[asdfman123]

I like to play an online strategy game, openfront.io. The way to win is to take out someone who is gaining power before they get too powerful.

It's just basic game theory, and you see it everywhere. However, it's so annoying in the workplace when your two options seem to come down to try to dominate or be dominated. Especially if you care about quality code and don't care for meetings.

As far as I'm concerned, I think I have to make peace with the fact that if I don't play the game, I am going to be managed by people who don't know what they're doing. But neither option seems particularly good. Should I try to bury my ego and influence from below? Should I work harder and try to climb the corporate ladder? I'm still not sure.

[judahmeek]

I think it's odd that your company has a fairly decent promotion metric (those who seek to spread knowledge through docs & meetings get promoted) and you seem to want nothing to do with it while also complaining that your coworkers don't respect your opinion.

I kind of get it as you have expressed that promotion is not your goal. However, organizational influence comes through promotion as your org & only those with influence at your org can change that.

What do you think would be a better system, that decoupled promotions from influence & enabled you to provide your experienced opinion without getting into management?

[asdfman123]

I actually know you're right, and am just being indulgent right now.

I just hate it because I find meetings draining.