5 ms·

> Shop talk and banter are fairly universal. Any difference is going to be a target. Just that it's "universal" doesn't mean it has to be that way. For fucks s

> Shop talk and banter are fairly universal. Any difference is going to be a target. Just that it's "universal" doesn't mean it has to be that way. For fucks sake we all exchange 40 hours a week (or more) to our employers, on top of overtime and commute. There's no reason at all anyone should have to put up with unprofessional abusive/discriminatory bullshit from anyone, no matter if customers ("Karens") or coworkers. At least the young generation got the message, this time they have the numbers advantage to actually demand meaningful change, and we're seeing the first effects of it - particularly in the trades, that fail to attract new trainees despite pretty competitive wages. (The next thing I'd love to see on the chopping block is corporate politics, it's utterly amazing that everyone knows at least one horror story where endless amounts of money were wasted, sometimes entire companies sank because two middle manager paper pushers thought their fiefdom wars to be more important than the success of the company at large... but apparently investors/shareholders seem to not care even the tiniest bit)

stavros 2y ago
This is like someone telling a fish that there are people who live on land, and the fish saying "it doesn't have to be that way". Someone mentions a cultural difference between your group and another, and you say "the other group is wrong, my culture is right". Instead, what you could do is think about how this is a completely arbitrary thing that the two cultures just do differently, and that maybe people shouldn't be offended by friendly banter that isn't meant to offend.
- skinkestek 2y ago
  Someone with background from from the US military (OK, Ryan McBeth) recently commented something along the lines of: > everyone is picked on. If you don't get picked on that is reason for concern. By quoting this, do I mean to encourage bullying? No, as the kid that wasn't included during my first years of school, NO. But there is a difference between everyone calling each other names vs everyone calling someone names etc.
  - dghlsakjg 2y ago
    That’s the thing. The line is mighty fine between bullying and good natured ribbing, and has a lot to do with group dynamics. Edgy banter can bring a group together, but bullying can do far more damage.
  - edwbuck 2y ago
    I was in the US military. We all joked, in ways that probably shouldn't have been jokes, that we would "trip" on deployment to the "zone" causing trendily fire accidents for the least like members of our team. Being US military didn't make it right, we were effectively deciding who we would kill in an effort to make the team more cohesive. That never set right with me, and I still remember the joke (but maybe it's not a joke, joke) to this day. Don't look to the military as a model of good teamwork. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. One cannot pretend it's the right model to follow.
- scotty79 2y ago
  That's very reminiscent to arguments that western culture is just one of the possible cultures and is no better or worse than culture of pre-technological bushmen.
  - stavros 2y ago
    I agreed with you on the first bit, the second bit kind of ruins it for me.
    - scotty79 2y ago
      I'm not really arguing for or against anything. It just seems structurally similar.
      - stavros 2y ago
        Sure, in the way that "exercise benefits me, therefore I should do it" and "murder benefits me, therefore I should do it" are structurally similar.
        scotty79 2y ago
        Sure, to some approximation. Doesn't work for me because one involves unwanted interaction and the other does not. But if you said "chatting up people benefits me therefore I should do it" instead of exercise I'd agree 100% about structural similarity to the statement about murder.
flappyeagle 2y ago
Wishful thinking is not a strategy
- loa_in_ 2y ago
  You don't have to present a full strategy to discuss a problem. In my opinion a strategy is something to reach through discussion. Dismissing the discussion because of lack of results is counterproductive.
  - edwbuck 2y ago
    One doesn't have to present a successful strategy to illustrate why an unsuccessful strategy will fail.
- justinclift 2y ago
  Errr, it kind of is. Just not a very good one. ;)
WalterBright 2y ago
> apparently investors/shareholders seem to not care even the tiniest bit They rarely know anything about what middle management is doing. After all, if you own any stocks, do you know anything about the middle managers in that corporation?
- mschuster91 2y ago
  Guess why I'm out of the stocks game other than the occasional gamble of meme stonks. I'm German, we don't need it either way. The thing is, we allow corporations to become (way) too fat. When a corporation grows too big, it grows uncontrollable as well - once the complexity of any corporation grows so large that there is no way for any single person to understand at least the basic scopes of everything the corporation's parts do at the same time, all kind of auditing and oversight becomes a sham, no matter if internal (boards) or external (consultancies, auditors, regulatory agencies).
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    Large companies are needed to do large projects. > When a corporation grows too big, it grows uncontrollable as well True, which is why corporations eventually fail. BTW, governments also grow too big and become uncontrollable.
WalterBright 2y ago
For a funny take on this, see the movie "Gran Torino", where two people excoriate each other viciously, until we the audience discover that they are actually two close friends. Sadly, in our modern world people are not only looking for things to be offended about, but are looking to be offended on behalf of other people.
- wwweston 2y ago
  Yes, if only we could aspire to ideals -- no doubt better modeled in some golden past far far from modernity -- where more "close friends" excoriate each other viciously, obviously that's perfectly healthy and nobody could possibly have any reasonable basis for preferring something else. > only looking for things to be offended about, but are looking to be offended on behalf of other people. It's one thing if you or someone else personally enjoys some recreational conversational sadomasochism with the right partner, likely you can even persuade people to accommodate you with talk like that. But the idea that there can't be genuine offense, only motivated offense attributed to some handwavy goal is clearly more projective pretense than anything like actual insight.

