Re:The vanishing civility: The game of jerks, bozos and assh...
by grkvlt on Monday August 01, 2016 @10:12PM
(#12207444)
The point is more one of framing, not of tolerance to assholes. If you restate the 'no assholes' policy as a set of positive traits that are to be encouraged then the framing effect is to cause people to look for those desirable traits and emulate them. A 'no assholes' policy frames things in a way that makes people look for assholes, and causes them to think negatively about personality traits, in terms of not being something undesirable. Instead of 'calling out' people for being jerks, bozos and so on, the idea would be to talk instead about how they could become better at teamwork, interaction with others and so on. So rather than pigeonholing them as something undesirable, you show them they are on the start of a path that leads to improvement.
I think the impact of these subtle semantic changes can be surprisingly effective, especially because it is all happening at an almost unconscious level. I also think some of it can certainly come across as a little cringe-worthy and perhaps rather strained. Sort of like the trend of looking for something to praise about everyone, and awarding certificates for merely showing up when that is the only positive thing that can be found. But, everything can be taken too far I suppose...
Re:The vanishing civility: The game of jerks, bozos and assh...
by Natanael_L on Monday August 01, 2016 @08:35PM
(#12207138)
but maybe changing them is not the author's goal, but rather routing around them.
Something about your phrasing made me think of this;
Yes, but you can easily blow up the stack with all this recursion, since the real world doesn't have TCO.
>If one is inclined to call people jerks, bozos and assholes, perhaps one is not understanding people very well.
Well, some people legitimately and truly are "jerks, bozos and assholes" though, some even embrace the jerk ethos openly. If you're addressing them, it's fair game to call them that.
Except if your worry is that calling them that wont help them change but alienate them -- but maybe changing them is not the author's goal, but rather routing around them.
>When I see a company describe its “no assholes” rule, I see a company inclined toward calling people assholes.
That's not the bad thing though is it? The bad thing would be being an asshole, not calling out one. So, as long as the company doesn't do it to people undeserving the title...