4 ms·

>I'm going to stay and fight and try to make whatever impact I can. Can you give me some examples of how you would fight? Boss comes in (or whoever more power

>I'm going to stay and fight and try to make whatever impact I can. Can you give me some examples of how you would fight? Boss comes in (or whoever more powerful than me, e.g. someone acting on the president's orders), says something with the gist of "Do this, or get fired". What are the next steps that I can take that won't get me fired, but also count as fighting back?

saulpw 1y ago
https://specificsuggestions.com/ https://specificsuggestions.com/
- ziddoap 1y ago
  "Hide perishable foods (fruit) in discreet locations of common areas" That's helpful for the conversation! Should I just keep clicking through this entire site until an answer related to my question appears? (It's a neat site, but... I'm not going to sit here playing go fish until an applicable one-liner appears)
  - dghlsakjg 1y ago
    This is what I got: Send people the http:// http:// version of links instead of https:// https:// I actually have no idea how this would disrupt anything.
    - linkregister 1y ago
      It would slow down the operation of the organization. In this case, it's counterproductive to the director's aims. The director's goal is to maximize grant funding; a functional bureaucracy is essential for that goal. There is nothing the director can do to increase the funding, which is being cut by an external source. The legality of the funding cut is unclear, but the director has no agency in the outcome of a legal challenge.
      - dghlsakjg 1y ago
        But how would sending the http link slow things down? Most link parsers, browsers, and sites will happily redirect you to available encrypted sites these days. And even when they don't this is extremely dangerous advice to give for people who aren't technical.
        linkregister 1y ago
        It's a silly novelty website. Maybe this no longer happens, but for a period of time, browsers would present a warning that the website was insecure. The user would need to switch to https by updating the address. It was inconvenient.
    - nonrandomstring 1y ago
      You total chaos machine! Give a wrong time. Stop a traffic line! I've mentioned it too often and sound like a stuck record, but Jaroslav Hasek's Svejk has it perfected [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Soldier_%C5%A0vejk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Soldier_%C5%A0vejk 11;rgb:0000/0000/0000
sathackr 1y ago
Comply but leak the truth to the media. Comply in a maximally obstructive way. Comply just enough to not get fired but not as much as someone who may be more inclined to please their boss. Enlist other opposition and find ways to multiply your obstructive compliance into other departments. There's tons of "how-to" guides on how to maliciously comply with work demands without getting fired.
- ziddoap 1y ago
  It's hard to "maliciously comply" or be obstructive to someone giving you 55% less budget. They just... give you less money. That's it. I guess you could slow down the firing process for a bit? That would be a minor obstruction for a short period of time. Then what? Anyways, "how-to" guides on malicious compliance probably don't tackle situations where an external team, acting on behalf of the president, come into your workplace with unparalleled authority to do whatever they please.
  - angry_octet 1y ago
    Congress is the body that decides budget, not the President. Convince Congress and you will win budget, and legislative directives to accomplish specific tasks. Putting a man on the moon required Congress. People are now routinely absolving GOP Congress critters, when they are the actual decision makers.
    - ziddoap 1y ago
      I'm not sure how the NSF Director should/could by themselves convince congress to not do the funding cut, but sure.
      - wizzwizz4 1y ago
        Fred Rogers managed it with PBS. https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fredrogerssenatetestimonypbs.htm https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fredrogerssenatete... Then again, that was Mr Rogers.
      - 1y ago
AcerbicZero 1y ago
If you're in a hierarchical structure and someone higher up gives you an ultimatum, your choices are: comply, resist and face consequences, or find subversive, incremental ways to undermine it. None of those are cost-free. "Fighting" isn't about magic moves that keep everything safe. It's about choosing when and how to accept the risks. Expecting a fight with no threat to your position is cowardice disguised as pragmatism.
- ziddoap 1y ago
  >or find subversive, incremental ways to undermine it. I'm asking for concrete examples of what "subversive, incremental ways to undermine it" would be. You basically just reworded the vague suggestion of "fight back". What are some specific examples of what the NSF director could have done that are subversive, incremental ways to undermine the orders which ultimately came from the president?
  - groby_b 1y ago
    In labor circles, the "subversive, incremental ways" are known as "work to rule". You simply do as you're told. Orders are never completely without ambiguity, and the person giving the order has less direct experience with the subject than the person receiving the order. There's wiggle room. Concrete example: The order is "Do X". The person charged with executing it actually understands that the consequences will be that Y and Z (which the person giving the order cares about) will actually be on fire if you do X. In a functioning relationship, you speak up and say "Happy to do X, but here's what'll happen, maybe we should consider a different way to achieve your goals". If you're going the subversive route, you say "Sure thing. I'll get right on X. I'll overdeliver on it". Then you do X, and nudge it towards maximally bad impact on Y/Z. Followed by "Oh, who could've foreseen! Y and Z are in ruins! What would you like me to do, boss?"
  - snake42 1y ago
    Mire things down in bureaucracy. Try and make everything take substantially longer than it should. Throw up hurdles in the face of progress. "Forget" to do important steps in the process so that you have to re-do work. Implement things on the face of it that are correct, but that don't achieve the same result, etc.
tobias3 1y ago
Don't do it. Perhaps obfuscate and delay as much as possible that you are not actually doing it. Perhaps get fired. Then go to court for wrongful termination (this would depend on the order being unlawful)?
- ziddoap 1y ago
  You can't "not do" getting a budget cut. They just give you less money. I'm also not sure how to just... not fire people. Sure, you can delay it a week or two. Okay. Then what? Get fired for non-compliance? That seems about as effective of a tactic as quitting is.
anthomtb 1y ago
If you are a Reddit user r/MaliciousCompliance is full of stories* of people follow orders to the most exacting and absurd extent. Most of them are peon-level folks so I am not sure how those actions would map to a person in a position of real power. *fact vs embellished fact vs straight fiction is always questionable on Reddit.
- ziddoap 1y ago
  I do really enjoy that subreddit, but as you alluded to, I can't think of any stories that would be applicable to the NSF director & president (even if taking them all at face value rather than as writing exercises).
  - Vilian 1y ago
    They said to him to fire half of the people, fire everyone then
    - ziddoap 1y ago
      Keep in mind we are talking about real people. These people are supporting themselves (and likely families). Making thousands more people, above and beyond the mandated amount, lose their employment is not a good outcome. It isn't some management game on steam where we can make decisions like that without second thought.
ojbyrne 1y ago
I think 4 year olds know how to do that. Follow the exact letter of what they say, but doing everything else outside the bounds of "do this" the way you want to. I.e. "It's time for bed" means "I'm going to continue to play, just in my bed." "Go to sleep" means "Pretend to sleep for 5 minutes, then go back to playing." When confronted, say that you woke up after 5 minutes.
- ziddoap 1y ago
  What they said is "you get less money" and "fire half the people". One of those you can literally not do anything about. I'm not sure how to fire people but do it in the way is the way "I want to".

