Live data from Hacker News

Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

twitter.com

231–240 of 246 posts

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#231
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Instead I describe as clearly as possible symptoms, timing/frequency, possibly related changes, things I've tried and results I've gotten, etc. What do you do if after all this, they still keep circling the problem?

"Could it be X? I read in the Y that sometimes this happens with it" If you want to add authority pick Y = Newspaper. If you think the person will respond better to you placing yourself societally lower, say 'online' and weaken your statement with something like "but who knows how true that is" etc. The objective is to place the thought in their head but keep them believing they're putting the pieces together. You co…

Maybe I'm just internally resistant to appearing weak in interactions. I find that this never works for me. I always come off as patronizing and condescending, even when that is not my intention in any way. For me, at least, just being somewhat minimally competent and trying to self-service, then making that competence known and clear at the first contact seems to have the highest success rate.

I think what method works best really depends on your personality type. I agree that the goal is to ensure that you are making the interaction smooth by get the person you're asking for help what they need. But I also see asking for help as two different modes.

1. I'm asking for help because I am not empowered (access controls, specialty tools) to fix my own issue, but if I had been so empowered I could have resolved it on my own easily.

2. I'm asking for help because I don't know the solution, but I'm competent enough to narrow it to a particular trouble area.

In #2, I acknowledge outright, internally and externally, that because I am asking for help I have reached the limit of my competence. My request is inherently respectful, because I'm acknowledging the superior competence of the person(s) I'm asking for help from, but out of respect for their time I do my best to ask a good question and provide all the necessary details to make helping me a low friction event.

In the case of #1... often it's better to aggressively establish your own competence to get them to just do what you need done. Unfortunately in the world of large organizations and bureaucracy you will deal with a lot of incompetent people who are put in a position of some tiny fraction of power over you. You need to get them to exercise that power to your benefit, but you also need to not alienate them so they withhold it. People with only a small amount of power can be extraordinarily vindictive, so it's best to approach them with a measure of respect, but also clearly establish the boundaries of the interaction so you can proceed as quickly as possible and be on with your life.

I've worked roles in which I was in both situations on the other side of the table, but I had enough self-awareness to realize when I was the monkey in #1 and I did my best to be as efficient as possible and let people get on with it. In situation #2, I understand very deeply the frustration of having someone essentially toss something over the wall and in so doing show their disrespect for your competence and the value of your time. As always, you want to go through life without making other people feel badly, but taking a submissive pathway will not always work for you, especially if that is not in your nature.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#232
post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, once the customer threatened us with the note-taking act, we had to be extremely careful about anything that would admit fault, lest they try to use it against us later. That is hardly fair as the whole "this conversation may be recorded for training purposes" puts the caller on edge right from the start. Are they allowed to record the call too? Is that legal? Obviously, the caller should just record the c…

I once told Sprint customer support I had recorded a call after they had promised me something and not followed through. They apparently put a note on my account because every time I called customer support in the future they informed me that I was not allowed to record the call and made me verbally confirm I was not recording the call or they would hang up. But of course they were recording all the calls. It was rid…

I'm pretty sure that's not actually legal. It might even constitute breach of contract, depending on what your contract for services states with them. I am not a lawyer, but given your track record and this behavior, I'd highly advise you to stop being a Sprint customer. This behavior, if not illegal, is at least highly unethical.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Could it be X? I read in the Y that sometimes this happens with it" If you want to add authority pick Y = Newspaper. If you think the person will respond better to you placing yourself societally lower, say 'online' and weaken your statement with something like "but who knows how true that is" etc. The objective is to place the thought in their head but keep them believing they're putting the pieces together. You co…

Maybe I'm just internally resistant to appearing weak in interactions. I find that this never works for me. I always come off as patronizing and condescending, even when that is not my intention in any way. For me, at least, just being somewhat minimally competent and trying to self-service, then making that competence known and clear at the first contact seems to have the highest success rate. I think what method wo…

Perhaps it does depend on how well you can express a particular way. Probably best to handle it the way that works for oneself.

In the last fifteen years or so of adulthood, I've met few roadblocks. Perhaps I would take a different approach if that's what I saw.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#234
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please provide an example that is not divorce where this phrase applies.

The one in question in this thread is a good example. He spent his weekend with his kids.

Not at all. "It's my weekend with my kids" clearly conveys that he does not get to spend other weekends with his kids.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#235
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please provide an example that is not divorce where this phrase applies.

Someone can have kids without marrying the mother? There are also other edge cases, such as adoption, surrogacy, etc.

Good point about not having married the mother. I guess I should have said "custody or visitation rights issues".

However, the original point still applies. He does not suffer from these issues, and directly communicated that he did. That is a lie.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#236
post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one in question in this thread is a good example. He spent his weekend with his kids.

Not at all. "It's my weekend with my kids" clearly conveys that he does not get to spend other weekends with his kids.

Objectively, it does not: it implies that, but does not denote it. You are reading your own implicit assumptions about the statement as fact. He simply never said that.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#237
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not at all. "It's my weekend with my kids" clearly conveys that he does not get to spend other weekends with his kids.

Objectively, it does not: it implies that, but does not denote it. You are reading your own implicit assumptions about the statement as fact. He simply never said that.

The impetus is not on the listener to "read through" the deception, the impetus is on the speaker to not purposefully deceive.

Whether you deceive by purposefully implying a falsehood or by purposefully denoting a falsehood it is still a lie.

Seriously, how far are you willing to go in your attempts to justify lying? You are basically saying "If I define my lie this way, it isn't a lie"

It's far easier and better for all involved if you simply tell the truth.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#238
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lying by omission includes the failure to correct pre-existing misconceptions. By this logic, one can lie by remaining entirely silent. I don't buy it.

> One can lie by remaining entirely silent. Yup. An example would be listening to someone reach the wrong conclusion, and by staying silent and not correcting them, implying that they were correct.

Do you also find trolley problem non-lever-pullers to be murderers?

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#239
post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Objectively, it does not: it implies that, but does not denote it. You are reading your own implicit assumptions about the statement as fact. He simply never said that.

The impetus is not on the listener to "read through" the deception, the impetus is on the speaker to not purposefully deceive. Whether you deceive by purposefully implying a falsehood or by purposefully denoting a falsehood it is still a lie. Seriously, how far are you willing to go in your attempts to justify lying? You are basically saying "If I define my lie this way, it isn't a lie" It's far easier and better for…

At no point in the events described did he do anything other than “simply tell the truth”. The words he quoted himself as saying were factually accurate.

Re: Shibboleths that get you past the initial script stage

#240
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone can have kids without marrying the mother? There are also other edge cases, such as adoption, surrogacy, etc.

Good point about not having married the mother. I guess I should have said "custody or visitation rights issues". However, the original point still applies. He does not suffer from these issues, and directly communicated that he did. That is a lie.

> He does not suffer from these issues, and directly communicated that he did

At no point did he directly communicate anything about custody in his statement.

You are confusing implication with direct statements.

Post reply on HN