[gentaro]

Not even a basic engineering fuckup. That's just an "I don't know what the hell I'm doing" fuckup.

[Illniyar]

I doubt it a "I don't know what the hell I'm doing" fuckup. Probably more of a "I warned my higherups, and they overruled me because they wanted the feature more than they wanted the app to be secure, and so they can handle the fallout" fuckup.

[gentaro]

> and so they can handle the fallout" fuckup.

Even if this guy objected to it, unless he quit his job straight after implementing this, you can be sure it came back down on him.

This is the kind of situation where you have to clearly argue your case and stand your ground.

[vageli]

> > and so they can handle the fallout" fuckup.

> Even if this guy objected to it, unless he quit his job straight after implementing this, you can be sure it came back down on him.

> This is the kind of situation where you have to clearly argue your case and stand your ground.

Hopefully the theoretical person stated their objections in writing. Would be useful in avoiding the fallout.

[fredley]

In my head, it went like this:

Mgmt: Can we do this? Eng: Yes, but... Mgmt: [Tunes out after Yes] Do it

Saying 'No' instead of 'Yes, but' is hard but a really valuable ability.

[dragonwriter]

I've seen that work out the opposite way, where “Yes, but” gets the part after “but” listened to, and “No, because” with a reason that isn't really a can’t be done reason but a cost to consider gets you not only ignored on the specific point but also frozen out of being involved in business and upper management contact because you are seen as projecting an air of laziness/inflexibility.

[heavenlyblue]

That’s why it has to be through e-mail.

[afarrell]

Do you know of any good online courses or study groups on rhetoric for engineers/scientists?