[JodieBenitez]

There are no agreed-upon limits, everything is new there. And I don't prioritize feeling good over everything else, otherwise I just wouldn't even start the debate. Far from being fired, I was promoted, because the real world is not your fantasy, results matter more than theorical threats. Also keep your name-calling to yourself.

[eschaton]

You literally said as much, and I am not calling you names, I am accurately describing your behavior in a way you yourself appear to recognize:

> So yes, call me sociopath if you like, but I will lie, > produce better software and get the praises if I > have to work in an environment that values tools > and methods over results.

You specifically said you would lie about how you work to get accolades if your employer attempted to set rules against working the way you prefer.

The appropriate reaction to your employer setting rules you don’t agree with is to try to convince them to change those rules, engage in a labor action alongside your coworkers to force them to change those rules, or to leave.

[JodieBenitez]

Blah blah blah.. virtue signaling. Enough said.

[JodieBenitez]

> The appropriate reaction to your employer setting rules you don’t agree with is to try to convince them to change those rules,

And that's what I do: nothing is more convincing than great results.

Get off your high horse maybe.

[eschaton]

What you’re calling a “high horse” is having morals and ethics. Your employer said not to do what you’re doing, so you either convince them to change their mind without doing something they explicitly said they don’t want you to do, or you go elsewhere. If you take the route of being a filthy fucking liar you aren’t in a position to accuse anyone of being on a high horse.