saulpw 1y ago

https://specificsuggestions.com/ https://specificsuggestions.com/

ziddoap 1y ago
"Hide perishable foods (fruit) in discreet locations of common areas" That's helpful for the conversation! Should I just keep clicking through this entire site until an answer related to my question appears? (It's a neat site, but... I'm not going to sit here playing go fish until an applicable one-liner appears)
- dghlsakjg 1y ago
  This is what I got: Send people the http:// http:// version of links instead of https:// https:// I actually have no idea how this would disrupt anything.
  - linkregister 1y ago
    It would slow down the operation of the organization. In this case, it's counterproductive to the director's aims. The director's goal is to maximize grant funding; a functional bureaucracy is essential for that goal. There is nothing the director can do to increase the funding, which is being cut by an external source. The legality of the funding cut is unclear, but the director has no agency in the outcome of a legal challenge.
    - dghlsakjg 1y ago
      But how would sending the http link slow things down? Most link parsers, browsers, and sites will happily redirect you to available encrypted sites these days. And even when they don't this is extremely dangerous advice to give for people who aren't technical.
      - linkregister 1y ago
        It's a silly novelty website. Maybe this no longer happens, but for a period of time, browsers would present a warning that the website was insecure. The user would need to switch to https by updating the address. It was inconvenient.
  - nonrandomstring 1y ago
    You total chaos machine! Give a wrong time. Stop a traffic line! I've mentioned it too often and sound like a stuck record, but Jaroslav Hasek's Svejk has it perfected [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Soldier_%C5%A0vejk https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Soldier_%C5%A0vejk 11;rgb:0000/0000/0000

sathackr 1y ago

Comply but leak the truth to the media. Comply in a maximally obstructive way. Comply just enough to not get fired but not as much as someone who may be more inclined to please their boss. Enlist other opposition and find ways to multiply your obstructive compliance into other departments. There's tons of "how-to" guides on how to maliciously comply with work demands without getting fired.

