3 ms·
IMHO you're taking it a bit too literally and seriously; I suggest interpreting it more loosely, ie "err on the side of assuming incompetence [given incompetenc
by chrisweekly 1y ago
IMHO you're taking it a bit too literally and seriously; I suggest interpreting it more loosely, ie "err on the side of assuming incompetence [given incompetence is rampant] and not malice [which is much rarer]." As a rule of thumb, it's a good one.
- makeitdouble 1y agoTo me the more problematic part is anchoring the discussion into rejecting a specific extreme (malice) when there will be a lot of behavior either milder, or neither incompetence nor malice. For instance is greed, opportunism or apathy malice ?
- chrisweekly 1y agoGood point. Basic self-interest is also as likely as incompetence. (shrug)
- ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago¿Por que no los dos?