Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

could you give an example? my approach is usually something like "I've come up with three options here, I think the first two are equally good, I'm mentioning the third for completeness, but I don't think we should do it because...."



Time is limited, why waste time talking about a third when you've already decided against it?


Who’s to say he’s necessarily right? The third approach (or pieces from it) could actually be the right one, even if he doesn’t know it.


You have a point, but that's also where you come off as indecisive. Since the question was explicitly about that that, presenting 3 options, one of which you have reasons against, when we're all busy and meeting time is constrained, is, in the abstract, a waste of everybody's time. If later on, someone comes up with objections; options A won't work because problem X, option B has issues Y and Z, then sure, bring up option C, which addresses X and Y but has other issues, for further debate, but unless that happens, that's time wasted. imo.

This does hinge on you knowing what you're talking about, and rejecting option C for unbiased reasonable logical reasons you're sure about.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: