
Why I Quit Being So Accommodating (1922) - Tomte
https://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/1922-why-i-quit-being-so-accommodating/
======
manmal
For anybody learning to say "no" currently - learn to say "no" gently and
kindly. I'm quite bad at this myself. I let people impose stuff on me, and
once I have had enough, I have a very rude way of telling people off. One
reason for this rudeness is a fear that I will lose something when declining
(e.g. a relationship or money), so I feel stuck between a rock and a hard
place - I don't want to help, but I feel I should not decline. Most of the
times, my rudeness while finally saying "no" is out of place, e.g. when my
fiance needs something from me that actually makes sense, or a customer who
needs some small task that they would actually pay for.

Watching other people (esp my fiance) saying "no" ever so gently has me
wondering how easy life could be if I were able to do the same. I'm practicing
it, and I think I'm getting better at it. Telling the other person the root
cause why you say "no" helps a lot to instill empathy for your situation. The
root cause always stems from a need or necessity that you currently have, like
need for rest/food/time to think/time to finish this or that task properly/...
Even if you are lazy and simply don't want to help right now, remember that
this laziness also fulfils one of your needs - probably you need to rest or
think.

ADDED: Telling people that you just cannot help _right now_ also softens the
blow. Also, if it's a customer then delaying might even be more beneficial
than just declining - you might need the billable hours in the following week.

~~~
Bakary
One method I found works disturbingly well is to have a busy life or cultivate
the appearance of a busy life. It's counter-intuitive for some and obvious for
others, but people will value you more if you are less available whereas they
will treat your time with increasing contempt if you can be reached and
interrupted easily.

With this reputation in place, people are much less likely to try to trick you
into doing what they want, and more likely to try to get you to do things with
them.

You have to be a little careful though. If you don't have much social capital
to begin with, it could backfire into being ignored altogether. If you overdo
it, it may also be counterproductive.

~~~
jcoffland
> One method I found works disturbingly well is to have a busy life or
> cultivate the appearance of a busy life.

There is nothing original about this. Practically everyone is doing all they
can to pretend to be busy, to the point that many people actually believe that
they are, and all to avoid meaningful interactions with the people around
them. Meaningful interactions are risky and costly and modern people have lost
their nerve. It's so much easier to watch Net Flix when you want to feel. I'm
sick to death of this. I want to surround myself with people who live deeply
and with meaning.

Think about it, how many people, other than your family, really give a shit if
you live or die? For most people that number is close to zero and it's not
going to change if you buy in to this bullshit that the solution to your
problems is to guard your time or focus more on yourself. In my experience,
the only people who say they need to start thinking more of their own needs
are the ones who have always done so.

~~~
Bakary
>Think about it, how many people, other than your family, really give a shit
if you live or die?

That is actually one of the crucial realizations that helped me change my
behavior towards others. It may seem hard to believe, but once I understood
that interactions were more transactional than I had previously thought (in
the sense that you always have to create some form of value for others since
people don't care about you otherwise), I was able to have a richer and deeper
social life because people fundamentally changed the way they responded to me.

I had the exact same goal you've described in your post. Like you've hinted
at, the current trend in society is along the lines "however cares the least
wins" and the sad truth is that you have to play the game to some extent to
unlock richer interactions. People who don't respect you will rarely have
meaningful interactions with you, if at all. I know this because I've been on
both sides of the aisle.

>In my experience, the only people who say they need to start thinking more of
their own needs are the ones who have always done so.

I agree, since I used to be this person. The only thing I'm suggesting is that
for people to consider you a certain way you have to act a certain way to meet
their conscious and unconscious expectations, even if the charade is
irrational as a whole. Think of it as a way to get a social baseline that will
in turn help you have a more meaningful existence. In fact, in my case I
started to like people more and more since I ended up with fewer mental
burdens and negative feelings.

~~~
watwut
"The only thing I'm suggesting is that for people to consider you a certain
way you have to act a certain way to meet their conscious and unconscious
expectations, even if the charade is irrational as a whole. Think of it as a
way to get a social baseline that will in turn help you have a more meaningful
existence."

It is oftentimes limiting too much - their expectations costs you. I get what
you are saying and that it works that way, but it oftentimes forces you to
pretend you don't like things you like or to avoid things you would like to
try. I mean, yeah, they would respond to me better and I would have more
meaningful social interactions, but the cost is too much.

~~~
Bakary
I had similar thoughts as well at first. I chafed against the effort involved
in dressing better, being more sociable, and a whole range of other habits.
The surprising discovery I made in that case was that I started to like things
I previously disliked (certain types of social activities) and lost interest
in things I previously spent a lot of time on (mostly escapism). As I engaged
more with the world my attitude changed, even though I retained the same core
personality. I effectively passed a threshold beyond which the effort started
to pay off in terms of satisfaction, to the point where it no longer seemed
like a burden at all.

Of course, this is only my own experience and will not be relevant for most
people. However, it's certainly a counter-intuitive notion that merits
investigation. At the very least, it's quite helpful to critically evaluate
your most common habits and patterns.

------
nrjames
It's ok to be accommodating as long as you have learned to be introspective.
We all have demands of our own time and money. Introspective accommodating
people are able to help others in a generous way while protecting the time and
resources they need to help themselves. It's a difficult balance to achieve.

Through experience, I've come to believe that this holds true in long-term
personal relationships, too. While many will tell you that compromise is the
key to a successful marriage, I think that standing up for yourself and who
you need to be usually is more important.

There's a needle on the gauge of life that experiences pressure to move from
both directions. When you are too accommodating or compromise unequally, the
needle moves towards you and establishes a new norm for expected behavior.
Your job should be to push back just enough to keep the needle balanced at a
point where you retain a full sense of self and the space within which to
exercise it. That requires a strong sense of introspection and can take years
of adult life to develop.

~~~
nostrademons
You want to compromise on the stuff that _other_ people find important and
hold fast on the stuff that _you_ find important. Goes for both relationships,
friends, teammates, and business associates.

Most people come into the world assuming that their desires are everybody's
desires. We live life by the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have
others do unto you." This obscures that there's often a wide variety in the
things we would like others to do unto us, and that assuming everybody wants
what you wants often leads us to do exactly what they don't want.

It was a revelation when my therapist told me "You need to show love in the
ways that other people want to _receive_ it, not the way you want to _send_
it." It hadn't really occurred to me before then that things I considered
really inconsequential - checking if she got home okay, or leaving the porch
light on for her at night - might really matter to my girlfriend (now wife),
or that things that I considered really important - like listening to my
latest theory on reality, or showing enthusiasm when I show her my latest
product demo - might be considered inconsequential by her.

Many people have this intuitive idea that service & favors are a zero-sum
game, but in actuality, some actions cost you a lot less than the recipient
benefits from them, and some cost you a lot more than the recipient cares. It
makes a lot of sense to perform favors that are cheap for you but benefit the
recipient a lot. It's on you to figure out how much the recipient cares and
how much time & energy you can spare for them.

~~~
minikites
>It was a revelation when my therapist told me "You need to show love in the
ways that other people want to receive it, not the way you want to send it."

I'm curious, was it along the lines of this?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_Love_Languages](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_Love_Languages)

~~~
nostrademons
Similar - you can bet that most therapists have read that and incorporate it
into their practice. My wife and I are fortunate enough to share the same
primary love language, but like with most couples, there are a bunch of little
things where we differ. This is why they say communication is key in a
relationship - if you're not communicating, you never learn that the other
person might come into the relationship with subtly different values or
experiences, and then when they do things that make you feel ignored or hurt,
you attribute it to malice rather than ignorance.

