I think there's a take that she should've been more proactive in looking like she's doing something and then kept up the whole "doing nothing while getting paid" angle. Not contributing to the bottom line of a company while appearing to do so is good.
I am probably being uncharitable. I don't think you mean for what you have said to come off the way it does to me. What I'm reacting to is just how it sounds to me, and not your intentions.
I don't think you're intentions are bad, but i feel like there's a bit of unexamined reaction in your origninal comment. I don't think its intentional. I think you probably even mean to be helpful in a "that's just the way it is" kind of way i guess. That line of thought and talk like that kind of aggrevates me, and I'll admit that. And thats part of why I'm not being overly charitable.
But i also dont feel like you're being uncharitable to the situation in the article. You're read of the person saying she did nothing is assuming the worst here as well, and comes off to me (not necessarily as you intended) like its blaming them, that they should have known better, or even that workers shouldn't expect better from management "cause that's just the way it is" if you don't want to starve bucko.
Now to be fair that definitely isn't a charitable read of your comment. But I'm not trying to say that I think that's what you really believe or intend. Just that's just how your comment sounds to me independent of your intentions, probably despite your intentions
Uh, no. This is reactionary. Management doesn't want to do what they literally claim to exist for and push the blame onto workers. Fuck that
I think there's a take that she should've been more proactive in looking like she's doing something and then kept up the whole "doing nothing while getting paid" angle. Not contributing to the bottom line of a company while appearing to do so is good.
Sure that's a take, but i don't think its a good one
Yeah, that was basically how i was thinking about it.
deleted by creator
Its reactionary to look at this article about how theres no training and reaction is
Meaning, being fair to management.
Talking about workers like that isn't really making the case that your view isn't reactionary
deleted by creator
Reality doesn't need to be defended. Neither does the cruelty in which workers are forced to be exploited or starve.
deleted by creator
I am probably being uncharitable. I don't think you mean for what you have said to come off the way it does to me. What I'm reacting to is just how it sounds to me, and not your intentions.
I don't think you're intentions are bad, but i feel like there's a bit of unexamined reaction in your origninal comment. I don't think its intentional. I think you probably even mean to be helpful in a "that's just the way it is" kind of way i guess. That line of thought and talk like that kind of aggrevates me, and I'll admit that. And thats part of why I'm not being overly charitable.
But i also dont feel like you're being uncharitable to the situation in the article. You're read of the person saying she did nothing is assuming the worst here as well, and comes off to me (not necessarily as you intended) like its blaming them, that they should have known better, or even that workers shouldn't expect better from management "cause that's just the way it is" if you don't want to starve bucko.
Now to be fair that definitely isn't a charitable read of your comment. But I'm not trying to say that I think that's what you really believe or intend. Just that's just how your comment sounds to me independent of your intentions, probably despite your intentions
deleted by creator
I understand. No worries comrade. Take care as well