Skip to main content
6 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jun 12, 2023 at 13:42 comment added Peter LeFanu Lumsdaine A line in the sand is never the whole definition of “acceptable” vs “unacceptable”, but it can be a very useful part of negotiating a relationship. Laying down a red line isn’t saying “everything up to there is OK”, nor is it saying “until you reach there, I’ll do nothing”. It’s saying explicitly: here is point which would be 100% unacceptable, and if you go there, I will be willing to walk away from the relationship and burn the bridges. (And implicitly: if you approach that point, I’ll be increasingly, unhappy, and will negotiate with whatever intermediate options are available.)
Jun 11, 2023 at 11:37 comment added David Roberts Mod Point taken. At the very last, people are thinking and talking about the idea, rather than just feeling grumpy in private about things SE does
Jun 11, 2023 at 8:38 comment added Darsh Ranjan To elaborate a bit more: I think that if we draw that line, every time SE makes a questionable decision (which seems likely to keep happening), we'll have to ask two questions: (1) did it cross our line, and (2) was our line drawn correctly, which means having the line at all isn't really that useful. I would think the correct path is just not to subject ourselves to that entity that makes those questionable decisions in the first place.
Jun 11, 2023 at 8:14 comment added Darsh Ranjan I guess I'm saying that it's not possible to predefine that sufficient condition in any reasonable way.
Jun 11, 2023 at 8:09 comment added David Roberts Mod It would not look good for SE, I meant. And optics are not about causation. It doesn't matter if there is an actual causal relationship, people will suspect there is one. And I don't mean a sharp line, a threshold; I mean a condition sufficient to clearly indicate it's time to go.
Jun 11, 2023 at 8:02 history answered Darsh Ranjan CC BY-SA 4.0