|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States41936 Posts
On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote: Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? The genocide of Gazans is generally what people end up complicit in.
|
On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? LibHorizons: Trump/Musk/DOGE's agenda/government/commands.
On February 24 2025 02:03 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? + Show Spoiler + Do some nonsense paperwork is kinda the standard for most jobs. Government or not. There being some new nonsense paperwork to comply with is not unusual. What is unusual is that this does not come down the normal channels and has the threat of "resignation" for non-compliance.
If my boss asks me for bullshit paperwork, and I don't comply, he'll remind me. If it's some kinda shithole organization where the bureaucracy is more important than the actual work, he will then tell me that if I don't do it promptly he will have no choice but to fire me, at which point I will do the nonsense paperwork or get fired. But there's a hierarchy for this kinda bullshit and some random email from some other department is not the way it works.
Now, if you're saying that makes you complicit with the fascist government, well, obviously. Doing anything other than quitting is making government workers complicit with the fascist government. + Show Spoiler +But sending bullshit paperwork up the food chain makes you no more or less complicit than just going about the usual day-to-day of your government job in the fascist regime. LibHorizons: Yeah. I wouldn't include sabotage and/or striking under complicity though.
Fascist regimes need a lot of people doing "regular" jobs going about their usual day-to-day tasks in order to accomplish their agenda. Filling those roles doesn't negate one's complicity.
Nonetheless, the point was that it wasn't really a mystery. There isn't really a reason for most government workers not to accede to this demand from Musk, unless they see their complicity as crossing a line, like the many people across a variety of parts of the government that have already resigned.
As you and micro point out, there isn't really reason to believe this crosses some line ethically or with regards to their dignity. DPB sounds like it would bother them, but still not cross the dignity line.
|
United States41936 Posts
On February 24 2025 02:28 oBlade wrote:DOD and intel are allegedly not under OPM whereas the email was blanket sent to everyone. 5 bullet points a week averages one a day. The leader of DOGE says it should take 5 minutes. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1893507929493643451Anyone who has worked for a private company and written a daily or week log understands this isn't a request to show you cracked Fermat's theorem every week, it weeds out people who can't even lie about doing work and encourages a culture of thinking about what work you're really doing. People aren't as self-starters as they think, like "of course I'm doing the best I can," but when you actually organize it, it weeds out the self-delusion if you have to write something that goes by a superior's eyes. Nah, time logging is actually quite difficult for people in management roles because so much of it is “solving random bullshit that comes across my desk”. If you’re manual labour then it’s just “I made x widgets”. If you’re management it’s “checked voicemails, listened to one from vendor, called vendor to work out why they think they weren’t paid, then called AP to work out why vendor wasn’t paid, then called IT to work out why the guy who DOGE fired last week was still in the approval queue, then called my boss to let them know DOGE fired IT and ask what we’re meant to do because I told the vendor I’d call them back with a timeline but I don’t have one”.
|
United States24563 Posts
On February 24 2025 03:15 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? LibHorizons: Trump/Musk/DOGE's agenda/government/commands. No, I don't think so. That would be victim blaming. There's nothing immoral about documenting your accomplishments and routing it within government channels (outside of certain risks like spilling sensitive information where you shouldn't). Just because the request for information from DoGE/OPM was immoral in its rollout doesn't mean the workers who follow their chain-of-command's directive to submit the e-mail are necessarily complicit in immorality, and certainly not the entire DoGE agenda.
|
On February 24 2025 03:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 02:28 oBlade wrote:DOD and intel are allegedly not under OPM whereas the email was blanket sent to everyone. 5 bullet points a week averages one a day. The leader of DOGE says it should take 5 minutes. https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1893507929493643451Anyone who has worked for a private company and written a daily or week log understands this isn't a request to show you cracked Fermat's theorem every week, it weeds out people who can't even lie about doing work and encourages a culture of thinking about what work you're really doing. People aren't as self-starters as they think, like "of course I'm doing the best I can," but when you actually organize it, it weeds out the self-delusion if you have to write something that goes by a superior's eyes. I love how you had to remove all context in order to even begin to defend this. This isn't Bob and Bob having performance interviews with employees and asking them what they do in a week, this is a mail to 19 million people that no one is actually going to read because your not checking 19 million diverse responses. You're about an order of magnitude over the size of the federal government there.