stavros 2y ago

This is like someone telling a fish that there are people who live on land, and the fish saying "it doesn't have to be that way". Someone mentions a cultural difference between your group and another, and you say "the other group is wrong, my culture is right". Instead, what you could do is think about how this is a completely arbitrary thing that the two cultures just do differently, and that maybe people shouldn't be offended by friendly banter that isn't meant to offend.

skinkestek 2y ago
Someone with background from from the US military (OK, Ryan McBeth) recently commented something along the lines of: > everyone is picked on. If you don't get picked on that is reason for concern. By quoting this, do I mean to encourage bullying? No, as the kid that wasn't included during my first years of school, NO. But there is a difference between everyone calling each other names vs everyone calling someone names etc.
- dghlsakjg 2y ago
  That’s the thing. The line is mighty fine between bullying and good natured ribbing, and has a lot to do with group dynamics. Edgy banter can bring a group together, but bullying can do far more damage.
- edwbuck 2y ago
  I was in the US military. We all joked, in ways that probably shouldn't have been jokes, that we would "trip" on deployment to the "zone" causing trendily fire accidents for the least like members of our team. Being US military didn't make it right, we were effectively deciding who we would kill in an effort to make the team more cohesive. That never set right with me, and I still remember the joke (but maybe it's not a joke, joke) to this day. Don't look to the military as a model of good teamwork. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't. One cannot pretend it's the right model to follow.
scotty79 2y ago
That's very reminiscent to arguments that western culture is just one of the possible cultures and is no better or worse than culture of pre-technological bushmen.
- stavros 2y ago
  I agreed with you on the first bit, the second bit kind of ruins it for me.
  - scotty79 2y ago
    I'm not really arguing for or against anything. It just seems structurally similar.
    - stavros 2y ago
      Sure, in the way that "exercise benefits me, therefore I should do it" and "murder benefits me, therefore I should do it" are structurally similar.
      - scotty79 2y ago
        Sure, to some approximation. Doesn't work for me because one involves unwanted interaction and the other does not. But if you said "chatting up people benefits me therefore I should do it" instead of exercise I'd agree 100% about structural similarity to the statement about murder.

flappyeagle 2y ago

Wishful thinking is not a strategy

loa_in_ 2y ago
You don't have to present a full strategy to discuss a problem. In my opinion a strategy is something to reach through discussion. Dismissing the discussion because of lack of results is counterproductive.
- edwbuck 2y ago
  One doesn't have to present a successful strategy to illustrate why an unsuccessful strategy will fail.
justinclift 2y ago
Errr, it kind of is. Just not a very good one. ;)

WalterBright 2y ago

> apparently investors/shareholders seem to not care even the tiniest bit They rarely know anything about what middle management is doing. After all, if you own any stocks, do you know anything about the middle managers in that corporation?

mschuster91 2y ago
Guess why I'm out of the stocks game other than the occasional gamble of meme stonks. I'm German, we don't need it either way. The thing is, we allow corporations to become (way) too fat. When a corporation grows too big, it grows uncontrollable as well - once the complexity of any corporation grows so large that there is no way for any single person to understand at least the basic scopes of everything the corporation's parts do at the same time, all kind of auditing and oversight becomes a sham, no matter if internal (boards) or external (consultancies, auditors, regulatory agencies).
- WalterBright 2y ago
  Large companies are needed to do large projects. > When a corporation grows too big, it grows uncontrollable as well True, which is why corporations eventually fail. BTW, governments also grow too big and become uncontrollable.

WalterBright 2y ago

For a funny take on this, see the movie "Gran Torino", where two people excoriate each other viciously, until we the audience discover that they are actually two close friends. Sadly, in our modern world people are not only looking for things to be offended about, but are looking to be offended on behalf of other people.

wwweston 2y ago
Yes, if only we could aspire to ideals -- no doubt better modeled in some golden past far far from modernity -- where more "close friends" excoriate each other viciously, obviously that's perfectly healthy and nobody could possibly have any reasonable basis for preferring something else. > only looking for things to be offended about, but are looking to be offended on behalf of other people. It's one thing if you or someone else personally enjoys some recreational conversational sadomasochism with the right partner, likely you can even persuade people to accommodate you with talk like that. But the idea that there can't be genuine offense, only motivated offense attributed to some handwavy goal is clearly more projective pretense than anything like actual insight.