------
temp246810
I'm going through this change right now.

Some words of hard earned "wisdom": make sure the pendulum doesn't swing too
far out in the other direction.

I went from being an accommodating person to an intense asshole - trying to
dial it back now but it's hard, especially when you notice that people
definitely respect you more for good or bad reasons when you're like that.
Take it too far though, and it will of course go all the way around and bite
you in the ass.

~~~
iamacynic
the trick is to finely calibrate your bullshit meter through life experiences.

what people tend to respect innately is a genuinely nice person who can
instantly turn into a no-holds-barred asshole if bad intentions are detected.

~~~
ThrustVectoring
IMO, the trick is to have control over the level of accommodation you present
to different people and different situations. The key quote from the article:

>I gave to them for years, at the expense of those who had a far better claim
upon my generosity.

There's a life skill getting pointed at here. Specifically, comparing the
demand to the level of obligation you want to fulfill, and reacting
appropriately. There's another higher-level skill of figuring out what the
results of different obligation levels are and strategically choosing them.

Basically, saying "yes" implies saying "no" to the alternatives, and sometimes
those alternatives are far better.

~~~
pdonis
_> the trick is to have control over the level of accommodation you present to
different people and different situations_

Exactly.

------
paxtonab
"People never trust an accommodating man with important things. That may sound
harsh and cynical, but check it up in your own experience. If you have a
severe illness, for example, you turn to the busiest, most exacting doctor in
town. The fact that he is busy and can’t be bothered by little things gives
you confidence in his ability and judgment."

~~~
will_pseudonym
Well, there's also the fact that the best doctors are the most in demand, so a
doctor who isn't busy isn't that in demand, which is a good indicator that he
isn't the best.

~~~
imesh
I know this is just a metaphorical doctor, but i don't think there are any
doctor's who aren't busy

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Sherlock Holmes was written by a doctor who wasn't busy, and who therefore had
time to write.

~~~
rglover
"I couldn't save your wife sir, but I wrote a hell of a novel!"

~~~
nickpsecurity
Lmao. Depending on the marriage, that could've changed the man's life for the
better. ;)

------
makecheck
Part of the problem is that “good manners” only seem to be considered in one
direction. It is time to redefine “rude” to include people that do not know
how to communicate their needs very well and/or are just super-entitled.

Why am I the one considered “impolite” by not dropping everything and helping
you immediately, if you haven’t bothered to do things like:

\- Indicate everything you have tried already (or worse, you haven’t done
_any_ basic research yourself)?

\- Consider the possibility that I _can’t_ respond instantaneously because my
Inbox has _dozens_ of other items already? Or that I didn’t answer my phone or
your text because I was actually busy, or in a bathroom, or due to some other
totally reasonable explanation?

\- Consider that you are basically asking for free help, when there are people
who pay for my time?

\- Show even the slightest interest in helping others yourself?

~~~
draw_down
I agree with you, but I think it's important not to take the bait. If someone
is implying you're a rude person for not doing what they want, and you know
you're not that, you can simply disregard. What they think of you is their
problem and not yours. Always maintain the frame of what you think is right
and what is best for you, and do not buy into their frame.

Of course, it gets trickier in different situations for different reasons. But
basically, people try to use shaming and emotional blackmail to get what they
want, don't let them.

One other thing: I think about the fundamental attribution error / actor-
observer bias a lot. You're an asshole because you won't do the thing I want,
but when someone else asked me for a thing and I said no, it was because I was
busy and etc etc. This dynamic influences _so_ much of what people think about
others and themselves.

------
exclusiv
I'd consider myself accommodating and people often come to me for all sorts of
advice. Or help with their new amazing idea. It's nice having a reputation of
being able to do a wide variety of things, including building companies which
many people fantasize about. I have a successful SaaS with a partner that
brought me an idea/opportunity because I had built a reputation as
collaborative/knowledgeable/accommodating. I'll invest my time and expertise
to explore opportunities and people know I'm candid.

However, I get ideas brought to me from everywhere, incl. friends of friends
of friends. I'm happy to provide detailed thoughts and notes but now I make
sure to challenge the person and the idea.

If it's a good idea, I want them to do some work upfront before I put anything
else into it. Sad to say that most people start really excited about their
idea, then I'll note that there are companies doing the same or nearly the
same thing already, that they need to differentiate, what it's going to take
to compete, etc and they will get completely deflated. Most of the time
there's no follow up. That's why most people can't be entrepreneurs.

I've helped out way too many people in the past only to have them give up so
easily. So if you're in this camp - I'd recommend challenging those that want
your help - it's a great filter and also a way to say yes and no at the same
time. You'll end up wasting less time and you'll still be open to great
collaborations and more rewarding experiences from helping others out.

~~~
therealx
I've been using this to great benefit also - require the person to put a
decent amount of effort into the idea first. Some people resent you for it,
but those that are destined to succeed and are able to make it will keep
persevering.

I used to not do this and wasted a lot of time in the process. Do you find it
hard to shake the reputation you had from before? I know I do.

~~~
exclusiv
Yeah it's definitely hard but what helps is to really be upfront and candid
about how limited my time is from the beginning.

So if someone refers someone to me, I'll tell them that I'm happy to assist
however I can at this point but that my time is limited for the foreseeable
future. You can do that directly or just by letting them know what you're
currently working on. I want to keep the opportunity open while being honest
about how I might be able to assist. Down the road it may even make sense for
me to shift my time from one of my other projects/companies to the new
opportunity that was cultivated from the reputation.

If it's an area that I'm not interested in, I'll say that too - "the
restaurant (tech) business is tough and I don't have expertise in that arena
so it's not for me". But I'll usually provide some strategies and let them
know that the dialogue is always open with me.

------
wordupmaking
When you're trying _that_ hard to please every trivial whim of anyone,
regardless of the cost to yourself: what are you compensating? Who hurt you?
Who lied to you? I mean, there's gotta be _something_ that made you rate the
approval by others so highly, and your approval of others so unimportant.
Something or someone that stole you from you. Would you take 2 weeks of the
life of one person to save another person 5 minutes? Unlikely, and it isn't so
different when you are one of those persons.

We'd be super weirded out if someone in front of us in the queue in the
supermarket committed suicide so we could pay faster. Apart from that probably
increasing checkout times for everybody -- just imagine the chaos -- we
wouldn't even appreciate "the thought", we'd be like "how DARE you use me for
this?". Most of us don't mind being catered to or even pampered, but we don't
want others to just throw themselves away for us. There are limits, even
though it's kind of invisible most of the time, there _is_ a line where
hurting ourselves too much to help others a little bit actually hurts society,
and offends others, correctly so.

Last but certainly not least: this over-the-top, dysfunctional selflessness in
the sense of having no self (or rather, not respecting one's self) attracts
not only knights in shining armour, but mostly _baaaad_ types. You might say
abuse breeds abuse in that someone who for some reason is playing doormat is
emitting pheromones for people who like to trample on others. I really don't
mean this to victim blame at all, but it's sadly true. And the less you let
others violate your boundaries, the clearer your sight becomes for what you
can freely give for mutual benefit. E.g. don't spend 2 weeks to save someone 5
minutes, but do spend 5 minutes to save someone 2 weeks.

