Tbf that seems like the proper response to me.:-)

Normal human ways of thinking go like: however you do it, so long as the job gets done it’s fine! ☺️

PM thinking: even if nothing ever gets done, so long as I collect a salary we continue to have 3 hours of meetings most days every week, it’s all good! 🤔🤯

Also, afaik, the conflict between the PO and PM roles is somehow literally the point? You get blamed if the tasks don’t get done, while the PM ensures that endless reports get generated - I doubt the vast most of which are ever read, and I know that I for one can never find one of those later, in part bc there are so many of them and they encompass everything else into them as well (Jira tickets, Slack messages, hundreds of emails per day mostly saying “this Jira ticket or that Confluence page has been edited”, the former of which for the life of me I cannot figure out how to turn off!).

So… not only I but we all feel your pain! Otoh, that seems one of the first job roles that will soon be replaced by AI?

I understand. I moved to Kbin.Social, StarTrek.Website, Discuss.Online, and now PieFed.Social. 😁

This title confuses me bc I thought taneggs was on lemmy.ca not lemm.ee.

https://discuss.online/post/19430152

The circular justification of a PM’s job, see how much value they add!?

He’ll have to change his sign now to “I am Dave”:-)

Mentally speaking, I am not so much here. Let that sink in… :-P

Woah there buddy, you can’t just jump straight into the (non-)solution like that! You skipped the planning refinement! And the planning pre-refinement! And the pre-planning pre-refinement! And we’ll still discuss all of this in the post-planning refinement!

(Yes, every one of these are real, distinct meetings, lasting at minimum one hour but sometimes two or more. EVERY WEEK. Kill me now please? 🥺)

Two words: electoral college.

Riker still would :-P

deleted by creator

Images you can hear…

Ia it because she only kills him once?

Off-camera here she made a duplicate before killing him. She’ll kill the transporter clone again later, as a treat.

And is in no way simply meth. :-P

If only we could all become so fortunate as to have a lawn and live to be old enough to yell at kids to get off of it!:-)

More of this!:-)

2+2=4

2+2=3 is too small, i.e. wrong in the direction of being too small

2+2=5 is too wrong in the direction of being too large

Likewise, optimism is wrong in being too hopeful, pessimism is wrong in being too fearful.

What you said though is that:

Pessimism is a vital component for any healthy society

So being wrong is a vital component of being right? It is an issue with the phrasing. It is not “pessimism” that is necessary, but a willingness to look at the things that may cause us fear - though your phrasing indicated that pessimism itself was the necessary component, which is what I disagreed with.

And cigarettes.

Tbf, there were big scary barrels, and Alex seemed fine on his own so…

I would argue that pessimism, like optimism, is too hobbled by an inability to see clearly the arguments of the other side. Realism seems a better way to go, and if that happens to look bleak then well, that still does not make it actual pessimism.

Same. The author speaks from privilege, but e.g. to a starving person half a meal is very much preferable to nothing at all - obviously a full meal would have been even better but half will do, for now, and offer energy to then have a better shot at gaining a whole one?

But it’s a poem, so communicated truth using language as a vehicle, and I suppose it was successful because it got all of us to talk about it:-).