That's also passive-aggrsssive.

"I have scheduled beginning $X on $Date. Documentation:... Please remit any feedback, please and thank you"

And in the second example, unrelated to the first scenario: "I had planned to begin $X on $Date, but priorities have shifted and $X is being tabled for now. Documentation:... Please remote any feedback, please and thank you."

Don't lie or whatever, or do. I don't, but none of this feels manipulative, you're just managing your time and workload.

I may have missed some nuance.

No matter how it’s formulated it looks exactly like the “opt-out” everyone on HN hates when it’s done to them. It’s effective so it’s great when it works for you not against you.

"opt-out" is just a tool and it can be used for both good and evil. Same as a for kitchen knife or a political appointment.

The key, as always, is in successfully answering the question (good or evil) "for whom". Everyone thinks they are on the right side of the story.

I think something like this to make sure they don't reject the idea:

Planning to move forward with X on $Date. Docs are here, but if you object, I totally understand and will respectfully accept your decision... though I'd hate for this to be one of those decisions that comes back to haunt you.

> though I'd hate for this to be one of those decisions that comes back to haunt you

I think this is guaranteed to set fire to any goodwill you have in your organisation

> - If I don’t hear back from you in [N] days, I am not going to do XYZ, considering you don't deem it to be important.

It's still needlessly confrontational. Why are you accusing someone of failing to understand the importance of something?

Ask yourself this: do you need someone else's input? If you do not need it, you do not need to ask questions. If you feel the need to request input then in the very least you need to reach out to them in a way you value their input.

I consider it an extension of, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."

This can work for or against you. If your goal is movement, then waiting at every step for a pedantic discussion with back and forth can kill entropy.

> I consider it an extension of, "it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission."

It's not. The key difference is that you're needlessly throwing blanket accusations towards other stakeholders. Is there a way to ask for forgiveness without throwing people under the bus?

Maybe they should get their shit together and get the fuck out from under the bus.

It also kills motivation.

The problem is that, sometimes, "no input" looks very much like "I have input, but I haven't had the time to give it", so you end up waiting for nothing. This way you put the responsibility on the other person, to say "please don't do this yet, I'll explain soon why not" instead of just staying silent.

> If I don’t hear back from you in [N] days, I am not going to do XYZ, considering you don't deem it to be important.

Sounds even more confrontational.

Yeah, let's soften it up:

> I'm going to proceed with XYZ in N days. If any of you fucking idiots have a problem with that, then scrawl it down in crayon and flush it down the jacks, which is where you'll end up if you dare question my decisions in future.

That is much, much better, because you dropped the passive part from passive aggressive which people hate the most.

Additionally, the person is clearly signalling s/he is capable of getting shit done, without being afraid of making the occasional mistake.

Though I’d tone down the swearing

English is not my first language and I have communication issues. Having said that you may be onto something unironically. Respectful conversations often pack more tensions than downright disrespectful approaches, such as the way "cabron" can be used affectionately in a group of Spanish friends.

> English is not my first language

In that case, the most likely mismatch between the language you provided and the responses you're getting is your use of the word "considering".

If you're using it to describe the state of mind you'll be in after you fail to receive a reply, that was a mistake. It is a common connective in English that explains the reason for something:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/considering

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/considering#Preposition (the preposition)

What this means is that the sentence "I will go ahead with changing X, considering you don't think it's important" is equivalent to "I've noticed that you don't think X is important, so I'm not looking for your input on my proposed change".

Learning a language well is a double-edged sword - if you look like you know what you're saying, and you make a mistake, people will assume you meant what you said. You can get away with really outrageous things if you come off as someone who can barely talk. But long after that point, there will still always be things that you never quite learned.

The issue with `considering you don't deem it to be important` is that the statement presumes a particular attitude for the recipient which may or may not be true.

Maybe they were sick for a couple days. Or were recently on vacation (and you haven't been notified yet). Or dealing with some higher priority emergency. Or just genuinely missed the email for some reason (accidentally sent to spam folder?)

Also even if it is true that the recipient thinks it is unimportant, it doesn't follow that the thing should be done. If somebody sends me an email asking me whether they should swallow bubblegum (or something on that level of trivial stupidity), I'd think they shouldn't -- but probably wouldn't bother to respond, or at least I wouldn't write a lengthy email explaining why not.

I'm not even joking, these days I often scroll through social media with a mild kind of twisted amusement watching people do and believe in stupid things -- while I can reply to each of them explaining why they're wrong, it's a well-known fallacy due to xkcd386. Coworkers are admittedly "closer" and thus I probably should warn them about potential hazards, but if it's a large org and I was just among a long list of cc-ed people... I might decide not to bother.

Don't forget to accidentally make a typo in "regards" so you sign off just calling them retards.

you're making a value judgement about people pre-emptively; this feels like a big mistake. I'd suggest you 1. explain what you want to do and why, 2. include relevant context, 3. how others can contribute and provide feedback. YOU may want to do something, but should be motivated by the US.

Every time you send a message like this it's a chance to convert someone to your cause. Don't waste it!

'considering you don't find it important' feels a bit too judgemental.

In such case why not just ask: 'Since [reason x] I propose to do y. Please let me know if I should proceed.

If they don't find it important enough to answer, you can just follow your own good judgement, backed with a papertrail.

Still personally I find all above tactics a bit pedantic and not enough to the point... often I just communicate what I am doing and what my next intended steps are, in standups and followup meetings. Or in-between, I just send mails with stakeholders in copy. I will hear it soon enough if someone does not find it a good idea or has a better idea.