There's also the opposite end, where people who randomly shout explicitives or argue in bad faith seek refuge in arguing that it's just Crocker's Rules.
I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
101–110 of 335 posts
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#102Everyone says that they value directness, and from what I can tell the vast majority of people actually don't. For example, I had a job interview a couple years ago where the interviewer showed up fifteen minutes late for a thirty minute interview. Eventually he did show up, and the interview proceeds more or less fine, and near the end he asks if I have any questions. I said "is it common to show up fifteen minutes…
"Everyone says that they value directness, and from what I can tell the vast majority of people actually don't."
Well sure, of course we do. We (or at least, a lot of the readers of this who live in a US and similar economic and social system) have learned that it is virtuous and correct to say we value directness. But that's where it stops; it's just a thing that is right to say. Part of the current social interaction protocol. It's then widely understood that many interactions should not be hyper-direct.
What you have observed - people saying they value directness and then not exhibiting it - is the expected behaviour. This isn't a bug.
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#103> I personally value directness, so when someone communicates with me in that way, it does influence how I perceive them, even subconsciously. I would also argue that this effect happens to most people, including those who aren’t aware of Crocker’s Rules or don’t particularly care about them.
When someone is overly direct with me I take it as them being upset or confrontational. So I suppose it does influence how I perceive them.
Honestly this is just indicative of a lack of social skills. The "social cushioning" actually has a purpose in that it provides context around the discussion so that neither party gets the wrong idea about the state of mind of the other person. The choice to either engage or not in social niceties is a way of communicating intent. The author complains about a lack of signal, but being completely direct excludes far more.
> Nobody reads "hope you had a great weekend" and thinks better of the person who wrote it, they probably just being trained to take you less seriously in the future, or at worse, if they're evil loving of Crocker's like myself, they just think about the couple of seconds of their life they will never get back.
Wtf? Some people do actually appreciate that if it's genuine. And it often is. I wish the cashier a good day, should I just stay silent and shove my money in their face in order to reduce the signal to noise ratio? Do these people socialise with others on a regular basis?
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should every incident report be written twice, once for normal people and once for the developmentally challenged then?
How do you figure that the author is “developmentally challenged”? It sounds to me like they are able to handle their insecurities in a more mature and emotionally balanced way than most others.
They wrote an entire article about how they hate when someone says they hope they had a nice weekend...
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#105Everyone says that they value directness, and from what I can tell the vast majority of people actually don't. For example, I had a job interview a couple years ago where the interviewer showed up fifteen minutes late for a thirty minute interview. Eventually he did show up, and the interview proceeds more or less fine, and near the end he asks if I have any questions. I said "is it common to show up fifteen minutes…
Calling that out to that persons face, in that moment, is also inappropriate and rude.
You can give that feedback some other time.
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#106I'm English and have been living in Finland for decades. This is a very Finnish thing in the workplace and I love it. Now and again we will get some new "foreign guy" and it reminds me that some cultures (not all) are following these over polite, social formatting rules. It's a bit annoying, but they eventually assimilate :P
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not going to pretend I'm great at reading social situations, but I think your approach in this story would have annoyed 99% of interviewers, even if they genuinely valued directness. If they'd asked for feedback on the interview process, then sure, they'd be a hypocrite if they claimed to value directness but got mad when you told them honestly that you were bothered by their lateness. But when they ask for quest…
Being annoyed is fine but I would argue that they should deal with it if they’re going to make me waste half the interview time sitting around. I’ll admit to a bit of douchiness on my end but I think they should have understood the snarkiness in this situation if they value directness.
Fair enough. I wasn't there and this probably depends a lot on your tone and general vibe, the dynamic between you and the interviewer up until then, and so on. I do think it's almost always a risky move, but I think I assumed too much and I apologise for that.
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#108This post is a poor exposition of Crocker’s Rules. Crocker’s Rules were a reaction to the avoidance of direct discussion of topics where some people treat the mere act of discussion in any capacity as offensive. Sacred cows and taboos for which there are social consequences even when asking honest questions. Crocker’s Rules, practically speaking, were a declaration that no good faith discussion was intrinsically offe…
I subscribe to the thesis of Death of the Author , that just because someone came up with something, it doesn't necessarily given them a permanent special privilege in its interpretation. Everybody can understand the work as they prefer, and if anything, the work takes on a life of its own in greater society and evolves together with it. (Hence the limits on the duration of copyright.) This is why many common idioms…
> "I could care less"
Do people really say this? Is it exclusive? I've only heard the inverse: "I couldn't care less".
Edit: genuine question. Please explain downvotes!
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#109This post is a poor exposition of Crocker’s Rules. Crocker’s Rules were a reaction to the avoidance of direct discussion of topics where some people treat the mere act of discussion in any capacity as offensive. Sacred cows and taboos for which there are social consequences even when asking honest questions. Crocker’s Rules, practically speaking, were a declaration that no good faith discussion was intrinsically offe…
I subscribe to the thesis of Death of the Author , that just because someone came up with something, it doesn't necessarily given them a permanent special privilege in its interpretation. Everybody can understand the work as they prefer, and if anything, the work takes on a life of its own in greater society and evolves together with it. (Hence the limits on the duration of copyright.) This is why many common idioms…
> the subject is the code/system/product/organisation, which has no feelings and hence can't be offended
This is like saying that telling someone their artwork sucks is not offensive because "the artwork has no feelings."
Re: I beg you to follow Crocker's Rules, even if you will be rude to me
#110Coming from a former production manager, communication takes style and you have to meet people where they are at. If they're at "Crocker's Rules," awesome! That takes 25 to 50% of the work out of the writing. They could be at "my best work was just trashed and I'm ready to quit," to which you could slow your roll and work through the crisis. Keep adding to your comm tools and you won't need one-size-fits-all theories.