one of the site's similar rules: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Asshole_John_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Asshole_John_rule Funny, I do not think the Wikipedia rule is very much related (or, at all) to the book's matter, but, there's that ...
    - squigz 2y ago
      To be fair, the author of that (opinion) essay is the one who added the reference, so I doubt anything sketchy is happening.
chuckadams 2y ago
I dunno, Steve Jobs was famously an asshole. Apple couldn't exist if every manager acted like him, but would it exist if he didn't? Tho unfortunately, that writes a blank check to all too many CEOs who think they're Steve Jobs when they're just an asshole. Shockingly, it's almost like a slogan on a book cover isn't enough.
- squigz 2y ago
  > Steve Jobs was famously an asshole. Apple couldn't exist if every manager acted like him, but would it exist if he didn't? Is there any reason to believe it wouldn't?
  - kortilla 2y ago
    Yes. That’s a completely different type of CEO. If he wasn’t an asshole he might have spent time with his daughter and maybe not came back to Apple at all when it was failing.
    - hliyan 2y ago
      And maybe we would have a more diverse ecosystem of mobile platforms and companies today, although nothing quite as fancy as Apple's. Perhaps we also won't have hundreds, if not thousands of founders mistreating their employees under the delusion that they are fashioning themselves after Steve Jobs.
      - chuckadams 2y ago
        Yes, I'm sure it would be all sunshine and rainbows without the Great Fruit Satan around. The point is the company as it is today probably wouldn't exist.
        squigz 2y ago
        The question is what evidence suggests that Jobs being an asshole led to Apple's success?
Frieren 2y ago
Companies are not natural environments. There is an obvious established hierarchy that is not decided by the group but imposed from the outside. > Does the person target people who are less powerful? I have seen too many times a big-boss talking how good someone is after receiving criticism: "How can X be doing bulling if X is so nice with me, the boss?". I cannot count how much money it costs to companies I have worked for to have unmotivated employees. It is bad for the company, it is bad for shareholders, is bad for employees, it is bad for society... but up in the hierarchy someone feels good about themselves for being assholes and getting away with it.
- Bluestein 2y ago
  > I cannot count how much money it costs to companies I have worked for to have unmotivated employees. I am sure it has been quantified by HR studies somewhere. I'd be interested to know.- > It is bad for the company, it is bad for shareholders, is bad for employees, it is bad for society... but up in the hierarchy someone feels good about themselves for being assholes and getting away with it. We need an AI-based "self-serving assholehood detector", at scale, parsing company traffic :)
- Bluestein 2y ago
  > Companies are not natural environments. Sure, as in "man made", but - just wanted to say - oodles can certainly be said (and, academically I am sure it has) about "natural" corporate environments (ie. environments arising from man made corporativism ...)
CharlieDigital 2y ago
On the topic of "interruption", I think that "it depends". Sam Bleckley wrote a really good essay on this behavior[0] that pretty much explains how my wife and I interact with each other. We interrupt each other constantly to move the conversation along faster and to express our current state of understanding. I have learned that this often comes across as "rude", but I feel like it's perhaps a difference of style between east coast (and maybe just NY/NJ) and the rest of the US. The Holy Creedo of The Church of Interruption: 1. Thou shalt interrupt when thou understand’st. 2. Thou shalt speak until I interrupt. 3. Thou shalt use physical cues to indicate when I ought continue talking. > “I’m talking about how you behave when we’re talking. When you understand whatever it is I’m trying to say, you don’t wait around for me to finish my sentence, you—” > “Interrupt. Sure. It’s the easiest way to make sure I understand what you mean.” > “That’s very insightful. You’re right; if you finish my statement in a way I agree with, I know that you understand. And, if I accept your summary, we both know you’ve got it. It’s very efficient.” [0] https://sambleckley.com/writing/church-of-interruption.html https://sambleckley.com/writing/church-of-interruption.html