TL;DR: you can't be a good friend to others without being a good friend to
yourself first.

~~~
anigbrowl
Unsure why you're being downvoted; this is one of the best comments on the
thread (and I remember this story from the last time it was posted).

 _You might say abuse breeds abuse in that someone who for some reason is
playing doormat is emitting pheromones for people who like to trample on
others._

This is absolutely true. Perhaps some readers were confused by your
metaphorical use of 'pheromones' to mean signalling in general. A great
example of this is griefing behavior in MMORPGs (and trolling in general, but
in games it's already quantified and thus far easier to measure). Most games
implement some sort of safe zone and/or NPC policing function to prevent
griefers from hassling new players to the point of wrecking the game, which is
the griefers' underlying and _often unconscious_ objective (so as to 'own' the
territory of the game space even if this is poisonous to the growth of the
player pool).

Denied the ability to pick on newbies, griefers then usually collect in small
packs and lurk around entry-exit routes to danger zones (whether from NPCs or
territorial conflict) where there's a possibility to target outcoming damaged
players or incoming ones pushing up against their skill envelope. Griefers
like to think of themselves as apex predators, but typically lack the self-
discipline and strategic vision required to organize as such, so more often
than not they occupy the same environmental as scavengers such as hyenas,
vultures etc.

I haven't kept up with the latest research on this, but I recall that EVE had
an economist on staff several years ago and I'd imagine that the larger
participants in that market are open to or already working with sociologists,
game theorists, and other quantitative social scientists to better understand
the dynamics of their virtual ecosystem.

For 'nice' players (in games and in life) who don't comfortably slot into
large teams, the usual advice is to be more of an asshole. And while that's
partly true, being an armored up lone wolf will only take you so far. Unless
the system as a whole is dysfunctional, individual lone wolves are never
competitive against anything bigger than a small-medium team. However, lone
wolves can team up and be very effective; to do so they (obviously) have to
overcome significant trust barriers, but can succeed by maintaining smallish
flat structures and growing hierarchies below those.

------
graphitezepp
As someone who trends towards heavily accommodating, I often seem to find my
actions that I judge as selfish or arrogant are the ones that I get respect
for. Definitely a phenomena I don't understand, but its real so it should be
very valuable to learn where to draw the line.

~~~
rdiddly
Put it in the context of dominance and submission among apes and it becomes
clear. The one who does nice things for you is displaying a submissive posture
and trying to win your favor. They are probably your social inferior: beneath
you in the hierarchy, or at most, a peer. The one who doesn't care about you
and does what he wants, shows that he's above you in the hierarchy. And some
people just can't resist their internal ape tendency to think "wow that's sure
an impressive alpha ape right there." But some, who consider themselves alphas
themselves, will take it as a challenge. Etc. etc. etc. All somewhat dreary
thoughts in the light of soaring techno-optimist talk about the glory of the
human spirit, but I think we're all still apes and I've said so, enough times
on HN, that I'm at risk of becoming known as the "ape guy."

Manners are in fact detailed prescriptive means & methods for being
submissive, or rather for sending submissive signals, as the default behavior
in societies where there are more humans living together than normal, i.e.
anytime after 1800 when the population really started to shoot upward and to
urbanize. It ends up being very practical to train people to be submissive in
an urban industrial society, because if you have a thousand supposed self-
declared alpha-apes constantly fighting it out "out there," things become a
mess very quickly.

Edit: to the respondents, I am intentionally keeping morality out of it
(decency and so forth), because a strictly moralistic right/wrong judgment-
based view didn't seem to be enhancing the parent's understanding. But
dominance & submission, like morality, is just another narrow rubric for
viewing the world, doesn't describe the whole world, and isn't the only way of
describing the world. So it's best not to take it too far beyond a blurry big-
picture view!

~~~
le-mark
This equating of manners to a submissive posture is odd to me. One wonders
what is meant by "manners". Saying yes, please, thank you, and holding a door
are by no means submissive acts. Table manners, or not acting boarish while
dining, is not submissive. Conducting oneself in a respectful, cordial manner
is not submissive.

However fawning and currying favor may indeed be submissive, but are not
proscribed by any idea of "politeness" I am aware of. Excessive accommodation
to the detriment of yourself and your interests would also be submissive in my
view.

~~~
lacampbell
_This equating of manners to a submissive posture is odd to me. One wonders
what is meant by "manners". Saying yes, please, thank you, and holding a door
are by no means submissive acts. Table manners, or not acting boarish while
dining, is not submissive. Conducting oneself in a respectful, cordial manner
is not submissive._

I disagree, I think it is more submissive than doing the opposite. But that's
not a bad thing - people who are _never_ submissive don't fit into society.
They have terrible manners and drive dangerously, like you point out.

A certain amount of strength is admired, but too much and you're almost
unilaterally rejected.

~~~
n8n3k
Yes. Always and never submitting will both cost you your freedom. If you
always submit you'll never get to to do anything you want, if you never submit
you'll literally go to jail.

But some people might be so submissive by nature that "Never Submit" is good
advice for them, because in those situations where they really should submit
it will never even occur to them not to.

------
stvnchn
> “You are thirty-five years old,” I said to myself. “More than half of your
> life has already been spent. Who is living your life, anyway? Is it actually
> yours? Or is it a kind of public storehouse of odd jobs? A pile of days and
> hours put on the counter of the world with a sign inviting every Tom, Dick,
> and Harry to take one?”

This was probably the best part for me. We have longer life spans and so we
trick ourselves into thinking that we have more time to waste on things we
don't really want to do. We can procrastinate all we want but in the end, we
still come back to this question without a single clue of how to answer it.

~~~
c3534l
That line struck me as unexpectedly grim. You forget that it used to be most
people didn't make it to retirement.

------
relyio
I was explaining this point of view to a good old aunt of mine one afternoon
and she exclaimed: “But, Joe, it is so selfish for a man to put his work ahead
of everything! It’s unchristian.”

“On the contrary, it is Christian in the very finest sense,” I replied. “What
was it that Jesus said when his parents rebuked him for his failure to keep
his engagement with them on that first journey down from Jerusalem? ‘Wist ye
not that I must be about my Father’s business?’ He demanded. He had work to do
— great work and little time in which to do it. Even He was no exception to
the eternal rule that achievement comes only through the subordination of
every power to a great ideal; and that no man is really obliging who does not
first discharge in full his obligations to his work.”

~~~
brookside
These types of arguments on whether something is or isn't _Christian_ or so
prevalent on my FB feed, especially in regards to current politics, even being
posted by non-Christians trying to convince their Christian relatives and
friends to renounce a policy or politician.

My take would be - this is arguing within a nonsensical framework, and we are
prolonging the _hopefully_ last stages of the superstitious demon-haunted
world era of humanity.

~~~
throwanem
You seem very secure in the belief that, once the "demons" of which you speak
are gone, naught but pure cool reason will replace them. One can only assume
such optimism stems from a complete ignorance of history.

~~~
Retra
One can be secure in the belief that a battle is worth fighting, even if
nobody has ever one one before. Our future is not determined only by our
history.

~~~
throwanem
Whence came you by this remarkable idea that the battle against religion has
never been won before? - not permanently, to be sure, but nothing else ever
ends, and why should this?

