[ArcHound]

> If you know in your heart of hearts that you didn’t put the work in, you’re undermining the social contract between you and your reader.

There's been a lot of social contract undermining lately. Does anyone please know about something that can be done to try and revert back? Social contract of "F you. I got mine" isn't very appealing to me, but that seems to be the current approach.

[jdashg]

We literally have to be willing to get taken advantage of sometimes, and we have to come down hard on the "don't hate the player, hate the game" f-you-got-mine assholes.

It is not weakness, but strength, to make yourself (reasonably!) vulnerable to being taken advantage of. It is not strength, but weakness, to let bad behavior happen around you. You don't have to do everything, but you have to do something, or nothing changes.

We gotta spend less time explaining away (and tacitly excusing) bad behavior as unfortunate game theory, and more time coming down hard on people who violate trust.

Ante trust gladly, but come down hard on defectors.

[ArcHound]

Consider this situation: security review before a project go-live.

I have never seen this team before and I'll "never" see this team after the fact. They might be contracted externally, they might leave before the second review.

Let's say I can sus out people doing this. I don't have the option of giving them the benefit of the doubt and they have the motivation to trick me.

I guess I've answered my own question a bit, such an environment isn't built to foster trust at all.

[zephen]

Upvoted because this is true, but we need to establish coping mechanisms for this.

For example:

"Sorry, yes, I know the report is due tomorrow, but I don't have time to review it again because I wasted 2 hours on the first version."

or

"I found these three problems on the first page and stopped reading."

What else?