[boundring]

"Not every battle is going to be a winning one, and understanding when to challenge a teammate and when to hold back is a skill that can only be developed with practice. The battles I’ve lost by not being prepared, the battles I’ve lost by picking on something trivial, and the battles I should have started—but didn’t—are what inspired this blog post."

"The more stressful a situation is, the more I find pragmatism is the best tool for improving the product and the team. What are your strategies for choosing when to push back and when to let it be?"

[jacquesm]

Think of it as a mindset. OP is still sketching things in these terms and has not moved beyond it. That is where the problem lies. Not in not being prepared, by arguing about something trivial or by battles that were not started but did not.

As soon as you start phrasing things in these terms everybody loses.

[boundring]

I'm starting to understand your position a little better.

You're against someone being open when they disagree with something, whether or not their position is valid?

That's a little ridiculous. Being Taoist in withdrawal from conflict is one thing, but being a responsible member of a group is another.

[jacquesm]

You keep putting words in my mouth, the parent comment is a classic strawman and I refuse to be drawn out into a debate at this level. Good luck.

[mixmastamyk]

My observer take is that you two (and perhaps others) seem to disagree on the definition of the word "disagreement" (haha).

Jacques appears to take a view that disagreement (or "picking battles") is tantamount to a fist fight, which obviously should be avoided. But, I think the OP and others discussing here rather think of of it as merely a difference of opinion, to be noted and moved past. In that sense, "avoiding disagreement" is not helpful because they are not noted, but buried.

[boundring]

What strawman?