I find little in the results of past such victories to recommend the conflict
be reopened. Should you care to take the time, I'd be interested to hear what
leads you to view the matter so differently.

~~~
Retra
I didn't say it hasn't been won before, only that it doesn't matter whether or
not it has.

Anyway, what leads me to view the matter differently is that I do not simply
look to the past to inform me of what will be effective tomorrow. I also look
to the potential that flourishes in microcosms of today. And to the increasing
efficacy of our culture's ability to promote and propagate the valuable ideas
of individuals and small groups. How we communicate today distinctly different
than in the past, and it opens some doors in a big way. And it is far too soon
to say whether this is a good or bad thing, so we may as well do what we can
to ensure it is a good thing.

You might believe war doesn't ever change, but it can change quite quickly
when a new weapon is developed. More importantly, even if the victory is
temporary, the results of a temporary enlightenment can guide the development
of society for ages after the war has been lost. Greek democracy failed, but
still lessons where learned. Enlightenments wane, but the world is a brighter
place even so.

~~~
throwanem
Yet the belief persists that there can be such a thing as a single, unitary
culture, somehow satisfactory to all. But perhaps you're right that this idea
actually is amenable to simple reason and persuasion, and it's a mere accident
of history that, in every prior case where it's been at issue, the issue has
eventually been decided by means of force.

~~~
Retra
Well, firstly, the ability to make rationally optimal decisions is not merely
a matter of cultural preference. Promoting the ability to make decisions which
marginalize errors generally - under _arbitrary_ goals - does not inhibit
anyone from having a satisfying culture. Rationalism doesn't choose your
goals, it determines the optimal way to achieve them. Now, it _does_ inhibit
people from participating in a culture which promotes their death as some
'ideal' state of being, as most religions that promote an idyllic afterlife
do.

I mean, if you put me on a raft out in the ocean and ask me whether we should
shoot and eat the Christian or the Atheist, I'm going to ask "which one of
them asserts their death will result in a state of unending glory and euphoria
while preserving the 'existence' of their mental state?" Because that's the
one that should be killed. And these kinds of biases pile up over the long
term, leaving a distinct mark of fragility and unnecessary risk on the entire
culture. You have ability to choose that, but I cannot advocate that you ever
should.

Secondly, it is not a historical accident that this issue has been decided by
force. It is not even really true; far more violence has been carried out in
the name of spreading religion than has been in the name of eliminating it.
And again, this is of little relevance anyway, because the past has been more
violent in general, and we have better understood and more widely available
means of achieving goals through peace today than any time in human history.

~~~
throwanem
> if you put me on a raft out in the ocean and ask me whether we should shoot
> and eat the Christian or the Atheist, I'm going to ask "which one of them
> asserts their death will result in a state of unending glory and euphoria
> while preserving the 'existence' of their mental state?" Because that's the
> one that should be killed

See what I mean when I talk about progressivism? Heretical it may be, but the
truth of God shines through nonetheless. For all the wrong reasons, from all
the wrong priors - you misunderstand the nature of death and that which
follows after, _and_ the nature of life and what it means to follow Christ -
yet we still come up with precisely the same answer: "This is my body, which
is given for you."

------
komali2
His drug store father example struck me - I don't really experience this
"service worker" thing anymore, even when I was a service worker.

It seems to me the playing field is being extraordinarily leveled. When I was
a bagger at a grocery store, nobody looked down on me. Maybe because of my
town, but I was never expected to "serve" someone's whims - I was just
expected to do my job, and when I did my job people thanked me.

Now whenever I'm out and about getting a thing done, I don't think of the
people "serving" me as "serving me." I'm at the mechanic's, I'm pinging him
for his expert advice. I'm at the carwash place, I'm asking them if they
wouldn't mind doing the interior windows for a bit extra, etc.

Maybe I just am very lucky that I never underwent the brunt of service work
torture because of my town, but is it still a "thing" to be asked to do a
bunch of random shit at the convenience of others? Am I just so lucky in all
of my jobs that everybody is respectful of eachother an their time?

~~~
tnecniv
I worked at a restaurant for a while and had a similar experience. I had no
bad experiences with customers like the horror stories you always hear.

~~~
naiyt
In contrast, I worked in tech support and had no end of terrible experiences
with customers.

------
Mz
Something I have concluded: Genuine respect is a two way street. People
expecting things they won't equally do in return are not expecting you to
respect them. They are expecting you to kowtow to them and be their bitch.

Those people can go to hell. They will never give back. They do not for one
minute believe in a social contract where both people invest in the
relationship. They are just using you. Doing anything for them just signals
that it is _okay_ for them to use you. This is a terrible social contract to
make.

You can still do nice things for other people because it serves something you
believe in. Just don't agree to be anyone's bitch, ever, for any reason.

------
CapitalistCartr
On a related note is "reasonable". In English this word is routinely abused. I
consider it a huge red flag.

"4+4=11"

"No, 4+4=8"

"Oh, c'mon, Joe, don't be difficult."

"4 and 4 is 8, 11 isn't correct.

"Be reasonable here. OK, let's compromise on 9.5, OK?"

~~~
Karunamon
This comparison falls apart the moment you're talking about matters of moral,
conscience, or basically anything that doesn't have an epistemologically solid
answer.

People can debate these issues, arrive at different answers, and still get
along at the end of the day.

When those issues are compared to math, where one side is automatically Right
and the other side is automatically Wrong and you are Unreasonable if you
don't agree... not so much.

A part of being a reasonable person is recognizing this and understanding that
the process you went through to arrive at the opinion you hold is _not even a
little bit_ comparable to the rigor and certainty of the answer to a child's
math problem. The comparison is inherently dishonest.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
I've never had a job involving "moral, conscience, or basically anything that
doesn't have an epistemologically solid answer" except the moral issues that
were clear-cut. E.g. flat-out illegal. Nor have I ever had anyone use the word
"reasonable" that way in such a discussion.

I'm the technical expert wherever I work, and yes, the situation is pretty
clear-cut. The abuse of the word in such clear situations is why I used an
arithmetic analogy.

~~~
mcguire
" _I 'm the technical expert wherever I work..._"

Therefore my opinions are correct and yours, to the extent that they differ,
are wrong.

------
zekevermillion
This rings a bit hollow to me, kind of reminds of "Rich Dad, Poor Dad" \-- a
moral play, a fictional story passed off as autobiographical. Aimed to enforce
our self-doubting instinct that we are somehow being a chump and letting
society take advantage of us. Taking this literally is a path to regrets.

~~~
dwaltrip
We can view it as containing slivers of truth, and then look at how to best
extract those slivers and strengthen our mental models with them.

Of course, this is a lifelong and error-prone process :)

------
DubiousPusher
I have had a very similar realization regarding customer service. I used to
think manners obliged me to be patient on the phone or at the customer service
counter. That I should jump through all the hoops put before me. And finally
if the outcome put before me was unsatisfactory that I should accept it and
move on. But I've come to see that customer service is just as much something
I'm paying for as the root service or good I'm buying.

Furthermore, the notion that an acceptable remedy to the problem that a
company cannot have it's shit together enough to adequately service the
occasional difficulties surrounding the transactions of its products is to
impose upon me has become unacceptable in my mind.

I know this is going to sound entitled but think of it this way, it is also an
entitled position to assume people should be obliged to fill out forms,
perform extra steps or wait in line because of a mistake a company has made.

I'm not encouraging anyone to treat people like garbage but my threshold for
corporate BS has become extremely low and I ask for issue escalation pretty
fast if a company isn't fixing a problem.

