Printable View
All right, 26 people are in the same location, and Person A tells an obvious lie. Persons B through Z all hear him and know he lied. Next, Person B says Person A lied.
Then the rest of society, Persons C through Z, spend the next week complaining about how horrible Person B's behavior was.
Is that freakin' bassackards or what?
I guess I'm not up enough on current issues to understand what this is a metaphor for.
Bassackards, indeed.
With no other information, I agree with C through Z from a strategic standpoint.
Everyone knows it is a lie so B educates no one. Best thing to do is for B to work with C-Z so that everyone tells A that everyone knows he's FOS in private. That somehow is harder for most people to do than making an announcement in front of the rest of the alphabet.
Look up Fierce Conversations
No reference to current events. Just some silliness around my university.
Strategically it makes sense, as was pointed out, to not "announce it in front of the alphabet." But that's because of society's aversion to ever hear anyone called a liar. "You just questioned his integrity." Of course, he just lied. What integrity?
Just seems strange to me that society rewards the liar with the moral high ground and bashes the guy who told the truth.
nh saucyQuote:
Originally Posted by FlyingSaucy
I liked this part of the summary I found: "Learning to deliver the message without the load allows you to speak with clarity, conviction, and compassion."
I totally agree with your point, but this isn't what I meant at all. If B knows A was lying and keeps his mouth shut, then B definitely holds an information advantage over A, B possibly holds an information advantage over C-Z, and C-Z possibly hold an information advantage over A. When B opens his mouth, he gives up those advantages for himself and possibly gives up advantages for C-Z, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb
So B should do what, build a small coalition of allies, say D - G, who agree with B and who then can together plot A's downfall? Or, possibly, exploit the information disadvantage of the lower part of alphabet soup? Or both?Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
The actual incident in consideration is an administrator, say dean A, misprepresenting matters to the faculty, B - Z. The dean holds much power, but not total. However, if his position goes unchallenged, faculty members J - Z will believe him, and the rest will be bewildered. His power will be completely undermined if Faculty Member B can convince C - Z he lied, without incurring the "societal wrath" of being the one calling someone else a liar.
Either/or depending on B's goals, the pre-existing distribution of power/authority, etc. Sort of like one of those "it depends" answers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb
Now this is the kind of detail that makes these things fun! Person A being in a position of authority makes B's actions a clearer mistake. Offending the vanity of someone who has authority over you is absolutely huge. A great historical example is Nicolas Fouquet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robb
So it seems that B had better options, including something like you mentioned above. A more insidious plan would be to indirectly get a rival C to realize A's deceit in hopes that C would expose A to D-Z while simultaneously bringing C and A into conflict, but being able to pull this off depends on more information that we don't have.
On the other hand like you mentioned above, if the deceit would be damaging enough to take A out of power then staging a coup could be a viable option.
OK, senior tenured faculty, like me, can't be fired, even if the dean is pissed. However, there are programs and funding lines I could be denied access to. Not a huge deal, but significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by spoonitnow
The power the dean holds is more over the junior faculty, which make up 60% of the faculty. Of the 40% who are tenured, maybe 2% have the balls to stand up to the dean.
The dean has a superior, who just retired, and it will be nearly a year of "interim" before that boss is replaced.
So let the infighting begin. The senior faculty, say B - G, can ignore the dean, lose no power or fringe benefits, but they leave 60% of the faculty denied a raise they deserve, amounting to $2,000 for one year only for each of them.
If the Faculty member B, who has balls, can detonate the dean's position in a public forum, many junior faculty members benefit, and a precedent is set for when the new provost (boss) is appointed. Of course, Ballsy B takes the personal hit for a decade by alienating his direct superior.
Given these circumstances, and avoiding the direct confrontation, it seems you would suggest getting a coalition or, possibly, another dean to take the stand, thus making it more difficult for the whole group to be punished.
Since I'm not risk-averse, I'm willing to be Ballsy B and just call the dean out. The coalition is hard, since most faculty are risk-averse, even those with tenure. And the deans tend to stick together, so fracturing their collusion is difficult.
But I'm working on it, while pouting about society being such nits about calling someone a liar.
And my original point about "everyone knowing A is lying" is only half true. The dean works through committees, staffed by senior faculty B - G, so he has limited power to withhold the raises. But if a Ballsy B stood up and made certain points clear, shove all in as it were, the dean would lose his position of sway and junior faculty might - emphasis on might, benefit.
So none of the original hypothesis is precisely accurate. But it would be nice just to stand on soap box and start calling names. Unfortunately, it's also pretty counterproductive.
But I thought it might raise some interesting discussion in the Commune.
Sleep with his wife.
Well yeah knowing the details of the situation changes a lot. :P I'd probably do the same.
The main thing though is that if you have a chance to prepare an action it'll almost always be more productive than acting on impulse, etc. But you already know that.
Answer:
10minutemail.
Anonymously send to b-z.
Don't forget to send to yourself also.
Although, does A know that B-G knows? If A knows only that B knows, this will fail terribly.
Life is poker.
Some hands are harder than others, but the strategic thinking is the same.
Information is power irl, like it is in poker.
Now, if I can find out some way to use it...
You're Person B!!!
god poker analogies tilt me
My mind is blown by spoon and Robb's thought process in this thread. Just how you both inferred so much with so little starting info is crazy.
I'm also very high.
i c wat u did der!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bbickes
"Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter because nobody listens."
-Not me
i like your mom bacjwards