- Bluestein 2y ago
  Must admit I thought the same thing on "interruption". It can be a "positive". Or, at least, it downright did not seem to me like it would warrant being put on such a list ... PS. Cue in, relevant (?) all the work nowaday's being done on conversational AI and "interruption".- PSS. It - indeed - could be "regional", definitely cultural.-
  - CharlieDigital 2y ago
    I think interruption comes in at least two modalities: 1. To stop the flow of conversation. This is definitely rude. A manager shutting you down, for example. 2. To facilitate the faster flow of conversation. This is The Church of Interruption; the point of the interrupt is to move the conversation to the next point with less waste. Some folks when they are speaking perceive these as one and the same, but they are actually quite different. In fact, to one who aligns with The Church of Interruption, drawing out a talking point feels rude -- as if the conversation partner were giving a speech and the rest of us are merely here to listen. My wife is Caucasian (Polish/Italian) and I'm Asian (Taiwanese) and definitely both of us fall into the latter. I think the high density of Italian, Indian, and Asian immigrants here in NY/NJ might have something to do with it as well!
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
wiremine 2y ago
I'm a CTO, and this is one of my cardinal rules: no assholes. We hire by it, and we fire by it. I took me a while to become such a firm believer, but here's what I've learned: 1. The true, genius level assholes are very few and far between. If you do find one, isolate them from your broader team, and ideally put them on contract. They are going to build you a great organization. The corollary of this: if you're an asshole, you likely aren't a genius. So stop acting like one. 2. Most assholes don't actually create anything great, they just look like they do. Strong opinions and blistering personalities tend to hide a crappy work product. 3. You'll learn there are enough nice people out there that you don't need to settle for crappy behavior. It can take time to find capable, nice people, but it's worth the effort. Finally: there are naturally asshole people, and then there are people who have been around so much institutionalized asshole-ism they just look like assholes. Learning the difference is critical. (Edit, formatting)
- Bluestein 2y ago
  I hope you do not mind if I print this and post nail it to a wall. Several walls. All over the place.-
- ryandvm 2y ago
  Agreed. Assholes are bad for organizations, but sadly, it's a pretty effective strategy for the asshole. Over the years, I've observed that you basically need 2 out of the following 3 things to be successful in this world: * Luck * Skill * Propensity for violating social norms (be an asshole, be corrupt, etc.) I call it the "Asshole Razor".
- wakawaka28 2y ago
  Genius assholes are rare but so are geniuses. I think the odds of a genius being an asshole are higher than a below-average person being an asshole. I also think asshole behavior is a subjective label in many cases. If your culture is not compatible with someone else's, they might be averse to you for no reason and assume you're an asshole, and then any minor encounter can turn into a dispute. Other people are so used to conformity that if you disagree with them, they'll shun you or else shout you down.
bloomingeek 2y ago
The worst is when an asshole is promoted. A supervisor job was offered to a co-worker who was groomed for the job for three years, when the time for promotion arrived, he declined because the money wasn't right for him. Management panicked and promoted an asshole who even they didn't want! Over the next five plus years this asshole screwed up almost everything he touched. Many logical complaints to upper management and HR were lodged, with no action taken, he always flew just below the "fire" threshold. The management team who promoted him (it was revealed later after the asshole left) wouldn't remove him because of how it would have reflected on them!
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- lurking15 2y ago
  > wouldn't remove him because of how it would have reflected on the them! I hate having to witness this at work where there's a team who's been working on a shitty project FOR YEARS and then it gets standardized across the company seemingly out of sunk cost fallacy and ass-covering of the people running it. Meanwhile there was an competing implementation done ahead of schedule and technically excellent, got canned.

