null_dot
@null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
- Comment on card game shop 3 days ago:
That’s just not how interacting with humans works though.
Chances are there are several individuals who visit this shop with “offensive” hygiene.
The sign isn’t going to stop them coming in.
When you say “hey fuck off stinky”, they’re going to react badly. Pointing to the sign isn’t going to make them any less reactive or defensive.
The correct way to handle this is to pull them aside, tell them you really appreciate them visiting the store, they’re really into the hobby and a key part of the local scene or whatever, but last time they came in a few other customers mentioned their hygiene.
I totally understand that most people don’t want to have that second interaction, that’s fine.
My point is, in either approach the sign doesn’t help.
- Comment on card game shop 3 days ago:
Like most signs, this will be ignored by the people it’s intended for.
- Comment on 6 days ago:
continuity of the star trek universe
Actually I think this is a fairly low priority if you want to gather more viewers.
- Comment on Jesus hates American "Christians" 2 weeks ago:
Yeah so I was raised in a reasonably devout household, and I’ve never really been able to resolve this.
Its related to the fundamental attribution error - we judge others by their actions but ourselves by intentions. Except its more than that because religion creates this us vs them dynamic, where anyone who is “us” has good intentions, but anyone who is them does not.
Let’s suppose a “good” person is one who performs acts of altruism, has integrity, and a high level of emptiness self awareness.
In my experience these “good” people are a small part of any group. Any race, creed, city, social group, whatever.
With that in mind, I don’t think religion makes people good - rather its a system of beliefs that allows people to perceive themselves and their friends as good.
Really I think this explains why religion is so prevalent. Ultimately being “good” isn’t a very good gig. Imagine doing destitute because you’ve spent your life performing acts of altruism. OTOH if it merely allows one to form a cohesive group of “good” people, i can see how that would be perpetuated.
- Candace Owens: Australia’s high court backs minister’s decision to deny visa to US rightwingerwww.theguardian.com ↗Submitted 2 weeks ago to australianpolitics@aussie.zone | 4 comments
- Comment on Turning Point Australia moves into SA 2 weeks ago:
This shit is just embarrassing.
If you want to form a conservative organisation that’s fine, but surely you could… you know… make up your own name? It doesn’t even need to be a good name.
- Comment on Why aren't Linux based mobile OSes more popular? 2 weeks ago:
To extrapolate…
Phones are many and varied and while a manufacturer might assist google to ensure android is compatible they sure as shit aint helping any linux OS.
There is no gargantuan megacorporation funding linux OS development, and there is practically no revenue for the few small companies that do. This means the existing implementations are, not very well polished.
Because the UX is so terrible it’s just a non-starter for non-enthusiasts.
Because there are no users there are no app developers.
- Comment on Can a person who is a convicted felon/ rapist even get nominated for the Nobel Peace Price? Extra points if you can ELI5 that. 3 weeks ago:
Could he have done more than “encourage” RBG?
- Comment on Can a person who is a convicted felon/ rapist even get nominated for the Nobel Peace Price? Extra points if you can ELI5 that. 3 weeks ago:
They can and do take prizes off laureates if they go bad later.
- Comment on Can a person who is a convicted felon/ rapist even get nominated for the Nobel Peace Price? Extra points if you can ELI5 that. 3 weeks ago:
I think the point you might have missed is, a conviction shouldn’t exclude you from receiving a prize, because you may have been convicted by a corrupt court.
I’m not saying Trump was wrongly convicted, just that a conviction shouldn’t exclude you in and of itself.
- Comment on Be proud of your life choices 3 weeks ago:
Amazing.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 3 weeks ago:
immediately after writing Everyone lies in interviews).
As I explained in that comment, everyone lies in interviews, but you can still select the best candidates because some don’t understand what makes someone desirable.
You made this thread asking how to lie to c-suite.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 3 weeks ago:
Sure. It’s also what anyone who’s ever hired anyone would say.
- Comment on [deleted] 3 weeks ago:
Who knows what this guy really meant but we can probably infer some things.
He did not take the opportunity to say “You’re really amazing and interesting and smart and funny” or anything similar.
It’s also a weird thing to say.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 3 weeks ago:
Telling on myself ? Oh no, some kid on Lemmy thinks I’m too bourgeois.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 3 weeks ago:
You seem to be laboring under several misconceptions.
