zlacker

>>ZacnyL+(OP)
Speaking from very painful, personal experience, few things are more agitating than being forced to execute on something you fully know is a horrible idea, especially when you tried and failed to communicate this fact to the individual pushing you to go against your best judgement.

Even more so when that person later loudly proclaims that they never made such a request, even when provided with written proof.

I can of course not say whether the people currently working at Twitter did warn that the recent measures could have such major side effects, but I would not be surprised in the slightest, considering their leadership's mode of operation.

Even as someone who very much detests what Twitter has become over the last few months and in fact did not like Twitter before the acquisition, partly due to short format making nuance impossible, but mostly for the effect Tweets easy embeddability had on reporting (3 Tweets from random people should not serve as the main basis for an article in my opinion), I must say, I feel very sorry for the people forced to work at that company under that management.

>>Topfi+Ew
At least once have I done a CC blast as a form of insurance when being asked to do something absolutely boneheaded.

>>Waterl+7A
You gotta get executives in writing sometimes or they'll throw you under the bus later.

>>7thacc+OE
If executives are throwing you under a bus, make an exit. There’s no coming back from a clown show like that.

>>Waterl+TF
I have a general rule that I make proactive, diligent efforts to inform and correct, and I do it 3 times to 3 different groups in leadership, and if that doesn't work, I'm out.

I'm about 2 for 8 but you gotta try sometimes.

>>jagged+cM
Yeah more often than not people just really really want to touch the hot stove.

Being the bearer of bad “stoves are hot to the touch” news makes you a downer.

>>steveB+3O
And in some absolutely bizarre anti-logic, I’ve seen some decide that the person trying to warn is somehow responsible for the inevitable outcome.

Not enough of you believed and now this balloon is adrift and will never make it to Imaginationland.

>>Waterl+tO
> I’ve seen some decide that the person trying to warn is somehow responsible for the inevitable outcome.

You should have warned me about this more convincingly!

>>Aeolun+9Y
I worked for a guy whose boss was trying to throw him under the bus constantly. In one scenario after being reminded of something, he said "I don't recall that conversation, you need to put this kind of stuff into email". So in a following scenario where he did send an email, boss man said "I get lots of email, you can't send an email and assume I read it."

This is why I find if you don't already have good relations with management and trust each others judgement, it really doesn't matter.

They will do as they wish, and throw you under the bus as needed.

>>steveB+t51
Talk verbally, and then send an email afterwards with notes. This means that they definitely were informed, because you talked to them, and you have something to point them to if they don't remember, because you send notes.

This is protection in adversarial scenarios, but is also just a great habit In general. Verbal discussion is really good for getting people on the same page, but without notes it's very easy for details and decisions to get lost.

>>jefftk+471
Another good way is to take notes live in the meeting — and have the doc shared on screen (for remote) or projected on the wall (for in-person).

That way, it's unavoidably in front of everyone's face, and you get the perk of ironclad timestamps in the document-editing history.