"And then everybody clapped" This story could be true, but it smells so much like fabrication.
^ This guy gets it
Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
31–40 of 45 posts
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#32It’s not just about rudeness, nobody who buys thousands of laptops wants to deal with shitty support. If they try stuff like this and managements backs it up, you know there’s more like it in the future and it’s just not worth anyones time.
Better to just wait a few years until that probably outsourced support department has been dumped before you try again.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#33The service department will adapt by always talking nice, always promising to service the products but never send or perform anything that costs money.
When you finally reach the person in charge: - "sorry sir, but your request has been filtered by our revenue, cost and risk model, the model is automatic and I am unable to override it, would you please try making the request in another way" - "my request is totally legit, why does the model think it's risky?" - "sorry sir, the exact mechanism is confidential. I would recommend you proposing a solution that doesn't have substantial cost for us, or we can work together on this case for a win-win solution".
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would counter that if you are at a networking function with your customers that you should consider yourself the face of your company and act accordingly. I don't blame them for developing a dislike for Oracle after an Oracle representative mistreated them. Their whole purpose in being there was to put face time in with past and future customers and engender positive connections and they failed.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may h…
> Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler.
I get where you’re coming from, and in most cases there is a large amount of truth to this. But your statement, as absolutely as you have expressed it, is a bold claim and needs more backing up.
If people could simply choose to be free of sadness, depression, or anxiety, we would - we’d all just decide to be happy all the time. We have more agency over our feelings than we think, but still only some.
Perhaps you were making your statement with people of privilege in mind. People of privilege walk around with fewer open wounds, retain an accordingly larger capacity for resilience, and are much more able to take your advice to heart. However, it is also good of them to be mindful of their conduct for the sake of those who aren’t in that position.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may h…
> Taking offense is just as bad as offending Why would you think that? If I, entirely by my own choice, take offense then I've only hurt myself. Hurting yourself should always be far less bad than hurting someone else.
Taking offence can certainly be weaponised.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may h…
> Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. I get where you’re coming from, and in most cases there is a large amount of truth to this. But your statement, as absolutely as you have expressed it, is a bold claim and needs more backing up. If people could simply choose to be free of sa…
I've heard it described as going through life with a battery that isn't 100% even when it charges to 100%. It's accurate.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may h…
So if I call a Black person the N-word or address a Jewish person with an antisemitic slur, and this bothers them because it reminds them of how society has long dehumanised them and enslaved and murdered their peers simply for being born into that classification, etc, it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing? It may be the case that some of us can c…
> it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing?
Your comment is a loaded straw man, and you've confused being offensive and taking offense as a single event when it is two separate and distinct events. I never said anything about fault. I only referred to responsibility. Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own actions. Taking offense is an action. Even if an individual's emotional response is involuntary, that individual alone is responsible for their emotion.
I can tell you that being thin-skinned is just as much a symptom of mental illness as being offensive, and they usually go hand-in-hand: the most offensive individuals are usually also the most overly sensitive individuals.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if I call a Black person the N-word or address a Jewish person with an antisemitic slur, and this bothers them because it reminds them of how society has long dehumanised them and enslaved and murdered their peers simply for being born into that classification, etc, it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing? It may be the case that some of us can c…
I would say most theories are overly simplistic for classifying humans. However here are a few I've found helpful. 1. Your feelings typically say more about yourself than about another person. Use them for self reflection. 2. Feeling wronged when someone is an asshole is just. Learn to create boundaries and find ways to separate yourself from such people, both physically and emotionally. 3. Very few things are made b…
> Feeling wronged when someone is an asshole is just.
"When someone hurts you, be hurt."
This is not the way. Instead, be tough and say, nothing can hurt me.[1]
[1] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/stick...
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say two things were equally wrong in the OPs anecdote: one person was offensive, and one person was offended. While it seems just to entirely blame the offensive person, ego is a thing not good and taking offense is a choice. Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. One may h…
> Unless physically striking someone, it is not possible to hurt someone's feelings. Feelings are important, no doubt, but feelings are entirely the responsibility of the feeler. I get where you’re coming from, and in most cases there is a large amount of truth to this. But your statement, as absolutely as you have expressed it, is a bold claim and needs more backing up. If people could simply choose to be free of sa…
Agency really doesn't matter to responsibility. "I didn't mean to step on your foot." We are responsible even for our own involuntary actions.
Re: Go ahead, be rude. It will cost you $350k
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
So if I call a Black person the N-word or address a Jewish person with an antisemitic slur, and this bothers them because it reminds them of how society has long dehumanised them and enslaved and murdered their peers simply for being born into that classification, etc, it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing? It may be the case that some of us can c…
> it is as much their fault for not having a handle on their hormones as it is mine for having said that thing? Your comment is a loaded straw man, and you've confused being offensive and taking offense as a single event when it is two separate and distinct events. I never said anything about fault. I only referred to responsibility. Ultimately, we are each responsible for our own actions. Taking offense is an action…
[deleted]