ziddoap 1y ago
It's hard to "maliciously comply" or be obstructive to someone giving you 55% less budget. They just... give you less money. That's it. I guess you could slow down the firing process for a bit? That would be a minor obstruction for a short period of time. Then what? Anyways, "how-to" guides on malicious compliance probably don't tackle situations where an external team, acting on behalf of the president, come into your workplace with unparalleled authority to do whatever they please.
- angry_octet 1y ago
  Congress is the body that decides budget, not the President. Convince Congress and you will win budget, and legislative directives to accomplish specific tasks. Putting a man on the moon required Congress. People are now routinely absolving GOP Congress critters, when they are the actual decision makers.
  - ziddoap 1y ago
    I'm not sure how the NSF Director should/could by themselves convince congress to not do the funding cut, but sure.
    - wizzwizz4 1y ago
      Fred Rogers managed it with PBS. https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fredrogerssenatetestimonypbs.htm https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/fredrogerssenatete... Then again, that was Mr Rogers.
    - 1y ago

AcerbicZero 1y ago

If you're in a hierarchical structure and someone higher up gives you an ultimatum, your choices are: comply, resist and face consequences, or find subversive, incremental ways to undermine it. None of those are cost-free. "Fighting" isn't about magic moves that keep everything safe. It's about choosing when and how to accept the risks. Expecting a fight with no threat to your position is cowardice disguised as pragmatism.

ziddoap 1y ago
>or find subversive, incremental ways to undermine it. I'm asking for concrete examples of what "subversive, incremental ways to undermine it" would be. You basically just reworded the vague suggestion of "fight back". What are some specific examples of what the NSF director could have done that are subversive, incremental ways to undermine the orders which ultimately came from the president?
- groby_b 1y ago
  In labor circles, the "subversive, incremental ways" are known as "work to rule". You simply do as you're told. Orders are never completely without ambiguity, and the person giving the order has less direct experience with the subject than the person receiving the order. There's wiggle room. Concrete example: The order is "Do X". The person charged with executing it actually understands that the consequences will be that Y and Z (which the person giving the order cares about) will actually be on fire if you do X. In a functioning relationship, you speak up and say "Happy to do X, but here's what'll happen, maybe we should consider a different way to achieve your goals". If you're going the subversive route, you say "Sure thing. I'll get right on X. I'll overdeliver on it". Then you do X, and nudge it towards maximally bad impact on Y/Z. Followed by "Oh, who could've foreseen! Y and Z are in ruins! What would you like me to do, boss?"
- snake42 1y ago
  Mire things down in bureaucracy. Try and make everything take substantially longer than it should. Throw up hurdles in the face of progress. "Forget" to do important steps in the process so that you have to re-do work. Implement things on the face of it that are correct, but that don't achieve the same result, etc.

tobias3 1y ago

Don't do it. Perhaps obfuscate and delay as much as possible that you are not actually doing it. Perhaps get fired. Then go to court for wrongful termination (this would depend on the order being unlawful)?

ziddoap 1y ago
You can't "not do" getting a budget cut. They just give you less money. I'm also not sure how to just... not fire people. Sure, you can delay it a week or two. Okay. Then what? Get fired for non-compliance? That seems about as effective of a tactic as quitting is.

anthomtb 1y ago

If you are a Reddit user r/MaliciousCompliance is full of stories* of people follow orders to the most exacting and absurd extent. Most of them are peon-level folks so I am not sure how those actions would map to a person in a position of real power. *fact vs embellished fact vs straight fiction is always questionable on Reddit.

ziddoap 1y ago
I do really enjoy that subreddit, but as you alluded to, I can't think of any stories that would be applicable to the NSF director & president (even if taking them all at face value rather than as writing exercises).
- Vilian 1y ago
  They said to him to fire half of the people, fire everyone then
  - ziddoap 1y ago
    Keep in mind we are talking about real people. These people are supporting themselves (and likely families). Making thousands more people, above and beyond the mandated amount, lose their employment is not a good outcome. It isn't some management game on steam where we can make decisions like that without second thought.

ojbyrne 1y ago

I think 4 year olds know how to do that. Follow the exact letter of what they say, but doing everything else outside the bounds of "do this" the way you want to. I.e. "It's time for bed" means "I'm going to continue to play, just in my bed." "Go to sleep" means "Pretend to sleep for 5 minutes, then go back to playing." When confronted, say that you woke up after 5 minutes.

ziddoap 1y ago
What they said is "you get less money" and "fire half the people". One of those you can literally not do anything about. I'm not sure how to fire people but do it in the way is the way "I want to".