~~~
DeuceDaily
I'm sorry, I wasn't paying attention. Would you mind just putting in a ticket?

------
temuze
Old submission with more comments here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4969041](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4969041)

------
ge96
Man, I'm a person that can't seem to say no.

Always eager to please other people before I even think about how it will
affect me. Would you like to work two doubles in a row and potentially go
insane? Ah sure... sure I'd love to!

Hey man, I'd like to catch this bus so I don't walk 6 miles home "Oh sure but
before that, can you do this one thing..." ahhhhh

What happens when you let people walk all over you. It's funny too when I
observe other people say no or F-off, people remember that and don't ask them
to do things... hahaha. Ah well.

Someday my balls will drop.

------
erkaes
I was an accommodating person until I realize what people value is not you
doing what they want when they ask you. But it is when you doing something
with them or for them with a motivation from within yourself, just because you
want to or just because you feel like to or just because you think they
deserve it or something like that.

To them I am just an all nice fellow who is kind to everybody. I earned their
gratitude but not their love and in the process I hurt people that truly care
and love about me.

------
codegeek
Being accommodating is not necessarily a black or white thing. For me, it
depends. I generally consider myself to be a nice easy going person who tries
to be accommodating as long as it doesn't hurt me or others. Notice the "me"
in my last sentence. Yes, be selfish and then be accommodating. Now, I can be
a real jerk if I come across one. Nothing wrong with that.

~~~
drunken-serval
Might want to read the entire article, it discusses that. The original author
was more charitable and more effective in his charity towards others in the
end.

------
balabaster
Wow! This thought thread is a what's what on the list of horrifying and
inauthentic bullshit.

When did we lose the ability to have authentic relationships?

If someone needs your help and you have the capacity to help and they haven't
burned you in the past, why not actually be human and help them? Perhaps one
day you'll need help and they'll return the favour. If they don't without good
reason, then next time say "hey, you know what, I was there when you needed
help last time and when I needed help you were nowhere to be found, you flaked
out on me because you didn't take my needs seriously." or whatever.

If you're hanging out with flaky people who give you bullshit excuses for not
helping you out when you genuinely need help and you're not helping out when
they genuinely need help then you don't have friendship, you have
acquaintances.

 _Being a friend is being there when your friends need you and your friends
being there when you need them_. If one side of that relationship isn't being
honoured, it's not friendship. One or the other of you is taking advantage of
boundaries that aren't being enforced or respected.

Kudos to everyone for wanting more time for themselves to find value in what
they do but when you get to the pinnacle of whatever it is you're doing and
you realize you've cast aside your friends and relationships for whatever
shiny thing it is that currently has your attention, I hope the shiny thing is
more valuable to you than your friendships, because you'll have none.

Addendum: I don't want to devalue those that are selfless and just trying to
scramble back a bit of time for their own selves, I get it, I'm an introvert,
I need time for myself to do my own things too, but don't lose sight of the
fact that human connection is where happiness and love lays. If the giving of
yourself to make those you love happy _isn 't making you happy_, then you
should probably closely examine the quality of those relationships and either
fix them or end them so you are.

~~~
usmeteora
I think this more like prioritizing minimum to desired requirements for your
own self versus others.

For example, my boyfriend and I are both engineers but hes working at a place
short term over the summer with a 3 hour time difference. I work 10am-4pm, he
works 9am - 7pm but with a three hour time difference.

Staying up an extra hour to talk to him very night after hes done with work
means going from 6.5 hours to 5.5 horus of sleep, which means I don't get up
and workout, eat a good breakfast and go to work feeling refreshed.

Luckily im dating an icredible person and he understands this, and that the
unideal arrangement is short term, so we found a comporimise and work around,
but I did have to say no I can't vid chat tonight I'm going to bed.

Doing a favour is easy, giving up something of yours, of which time by the way
is very expensive for busy people, at the expense of your own personal time
(which people think is not a requirement but I know for a fact now it is, and
even some of the busiest CEOs etc take a no compromise personal time out each
day or each week reagrdless of how many emergency events are knocking at thier
door. They do this because they know in the long run they suffer, and their
company and employees suffer from bad decision making)

so anyways, at the expense of your own personal time, health, mental health
other relationships or budget.

people who also have healthy priorities will know this and understand. For
example, I'm dating someone who actually cares about me and WANTS me to be
happy, well rested healthy and do well in my career. So its not hard for us to
find compromises around times we would normally like to talk for a few months
so I can still maintain my morning routine which sets the tone by my mental
and body health for each day and in general my life, without being sickly
sleep deprived, and he can still enjoy the work culture with his team who
rolls in late and works late and enjoyed working late as a team. I want him to
enjoy this experience and benefit from it and grab beers a couple times a week
after work with his work buds. I want him to do well, so its easy for us to do
favours for eachother because our personal lives and therefore our happiness
together benefits from this. Neither of us would be happy together if we felt
we were compromising our ability to be our best, especially at this juncture
in our lives, young 20s making or breaking reaching our goals.

I've been in relationships with men who couldnt care less about my long term
goals and would keep me up late, obligate me to do their chores and guilt trip
me for not being arm candy at every fancy event they went to if it took away
from my personal projects, working out, or me time, or guilt tripping me for
staying late at work, not encouraging me to go get that new job because things
are convenient if I'm unsuccessful and will be miserable enough to drop out of
my career and have their kids one day.

You want to try to mostly limit expensive (in terms of time or sacrificing
life goals or day to day health which can add up quickly whether its lack of
sleep, personal you time, workout time, healthy food or skipping your mid day
10minute meditation or walk on your lunch break) to people who ask favours not
too often, and you know there is a mutual benefit.

I don't mean that in selfish terms. I mean if someone continually doesn't do
their job well and the favour is you continually give up your lunch break,
which you barely take and cut down to a 15min walk in the sun to go over notes
or fix another last minute repeated mistake from someone who feels entitled to
your time or won't learn how to fish, and wants you to fish for them, then you
should say no.

Another example, people have asked me "hey can you make an app for me, or go
come meet me for a drink and listen to by business idea and give me your
advice, feedback, business advice, network connections based on what I tell
you."

Alot of times this person has not done their own due diligence, or knows I'm
usually willing to help out and just wants my tech knowledge and connections.
That's fine, but I find people who don't reach out with specific questions
during a sepcific stage of development and won't send you an email about it,
simply want you to meet up for a beer and let the fact you are in a
conversation for an hour be free mentoring advice and social networking for
them.

In regards to people asking about apps or websites and asking me to help them
because they know im in tech but arent at all. I get how it could be confusing
to get started or get help on an app if you run a non tech company, but the
questions are so basic I now resort to basically asking them to google it.

Literally google it. If you have done all the work and have a question that
you feel my specific experience/expertise could help you make a pivot point
decision on a very developed situation where you have done your due diligence,
and you want me to be a bouncing board, then go for it.

but I often find people like this are throwing a half assed or 20% thought 5%
put in effort to idea/project, and they spend their time try to sell me on how
I should be just as excited about it as they are, for the explicit purpose of
me feeling its worth my time to jump in and offer more time and effort and
help to advocate for their project, and always of course a good friend wanting
to help people out, never a formal contract or consulting time.