35 points by Bluestein 2y ago

""The theme of this book is that workplace bullying worsens morale and productivity. To screen out the toxic staff, it suggests the "no asshole rule". The author insists upon use of the word asshole since other words such as bully or jerk "do not convey the same degree of awfulness".[6] In terms of using the word in the book's title, he said "There's an emotional reaction to a dirty title. You have a choice between being offensive and being ignored."" PS. I am sure there's an in-between somewhere, but, fair enough.-

delichon 2y ago
> You have a choice between being offensive and being ignored. The author of "The No Asshole Rule" explains the incentive to be an asshole and succumbs to it in the title to get more attention.
- Nevermark 2y ago
  Using a lightly culturally offensive word, I.e. a rude word aimed at nobody, or at a group defined by the harm they cause, is not the same as using a serious socially offensive word, I.e. an abusive word aimed at, or including, innocent people. Such as “[insert deeply disrespectful term associated with systematic denegration, unfair treatment, hate or violence aimed at any group that includes people innocent of causing some systematic intentional harm to others]”. “Enshitification” is another rude word not aimed at anyone innocent, but whose unpleasantness memorably represents dramatically repellant and even harmful behavior.
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    (And, unfortunately, if I could - "enshitification" - a rather relevant concept nowadays ...)
  - mikrl 2y ago
    I think enshittification is removed enough from its root word to be acceptable. I’ve heard it said matter-of-fact-ly on podcasts which otherwise avoid blue language.
- squircle 2y ago
  Well, there is being an asshole when immediately being understood is critical/important (i.e., we're cooking here, skip the niceties--I think this actually increases trust and honest communication) and then there is being an asshole because you're a cranky old fart who doesn't know any other way to communicate and/or enjoys exploiting others by making them uncomfortable.
  - Bluestein 2y ago
    This distinction, in fact, is made by the author by way of "temporary" and (so called) "certified" practitioners ...
- Bluestein 2y ago
  Actually, the qualifications for Assholehood are very well defined, as - I guess - is part of the point. To wit: ""Their unpleasant behaviors were catalogued by Sutton as The Dirty Dozen:[9] Insults Personal space violation Unsolicited touching Threats Sarcasm Flames Humiliation Shaming Interruption Backbiting Glaring Snubbing
  - esperent 2y ago
    Flames?
    - Bluestein 2y ago
      (Apparently ...)

huhtenberg 2y ago

The tone of the article is way off as far as Wikipedia guidelines go. Reads more like a promo piece.

squigz 2y ago
It is, and others agree with you (and yet others disagree) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_No_Asshole_Rule#Proposing_Deletion_of_this_Article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_No_Asshole_Rule#Propo...
- Bluestein 2y ago
  Interestingly, and - on that point - the Wikipedia page in question is itself linked to by a Wikipedia "essay" on one of the site's similar rules: - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Asshole_John_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Asshole_John_rule Funny, I do not think the Wikipedia rule is very much related (or, at all) to the book's matter, but, there's that ...
  - squigz 2y ago
    To be fair, the author of that (opinion) essay is the one who added the reference, so I doubt anything sketchy is happening.

chuckadams 2y ago

I dunno, Steve Jobs was famously an asshole. Apple couldn't exist if every manager acted like him, but would it exist if he didn't? Tho unfortunately, that writes a blank check to all too many CEOs who think they're Steve Jobs when they're just an asshole. Shockingly, it's almost like a slogan on a book cover isn't enough.

squigz 2y ago
> Steve Jobs was famously an asshole. Apple couldn't exist if every manager acted like him, but would it exist if he didn't? Is there any reason to believe it wouldn't?
- kortilla 2y ago
  Yes. That’s a completely different type of CEO. If he wasn’t an asshole he might have spent time with his daughter and maybe not came back to Apple at all when it was failing.
  - hliyan 2y ago
    And maybe we would have a more diverse ecosystem of mobile platforms and companies today, although nothing quite as fancy as Apple's. Perhaps we also won't have hundreds, if not thousands of founders mistreating their employees under the delusion that they are fashioning themselves after Steve Jobs.
    - chuckadams 2y ago
      Yes, I'm sure it would be all sunshine and rainbows without the Great Fruit Satan around. The point is the company as it is today probably wouldn't exist.
      - squigz 2y ago
        The question is what evidence suggests that Jobs being an asshole led to Apple's success?

Frieren 2y ago

Companies are not natural environments. There is an obvious established hierarchy that is not decided by the group but imposed from the outside. > Does the person target people who are less powerful? I have seen too many times a big-boss talking how good someone is after receiving criticism: "How can X be doing bulling if X is so nice with me, the boss?". I cannot count how much money it costs to companies I have worked for to have unmotivated employees. It is bad for the company, it is bad for shareholders, is bad for employees, it is bad for society... but up in the hierarchy someone feels good about themselves for being assholes and getting away with it.

Bluestein 2y ago
> I cannot count how much money it costs to companies I have worked for to have unmotivated employees. I am sure it has been quantified by HR studies somewhere. I'd be interested to know.- > It is bad for the company, it is bad for shareholders, is bad for employees, it is bad for society... but up in the hierarchy someone feels good about themselves for being assholes and getting away with it. We need an AI-based "self-serving assholehood detector", at scale, parsing company traffic :)
Bluestein 2y ago
> Companies are not natural environments. Sure, as in "man made", but - just wanted to say - oodles can certainly be said (and, academically I am sure it has) about "natural" corporate environments (ie. environments arising from man made corporativism ...)

