Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

A very clear and cogent overview of a structure. Simple to cite. Pragmatic and practical - I think it's quite a positive to have for an organization.

>Not all people share the same model of reasonableness, so disagreements inevitably occur. Under the reasonable person principle, the first thing to do is work it out privately (perhaps in person, since e-mail is known to amplify feelings). Indeed, many people would find it unreasonable to bring in third parties before trying personal discussion.

As true as this is, holistically, I do think the trend in "modern USA" is a bit less personal. Trending more towards the "easier to tattle anonymously" than have personal interactions. This creates more friction down the line as the third party will, inevitably, disappoint at least one faction if not both.

I do think making the statement is important though, and I do not disagree it's in line with what Reasonable People should do in working out differences.




Agreed, i've observed both personally and with others that americans tend to get upset when someone tries to move a disagreement into private chat, rather than having a public battle about it; and also tend to follow it up by actions that ensure the disagreement is never resolved.


I think it's sometimes interpreted as a kind of shadiness.

One thing that might help is a promise to summarize to the group after the discussion is over.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: