• MajorHavoc@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    208
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    “he’d already aroused suspicion by interrupting a meandering discussion of principles with a straightforward plan of action.”

    I feel seen.

    • underisk@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      8 months ago

      a) Organizations and Conferences

      1. Insist on doing everything through “channels.” Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.
      2. Make “speeches.” Talk as frequently as possible and at great length. Illustrate your “points” by long anecdotes and accounts of personal experiences. Never hesitate to make a few appropriate “patriotic” comments.
      3. When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and consideration.” Attempt to make the committees as large as possible—never less than five.
      4. Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.
      5. Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.
      6. Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.
      7. Advocate “caution.” Be “reasonable” and urge your fellow-conferees to be “reasonable” and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on.
      8. Be worried about the propriety of any decision—raise the question of whether such action as is contemplated lies within the jurisdiction of the group or whether it might conflict with the policy of some higher echelon.-
      • Followupquestion@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        The best part is by publishing this far and wide, anybody pushing for “careful consideration” and actual reasoned planning is immediately suspect, which leads to less reasoned decisions, which usually means more mistakes. If a victory is somehow won through violence of action and not careful planning, the support structure isn’t there to maintain the victory, nor are the people who win that victory well-suited to careful planning before the next engagement. The boring stuff is often what wins wars, simple things like plenty of fuel, adequate hygiene facilities, and dry socks can literally mean the difference between a division surrendering or winning a battle.

      • The_v@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        TIL that the OSS completely undermined the global business culture.

        Those bastards!!!

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Wow, that’s literally what Maxim Katz in Opposition Council did