CharlieDigital 2y ago

On the topic of "interruption", I think that "it depends". Sam Bleckley wrote a really good essay on this behavior[0] that pretty much explains how my wife and I interact with each other. We interrupt each other constantly to move the conversation along faster and to express our current state of understanding. I have learned that this often comes across as "rude", but I feel like it's perhaps a difference of style between east coast (and maybe just NY/NJ) and the rest of the US. The Holy Creedo of The Church of Interruption: 1. Thou shalt interrupt when thou understand’st. 2. Thou shalt speak until I interrupt. 3. Thou shalt use physical cues to indicate when I ought continue talking. > “I’m talking about how you behave when we’re talking. When you understand whatever it is I’m trying to say, you don’t wait around for me to finish my sentence, you—” > “Interrupt. Sure. It’s the easiest way to make sure I understand what you mean.” > “That’s very insightful. You’re right; if you finish my statement in a way I agree with, I know that you understand. And, if I accept your summary, we both know you’ve got it. It’s very efficient.” [0] https://sambleckley.com/writing/church-of-interruption.html https://sambleckley.com/writing/church-of-interruption.html

Bluestein 2y ago
Must admit I thought the same thing on "interruption". It can be a "positive". Or, at least, it downright did not seem to me like it would warrant being put on such a list ... PS. Cue in, relevant (?) all the work nowaday's being done on conversational AI and "interruption".- PSS. It - indeed - could be "regional", definitely cultural.-
- CharlieDigital 2y ago
  I think interruption comes in at least two modalities: 1. To stop the flow of conversation. This is definitely rude. A manager shutting you down, for example. 2. To facilitate the faster flow of conversation. This is The Church of Interruption; the point of the interrupt is to move the conversation to the next point with less waste. Some folks when they are speaking perceive these as one and the same, but they are actually quite different. In fact, to one who aligns with The Church of Interruption, drawing out a talking point feels rude -- as if the conversation partner were giving a speech and the rest of us are merely here to listen. My wife is Caucasian (Polish/Italian) and I'm Asian (Taiwanese) and definitely both of us fall into the latter. I think the high density of Italian, Indian, and Asian immigrants here in NY/NJ might have something to do with it as well!

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

wiremine 2y ago

I'm a CTO, and this is one of my cardinal rules: no assholes. We hire by it, and we fire by it. I took me a while to become such a firm believer, but here's what I've learned: 1. The true, genius level assholes are very few and far between. If you do find one, isolate them from your broader team, and ideally put them on contract. They are going to build you a great organization. The corollary of this: if you're an asshole, you likely aren't a genius. So stop acting like one. 2. Most assholes don't actually create anything great, they just look like they do. Strong opinions and blistering personalities tend to hide a crappy work product. 3. You'll learn there are enough nice people out there that you don't need to settle for crappy behavior. It can take time to find capable, nice people, but it's worth the effort. Finally: there are naturally asshole people, and then there are people who have been around so much institutionalized asshole-ism they just look like assholes. Learning the difference is critical. (Edit, formatting)

Bluestein 2y ago
I hope you do not mind if I print this and post nail it to a wall. Several walls. All over the place.-
ryandvm 2y ago
Agreed. Assholes are bad for organizations, but sadly, it's a pretty effective strategy for the asshole. Over the years, I've observed that you basically need 2 out of the following 3 things to be successful in this world: * Luck * Skill * Propensity for violating social norms (be an asshole, be corrupt, etc.) I call it the "Asshole Razor".
wakawaka28 2y ago
Genius assholes are rare but so are geniuses. I think the odds of a genius being an asshole are higher than a below-average person being an asshole. I also think asshole behavior is a subjective label in many cases. If your culture is not compatible with someone else's, they might be averse to you for no reason and assume you're an asshole, and then any minor encounter can turn into a dispute. Other people are so used to conformity that if you disagree with them, they'll shun you or else shout you down.

bloomingeek 2y ago

The worst is when an asshole is promoted. A supervisor job was offered to a co-worker who was groomed for the job for three years, when the time for promotion arrived, he declined because the money wasn't right for him. Management panicked and promoted an asshole who even they didn't want! Over the next five plus years this asshole screwed up almost everything he touched. Many logical complaints to upper management and HR were lodged, with no action taken, he always flew just below the "fire" threshold. The management team who promoted him (it was revealed later after the asshole left) wouldn't remove him because of how it would have reflected on them!

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lurking15 2y ago
> wouldn't remove him because of how it would have reflected on the them! I hate having to witness this at work where there's a team who's been working on a shitty project FOR YEARS and then it gets standardized across the company seemingly out of sunk cost fallacy and ass-covering of the people running it. Meanwhile there was an competing implementation done ahead of schedule and technically excellent, got canned.