Another example, I have a friend who owns a non tech company or not in the
space of software, and they mentioned having a terrible time finding a good
marketing firm to consult with and that at the end of the day they really just
needed google analytics.

Through a very technical personal project, I was also using google analytics
for something, and being that this group is run by a good friend of mine who
genuinely is having a wreck of a time finding high quality marketing, I
offered specifically to help out with their google analytics. Not anything
else like graphic design, advertising, social media campaigns, just said yeh
if you are so busy you don't even have 5 hours to go through google analytics
analysis, and set up the filters you want and identify and prioritize some
outliers who could be customers of worth, then I can atleast look at whats hit
it already, put some security filters on it and give you a run down of what
you have so far, and set up a few more things.

I figured 20 hours of work total over a month, and actually its very
beneficial for me to get access to working with google analytics from a
growing company perspective versus a personal website/project of mine for
future.

All fine until I go to meet with their Director and find they have no
financial, specific customer, demographic goals at all, much less for 1 month
3 month etc. So outside of setting up basic security, its very hard to utilize
analytics if you don't know what youre analyzing or what your goals are, or
the genre or even priority of customers since the potential customers span
multiple industries all over the world.

if I offer to do analytics, I need to know what I'm analyzing. If google
analytics is specifically analyzing people exposed to your company, then I
need to know what youre interests are as far as people, targeted or widespread
marketing, specific consumer groups, specific industries, specific locations,
maybe atleast a profit or unit sales goal so then we could utilzie the hits to
see who is most likely to provide that? Nothing...

So alot of people are willing to take free help, but alot of people don't know
how to utilize that help to do something valuable or use it to teach
themselves how to do it themselves or go find the long term help needed.

Alot of times what people are really asking just like when I've been asked to
write emails is:

"Please review everything that exists currently, can be done and needs to be
done, identify potential solutions, prioritize amongst existing priorities,
document communicate, find the right people to do it, and of course since
already noone else besides you is willing to do even this, if you want to
prove your motivated, youll actually implement the solution yourself"

Thats what alot of times "favours" end up being when people say "hey, I want
to go over this idea and get feedback from you" ....

~~~
balabaster
I totally appreciate the effort you went to to write this.

You're quite right in that your time is valuable and a lot of people encroach
on this time without any respect for just how valuable it is - it's the only
resource we cannot renew, at least so far. So your taking the time and effort
to write this instead of whatever else it is you could've been doing to
further your success is evidence of how important this topic is to you as
well. So thank you.

You are from the sound of things in a wonderful and respectful relationship
that values your time and needs. This is worth keeping hold of; but many
people have absolutely no respect for each others needs in this sense and so
walk all over it with the expectation that their partner should be more
selfless so they can be more selfish instead of both being selfless towards
one anothers needs. Any affront to this perception is considered selfishness
on your part.

"Oh you need time to yourself, I will make room and take on responsibility so
that you can have that." returned by the favour of "Oh, you need some time to
do X, Y or Z activity so you can be fulfilled, you know what, let me take A, B
and C off your plate so that you can do that."

This is the difference between a selfless relationship and a one sided
relationship where one partner is "You know what, I need this in order to feel
fulfilled, so I need you to do X, Y and Z for me so that I can get that
fulfilment." "What do you mean you don't have the capacity to do that? You
think your time at the pub with your friends is more important than my mental
wellbeing?" "Well, you want me to stop doing something that's good for my own
mental wellbeing in order for you to satisfy yours."

From the sound of things, you've been on the receiving end of this too, so you
understand both sides of this coin.

A balance definitely needs to be struck between the giving of yourself freely
to those that are important to you and the expectation of payment in kind.
Relationships are a two way street.

With regards to people who approach you for technical assistance in their
projects - I've been burned a number of times: Kids with no due dilligence
done expecting me to give my all for their success, right up to a sociopath
who had done all her due dilligence and had used every developer she could get
to do her bidding as stepping stones to her success while taking advantage,
not paying them, setting lawyers on them to hand over code she'd not paid for
and the whole 9 yards who approached me with a solid prototype, a solid
business plan and an NDA that protected her and "a contract that's coming" but
was never delivered who convinced me to work on good faith. She was a nasty
piece of work. So I understand being taken advantage of and I'm wary of it
having been stung for tens of thousands of dollars in payments I will never
receive. Thankfully a solid understanding of the DMCA, Copyright Law and lucky
timing saved me from her ever being able to publish my work, but that's
another story for another time.

My point is: If your friends and business partners are taking advantage
without any respect for your needs, they're not your friends. If any contract
is too one sided without any consideration for your needs and there is
resistance to your needs being met, they don't care about you, only
themselves.

If your friendships aren't instrumental in your success and your success is
where your personal fulfillment lies, then your friendships should be
evaluated in such a way that they bring you that success, not stand in its
way... and that's a two way street. You cannot expect your friends to be
instrumental in your success without your willingness to be instrumental in
theirs. You stand by them as you expect them to stand by you. If one or the
other of you is not meeting this basic tenet of friendship, then you need to
reevaluate that friendship.

------
steinuil
This reminds me a lot of the posts by burnt out open source project
maintainers, like the one about turning off github issues that was on the
front page just recently, or one from a while ago about ignoring most github
notifications and marking old repos as unmaintained.

------
PatrickAuld
It's important to remember what you are trying to do when you are being
accommodating. You want to help others help themselves so that they are more
capable in the end.

The author here took 100% of the work and pains from those around him. The
people he helped were relieved of that task but are no more prepared for it
should it arise again.

Personally I do try and be accommodating to those around me; but I include
them in what is being done so they can learn from it. This give them back more
than just result of the task and enables them to hopefully accomplish it
themselves next time.

------
merraksh
_At eighteen I went away to college. [...] I had saved enough from a summer 's
work to pay the fees of the first term,_

I guess college wasn't that expensive back then (or summer jobs were paying a
lot).

~~~
johnminter
That was true of state universities as late as the mid 1970s when I attended.
It was the rise of easy credit for guaranteed loans that permitted the current
runaway inflation in costs. College costs have grown faster than health care.

------
feralmoan
A lot of the points touched on in the original article and this thread are
conducive to deeper, creative and more meaningful work in general. You
_should_ say no to meaningless distractions. I just finished reading this book
about it, so, good timing... [https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Work-Focused-
Success-Distracted-...](https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Work-Focused-Success-
Distracted-ebook/dp/B00X47ZVXM)

------
YeGoblynQueenne
The blog header is Diogenes, the Cynic (by an unkonwn artist) [1]. This
suggests a possible misunderstanding of historical personalities. I believe
Τimon, the Misanthrope, is the role model the author was really looking for:

 _According to Lucian, Timon was the wealthy son of Echecratides who lavished
his money on flattering friends. When his funds ran out, the friends deserted
him and Timon was reduced to working in the fields. One day, he found a pot of
gold and soon his fair-weather friends were back. This time, he drove them
away with dirt clods._ [2]

I'm not being facetious: Diogenes, besides being a sarcastic old codger for
which he is mostly famous, also displayed a complete lack of interest for his
own person, so not quite the blazing firebrand of, the er, enlightened self-
interest promulgated in the OP.

___________

[1] [https://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/new-year-new-
head...](https://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/new-year-new-header/)

[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timon_of_Athens_(person)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timon_of_Athens_\(person\))

------
martin1975
Great writeup. It hits on age old wisdom - how do we strike a balance between
saying 'yes' or 'no'?