Firstly, that being a parasitic middle manager is somehow undesirable. It’s natural to dislike the people who are supervising you (but building some kind of ideology around that to justify your dislike is a bit cringe). However, as they progress through their lives most people want more money, more responsibility, more challenge, and with those things comes more authority.
Secondly, that anyone complaining about “parasitic middle managers” would actually refuse the opportunity to take such a role if they were able to do so.
I’m sure that “parasitic middle managers” do exist, but one feature of capitalism (which I’m sure you also despise) is that it’s very good at weeding out people that don’t produce any value. In the vast majority of cases, the parasitic middle managers you’re talking about are in fact well experienced and highly skilled professionals, who earned the role on merit because they can produce lots of value.
It’s the same way everyone that doesn’t own a home complains about landlords, but ultimately aspires to be one.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
Lol walk more dogs.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
That’s fair, but for this type of job management isn’t going to be asking you about your hopes and dreams.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
Everything you’ve said here is pretty much the opposite of your initial “minimum job requirements” comment.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
Everyone lies in interviews. However, a lot of people don’t understand what will make them desirable so they lie about the wrong thing.
Someone who understands the role enough to lie to make themselves seem desirable is better than someone who doesn’t.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
LOL. You sound like you’re ripe for restructure.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
I’m not assuming you’re an idiot, but I’m sure you agree that team members with some aspirations are better than those who like OP, tell you they’re only there for the money.
If you could choose, you surely wouldn’t choose the latter.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
I don’t really follow.
If you could select your own team from a large pool of employees, would you choose the person who said “I’m just here for the money and will do the bare minimum required per my role’s responsibilities”, or would you choose the person who said “I’m so passionate about whatever thing we do and I’m excited to be part of your team because I want to learn all I can from you”.
If you chose the first guy then you’re an idiot, sorry.
IDK why you’d tell that to team members honestly. It’s great that you want your team to be happy and relaxed and also great that you don’t want to take advantage of them. However, you need to balance that against helping them be the best they can be. Imagine joining a rowing team and your captain just saying “yeah so on this team we invest the minimum effort we can get away with while not sinking”.
If I looked back at the colleagues and supervisors that really received my best work and pushed me to be a little bit better than I really was … I didn’t like any of them at the time.
- Comment on what's a good answer to placate the c-suite if you're accused of lacking motivation and being unfriendly? 4 weeks ago:
The correct response is non-verbal. You have to demonstrate that you’re motivated and friendly.
Telling coworkers that you’re only there for the money is the corporate equivalent of telling your spouse you’re only with them because your asshole isn’t going to lick itself and you don’t have any better options right now.
Everyone goes to work to make money. You’re not special in this regard. No one would go if they weren’t getting paid. The real question is why you’re doing this job to earn money instead of doing some other job to earn money.
The correct answer is, “I’ve always been passionate about <fruit bats> and I dream of one day <farming fruit bats> so I’m starting out in this job <counting fruit> because <tangential relationship> and I’m looking forward to learning all I can from you guys.”
However, you need to walk this walk, saying the things isn’t enough.
I often find myself explaining this to new team members: things go so much easier if people like you. You don’t really have to be an especially likable person, just a little empathy, and avoid being a dick. It doesn’t take much to phrase things in such a way that people actually want to help you.
- Comment on Real easy 4 weeks ago:
Seal, seal, seal, seal, seal, seal.
- Comment on Missing banana for scale. 4 weeks ago:
Yeah nah.
I agree that its sloppy language but it would’ve been more descriptive in the 80s.
- Comment on Missing banana for scale. 4 weeks ago:
I just commented this somewhere else:
I think this photograph was taken in an era when the only technology available to make an image that looked like this was photography. At that time “not a real photograph” was the equivalent to the statement “a photograph of something which is not what it appears to be”.
- Comment on Missing banana for scale. 4 weeks ago:
I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic.
Sure but I think this photograph was taken in an era when the only technology available to make an image that looked like this was photography. At that time “not a real photograph” was the equivalent to the statement “a photograph of something which is not what it appears to be”.
- Comment on Missing banana for scale. 4 weeks ago:
I thinkbots a real photo of a recreation of the ape.
- Comment on Kindergarten forced to back down after proposing to charge parents $2,200 for their own children’s art 5 weeks ago:
Yeah. Nothing like solvency issues to drag out a bit of drama is there.
Sadly, everyone involved in this fiasco is at best underpaid but more likely a volunteer.