It is CCed to their direct bosses as well, meaning they are reading it. But it seems pretty transparently intended as a net for people whose even employment itself is suspicious - like can't or don't respond, or response doesn't reflect reality at all. Not a you didn't cure enough cancers this week thing.
Like Kwark's post there that took a minute to write is a passing grade, formatted in bullet points. Not an itemized affidavit chronicling every second spent.
|
On February 24 2025 04:02 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 03:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? LibHorizons: Trump/Musk/DOGE's agenda/government/commands. No, I don't think so. That would be victim blaming. There's nothing immoral about documenting your accomplishments and routing it within government channels (outside of certain risks like spilling sensitive information where you shouldn't). Just because the request for information from DoGE/OPM was immoral in its rollout doesn't mean the workers who follow their chain-of-command's directive to submit the e-mail are necessarily complicit in immorality, and certainly not the entire DoGE agenda.
Reminds me of a previous job where we were expected by upper management to fill in a time justification report. I literally filled it in at the end of the week with "30h on project X", "10h on project Y" because I was supposed to work 40h and spend 75% of my time on project X, 25% of my time on project Y. Anything else would be far too complicated and my boss knew and agreed.
|
On February 24 2025 04:48 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 04:02 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 03:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? LibHorizons: Trump/Musk/DOGE's agenda/government/commands. No, I don't think so. That would be victim blaming. There's nothing immoral about documenting your accomplishments and routing it within government channels (outside of certain risks like spilling sensitive information where you shouldn't). Just because the request for information from DoGE/OPM was immoral in its rollout doesn't mean the workers who follow their chain-of-command's directive to submit the e-mail are necessarily complicit in immorality, and certainly not the entire DoGE agenda. Reminds me of a previous job where we were expected by upper management to fill in a time justification report. I literally filled it in at the end of the week with "30h on project X", "10h on project Y" because I was supposed to work 40h and spend 75% of my time on project X, 25% of my time on project Y. Anything else would be far too complicated and my boss knew and agreed.
Same at my workplace. Boss only wanted to know the amount of time spent to accurately charge the client. The actual details of the work being done would already be known by people managing the project. No point wasting my time telling you information everyone already knows.
|
On February 24 2025 04:02 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2025 03:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 02:03 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 24 2025 01:14 micronesia wrote:On February 24 2025 01:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 23 2025 22:39 micronesia wrote: He actually threatened that failure to comply with the bonkers request would be considered "resignation."
I am curious to see where each department will fall out on this. LibHorizons: Feels like an obviously empty threat that all managers should be telling workers to ignore. Can't imagine the rationale for being complicit, other than being a Trump supporter. You wouldn't do it just because your boss told you to would you? I didn't even get this opm e-mail so it's currently a moot point, but... You are asking if I would refuse to follow a legal order (i.e., send a bulleted list of accomplishments to opm) from my actual chain of command because of the ramifications of it? Probably not. LibHorizons: In that case, I'd imagine most people/departments will end up being complicit. Why wouldn't they? Employees who follow that order to submit the e-mail (from their chain of command) would be complicit in what? LibHorizons: Trump/Musk/DOGE's agenda/government/commands. No, I don't think so. That would be victim blaming. There's nothing immoral about documenting your accomplishments and routing it within government channels (outside of certain risks like spilling sensitive information where you shouldn't). Just because the request for information from DoGE/OPM was immoral in its rollout doesn't mean the workers who follow their chain-of-command's directive to submit the e-mail are necessarily complicit in immorality, and certainly not the entire DoGE agenda. LibHorizons: The rest of the post was also applicable to your argument.
Fascist regimes need a lot of people doing "regular" jobs going about their usual day-to-day tasks in order to accomplish their agenda. Filling those roles doesn't negate one's complicity.
Nonetheless, the point was that it wasn't really a mystery. There isn't really a reason for most government workers not to accede to this demand from Musk, unless they see their complicity as crossing a line, like the many people across a variety of parts of the government that have already resigned.
As you and micro point out, there isn't really reason to believe this crosses some line ethically or with regards to their dignity. DPB sounds like it would bother them, but still not cross the dignity line.
|
|
|
|