The arguments for yes are obvious, probably best summarized by Wallace
Stevens' saying: "After the final no there comes a yes and on that yes the
future of the world hangs." (had to google for the exact saying :).

Logically and intuitively speaking, the degree to which our lives work is the
degree to which we keep our agreements - it is the 'yes' (action) that moves
us forward, shapes us as a person, far more than the 'no' (passivity).

In an infinite world of possibilities, what should one say 'yes' or 'no' to?
This brings into the picture something we all struggle with finding for the
better, if not the most part of our lives - _purpose_ and _meaning_.

I've no idea where your purpose and meaning come from - I know where mine do,
however, if you want to be able to quickly sift through the infinite
possibilities and readily come up with a 'yes' or a 'no' for what you commit
to versus what you don't, then it is imperative that you seek out your purpose
in life.

Generally speaking, the purpose has to be larger than what you can accomplish
on your own, sometimes it might even span your life, or multiple life spans if
your purpose is worth following by others.

Another way to achieve purpose or meaning is to surrender to another person,
hopefully someone better than you. No, this doesn't mean becoming a door mat -
it just means becoming vulnerable and coachable toward this person, whomever
that is for you - could be a spouse, a higher being, whatever....

I'm starting to like HN even more when I see posts like this make it up to the
first spot.

------
mcguire
" _People never trust an accommodating man with important things._ "

This is (a) incredibly true (in the original sense of incredible) and (b) a
difficult and painful lesson to learn.

Being the one to go to with problems means that all you will see are other's
problems---no one will look for you when they succeed. Being the one who makes
crap work means that you will always be making crap work.

 _But saying 'no' isn't the biggest part of the problem._ Saying no just means
you do nothing. You need to have a positive plan. Something that you _want_
enough to push for.

More importantly, you need to push yourself forward. Brag. Sell yourself.
Advertise. Mock other people to their faces, even if you know they're right
and you're wrong. The world is not a kind and gentle place. It does not reward
humility and the meek are not going to inherit anything.

------
xbryanx
If you liked the writing/ideas here you'll love Seneca's On the Shortness of
Life.

[https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/97412.On_the_Shortness_o...](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/97412.On_the_Shortness_of_Life)

~~~
theprop
Or the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. Both are fantastic...

------
Angostura
As a counterpoint, I am also one of those people who spends a lot of time
helping people out, both at work and in the community.

I do it for two reasons: firstly, to be frank - I enjoy it, I enjoy the social
stroking it confers. I work with clever, talented people - but they have
different skill sets to me. If I can do something in 5 minutes that would take
them an hour - and _show_ them how to do it - I get a buzz and they are
grateful.

Secondly, getting a reputation for people capable, people come to me with
_interesting_ problems, which increase my skill sets.

Yes, sometimes I have just too much on, and sometimes they come to me with
dull stuff.

But in general, the combination, of making people happy, recognition and
interesting problems makes being accommodating worth it for me.

------
BinaryIdiot
This was really good and most of it held up really well. I too was far too
accommodating and when I thought I had it licked I got brought back in. It's a
tough thing to avoid. In some ways you want to help _everyone_. In other ways
that hurts yourself and, depending on how bad it is, maybe your family or
career (like in this story).

People should certainly try not to be accommodating to everyone. It's
something I still struggle with but no longer being a part of a start-up with
unrealistic expecations has certainly toned down this significantly for me.

A little here and there can still be good, however.

------
hownottowrite
Ref: Original article with lovely typesetting -
[https://books.google.com/books?id=kstZAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA3-PA13#v...](https://books.google.com/books?id=kstZAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA3-PA13#v=onepage&q&f=false)

The whole issue is full of gems, like this one just a few pages away: "You do
not have to like a job to succeed in it!"

[https://books.google.com/books?id=kstZAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA3-PA16#v...](https://books.google.com/books?id=kstZAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA3-PA16#v=onepage&q&f=false)

------
stretchwithme
Couldn't help but recall Peter Thiel's ideas on competition and why it's good
business to avoid it. The author's father was stuck in competition and it
drove a lot of what he did.

~~~
graphitezepp
The idea in the article was that the competition was "imaginary" as in the
salesman across the street didn't bother to try to do everything for everyone
correct? Maybe the lesson is more about ignoring what others might be doing
and focusing on what you need to do for success yourself. EDIT: mistake was as
suggested below.

~~~
stretchwithme
"lesson is more about what others might be doing"

You mean less, right?

~~~
Avenger42
Alternately the word "ignoring" might have been mistakenly omitted:

> "the lesson is more about _ignoring_ what others might be doing and focusing
> on what you need to do for success yourself"

~~~
stretchwithme
Gotcha. I'm always doing that.

------
advael
Reading this article was great for me. It provided a perspective that I needed
with a compelling argument for it.

Reading the comments was a huge mistake. It mired the previous sense of
insight with contradictory perspectives supported by compelling anecdotes but,
crucially, no analysis more rigorous than the original article.

Of course, you can make a compelling case for anything if you have rhetoric
and evidence isn't demanded of you, but I think there's a point where analysis
is of negative value.

In a way, learning this lesson has been valuable in and of itself.

------
77pt77
>Read the life of a great scientist like Agassiz. Was he forever at the
world’s beck and call? Not for a single day.

Agassiz refers to "Louis Agassiz" a creationist scientific racist that
believed the races had been created by God in separate events. Not the best
example to use.

Edit: He believed this in the late 1800 and the author of the submitted
article apparently considered him a "great scientist" as late as 1922.

~~~
linksnapzz
Agassiz, who is still remembered for his contributions to geology & fossil
taxonomy, can't possibly be a great scientist as he committed wrongthink over
a century ago.

Eventually, the only great scientists will be ones who are still available to
have their opinions policed by modern progressives.

~~~
arjie
Hey, man, if you want to believe in frauds, go right ahead. Discrimination
between useful hypotheses and rubbish ones is how knowledge advances. If you
want to hold up losers as your heroes, don't be surprised when no one follows.

~~~
linksnapzz
Unfortunately for you, Agassiz's hypotheses about a great many things were
useful and correct.

But look on the bright side, if a putative belief in creationism would prevent
anyone from hearing about a given researcher's other & more defensible work;
we would all be laughing at that silly creationist Issac Newton.

~~~
arjie
Hey, I can use his results while still decrying him. And I intend to. I call
it standing on the shoulders of giants while chipping off their faces.

Seriously, though, you're right. One shouldn't dismiss all of people's work
just because they were wrong about some things. But whether someone is a
'great scientist' is a bit unimportant in that sense.

------
hoodoof
Nothing worse than people who say "yes" but underneath, they really don't want
to, and play out their resentment passive aggressively.

~~~
draw_down
Mmm, I can think of worse things.

------
graphememes
To summarize the entirety of the lesson: Sometimes saying "no" is better than
saying "yes". By saying "no" you give time otherwise wasted to things that are
beneficial to yourself. When and how you decide to say "no" should be based on
whether the person that is requesting is perfectly capable of doing the task
themselves according to the nature of the article.

~~~
77pt77
And sometimes it's better to say nothing at all...

~~~
anigbrowl
Very _very_ true. The greater your ability to conceal your thoughts,
especially in the case of escalating provocations, the more information your
interlocutor will reveal until the strategic balance shifts.

~~~
ryandrake
"Never write if you can speak; never speak if you can nod; never nod if you
can wink."

------
fiatpandas
Has anyone seen the documentary Supermensch?

I wonder what the fine line is between being a mensch like Shep Gordon, with
the kind of legend and grandeur that comes with such a title, and being an
over-accommodating person to a pathetic degree, as described in the article.

It's tough to describe, but somehow a mensch has all the traits of an over-
accommodating person without the sign on their back that says "use me."

------
emersonrsantos
Every time you give someone theoretically everything they want, they will not
value you.

It's a simple supply and demand rule. _Everything offered in abundance loses
its value._ What are you offering? Your time, your resources, your care, your
attention.

To people realize your valor, offer less, invest less. Give them space to miss
you and run after you.

We do not respect or admire worthless things.

------
77pt77
> “You are thirty-five years old,” I said to myself. “More than half of your
> life has already been spent.

Well, the age of the document is showing.

~~~
Bakary
How many years are really worth it, though? Is an extra 20 years of miserable
old age worth 5 years of youth? I'm not wholly certain that's the case.

~~~
gloggy
That's why one should exercise and eat right. There is a strong correlation
between regular exercise/healthy body weight and a productive old age. It
amazes me how cavalier people are about their bodies.

------
jkuria
Related to this I'd recommend Adam Grant's Bestseller _Give and Take_. The
surprising conclusion is while some "Givers" end up at the bottom, other
"Givers" also end up at the top. The key to doing good and doing well is to
practice what he calls "generous tit for tat".

------
cafard
Having read through this, it strikes me as a version of the change that takes
place in Pierre Bezhukov in _War and Peace_ after his captivity. One saves
time by not having to read a thousand pages to get to it; one loses something
also, given that those thousand pages are of _War and Peace_.

------
fb03
Saying "no" sometimes (genuinely, everyone has shit to do) is the best way to
know for sure who really enjoys your company and who just keeps you near for
the easy "yes" you always carry around.

------
gadders
Previous discussion from 4 years ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4969041](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4969041)

------
avremel
Seems similar to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, depicted in her novels (for
example Atlas Shrugged). She does take the "selfish" theme a touch more
radically though.

------
tyingq
Could be observing effect rather than cause. People that are very good at
<whatever> get a lot of business. Which cuts into the time you have to be
accommodating.

------
theprop
Evan Williams of Twitter/Blogger I think said that the CEO's job is to say No
No No!!

No to new features, to partnerships, to things that lose focus from the core
mission.

------
username3
Do favors for money. Money is an IOU ticket for bartering.

~~~
antisthenes
You have a point there. Using money removes the arduous pontification of
whether the favor was worth doing, aka "helper's guilt".

Especially when both parties enjoy some sort of prior established trust (long
friends or acquaintances), it's even easier to use money even if it won't
compensate for a comparable market rate service.

E.g. "Would you mind helping me with X, Y or Z and I'll buy you lunch(es)?"

~~~
nf05papsjfVbc
This entirely depends on the culture one is used to.

I've seen two cultures:

\- In one it works the way you describe it and it's considered odd if the
favour were not 'compensated' in some way

\- In another, the question of 'compensation' of a favour is an insult and
seen as a statement of no investment in the relationsip

When people from one culture go to the other, it's bound to cause discomfort.
I've experienced this and also seen it happen to others.

------
suparpat
"You are not required to set yourself on fire to keep other people warm"

------
BrailleHunting
The most common annoyance is the social ritual demand of being in a coffee
shop and some fool asks others to watch their computer. Refuse by saying "No I
may have to leave soon. Invest in a laptop lock."

------
ImTalking
Reminds me of "It's a Wonderful Life".

------
usmeteora
yeh, as a female this has been a long learning experience for me. Raised in
the deep south, our job is to ease political and social tensions and be as
accomodating as possible, literally waiting around to see how we can pitch in
and help to advertise our hospitality.

Obviously the hypocrisy came to light a long time ago, but I still see this in
myself and often amongst women in the workplace.

We are asked to do more public speaking on behalf of our company. The
intentions are good, and I want more women in technology so I'm happy to be a
role model though I'm far from perfect, but I won't let it take me away from
my job and I've turned down being a public speaker.

I've turned down running a SWE "Society of Women Engineers" Chapter at work.

I turn down running social events on behalf of the company.

My favorite two I've learned to say no to are

"Well I never learned how to write well and you take really good notes, so can
you document this meeting and send a summary email out to everyone with the
conversation, highlights, and action items"

I'm not a secretary, I'm an engineer, and if you have a PhD from MIT and never
learned how to write, and in fact its so difficult you can't take meeting
notes or you need meeting notes because you can't remember the takeaway items,
then thats your problem/opportunity for growth, not a place where I turn into
a secretary.

if I'm going to be writing priorities, deciding what the priorities are based
on the conversation, documenting them and communicating them and following up
for troubleshooting follow through, then make me your Manager.

The other one is "yeh well this is really complicated. It's kind of a mess.
Noones looked at this process in a long time, lots of old documentation. Would
be really great if someone could come in a organize all this for us..."

That's the part where I'm supposed to enthusiastically volunteer to reorganize
the half assed work of people who never understood APIs, who additionally
still work at this company and have not fixed it, who are ok with half assed
work, and people who will make condescending comments about the lack of
ability to pick up quickly on things as I'm rewriting the mess of
documentation left behind.

I used to feel obligated to all of those things. I don't. It's really too easy
for people to expect women to come in at tech companies and

1\. Be a part time poster child for women in tech including but not limited to
taking time away from the team to go to public speaking events and organize
work events.

2\. Spend your time documenting things that nooone has bothered documenting
before

3\. Be expected to "show enthusiasm" and "contribute" by basically cleaning
out the closet of men who havn't opened the drawer to realize how disorganized
things are until they have a new person trying to learn under them.

I don't do any of these things anymore, and I make it clear I am not
interested in those things when I am asked. I spend time learning technical
work, and continually filter my tasks of extraneous things that are not
focused on addressing the core issues of my work.

Your job is to do your job and be good at it, and you will naturally be
accomodating by the benefits that brings.

On a personal level, I've learned the same thing. huge guilt trips from men to
hang out and call me a bitch for basically having standards, being an
introvert, and not making dating my hobby outside of work. It's expected of me
actually still even in tech.

Huge guilt trips from girls who expect me to be an extrovert, or take it
personally that I dont want to be constantly social or go shopping or talk
about boys with them, again, even in tech.

Women have a lot of pressure to be socially accomodating, and people will have
subconscious expectations of you to do be that way inside and outside of work,
and not realize how entitled they actually feel in regards to having a say in
your own personal life decisions.

I'm 26 now, but I really wish another women would have given me this advice at
20.

Learn to say no. Focus on you and your job. You accomodate so many people when
you take care of yourself and are good at your job and genuinely contribute.

------
77pt77
>Three things were very clear to me in that night of self-examination five
years ago. First: A man’s chief loyalty must be to the woman who has joined
her life to his; to the children who call him father; and to the business
which feeds and clothes and houses them all

No. A man’s chief loyalty must be to himself. This guy didn't take the lesson
to its final conclusion.

~~~
xyzzy_plugh
Which benefits society more?

------
BARTYLBY
I'm new to ycomb and I'm loving it so far. Thanks for all the good post. I
look forward to more.

